Box 21, Folder 5, Document 33

Dublin Core

Text Item Type Metadata




OCTOBER 3, 1967

The Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit
Authority held its regular meeting on October 3, 1967, at 3:30 P.M.
in the Glenn Building Conference Room, Atlanta. Mr. Roy A. Blount,
Vice Chairman, presided.


Robert F. Adamson (City of Atlanta)
Sanford Atwood (DeKalb County)

M. C. Bishop (Fulton County)

Roy A. Blount (DeKalb County)
Rawson Haverty (City of Atlanta)

K. A. McMillon (Gwinnett County)

L. D. Milton (City of Atlanta)

Edgar Blalock (Clayton County)
Richard H. Rich (City of Atlanta)

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


Walter Douglas, Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas,
New York

Gerald M. Sturman, Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas,
New -York

W. O. Salter, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel,
San Francisco

Consultants (Cont'd.)

J. A. Coil, Resident Manager, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor,
Bechtel, Atlanta

Leon Eplan, Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta

W. Stell Huie, Huie & Harland, Atlanta

Tom Watson Brown, Huie & Harland, Atlanta


Paul Muldawer, Muldawer & Patterson, Atlanta

Maartin Den Hartog, Lord & Den Hartog, New York

Stan Lorch, Lord & Den Hartog, New York

H. Boyer Marx, American Society of Landscape Architects
and MARTA Advisory Committee

P. A. Springer, Atlanta Traffic and Safety Council

William Fletcher, White, Weld & Co., New York City

George B. Pilkington, Bureau of Public Roads

Roger D. Lewis, Bureau of Public Roads

John D. Prien, Jr., Executive Director, Georgia Society
of Professional Engineers

Bill Schemmel, Marietta Daily Journal

Dick Hebert, Atlanta Constitution

Dave Donaldson, Securities News

Leroy Powell, WAGA-TV

Don Bridges, WAGA-TV

Mrs. Margaret C. Breland, Jerry A. Coursey, Mrs. Rachel
Champagne, Miss Claudette Parrish, Atlanta Region
Metropolitan Planning Commission

The meeting was called to order by the Vice Chairman.


Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. Adamson, the minutes
of the September meeting were unanimously approved and the actions
of the August meeting were ratified.

Financial Report

The General Manager presented the financial report as of Septem-
ber 30, 1967, which is attached hereto and made a part of these
minutes. Gwinnett County was in arrears for one-half of its 1967
commitment. Mr. McMillon reported on a meeting held with Gwinnett

County Commissioners and stated payment would be forthcoming.
Cash balance would be in line once the recent bill from Parsons,
Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel was audited and paid.

Section 9 Amendment

The General Manager recommended approval of a resolution authorizing
an application to HUD for an amendment to the current Section 9
project and a contract between MARTA and the Atlanta Region Metro-
politan Planning Commission for a three-month study to meet statu-
tory requirements for a coordinated transportation and transit

plan required by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
This work would be performed by Alan M. Voorhees and Associates,

the cost of which would not exceed $30,000--$10,000 local money

and $20,000 from HUD. The following resolution was unanimously

WHEREAS, local funds in the amount of $10,000 are available
as matching funds for additional work necessary to expand
the scope of HUD Contract No. H-771 as set forth in the
Amendment request presented to this Board;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that this Authority request
$20,000 additional funds to expand the scope of the tech-
nical studies, Section 9 Grant (HUD Contract No. H-771) and
approve the Amendment request; and

FURTHER RESOLVED, that H. L. Stuart, General Manager of
this Authority, be and hereby is authorized and directed
to take any and all further actions and to execute for
this Authority any and all documents as may be reasonably
necessary to make and obtain such request.

Huie and Harland

Mr. Huie stated that there was now a need for bond counsel to as-
sist in preparation of bond issues. There were only two firms in
Atlanta specializing in this area and they both were interested

in doing this work. He suggested the firm of King & Spalding be
retained as bond counsel, with Gambrell & Mobley as associate
bond counsel. This would not involve any commitment of money this
year. Upon motion by Mr. Bishop, seconded by Mr. Atwood, the
following resolution was passed:

RESOLVED, that the recommendations of General Counsel
with regard to Bond Counsel are approved and that King &
Spalding be named Bond Counsel and that Gambrell & Mobley

be named Associate Bond Counsel to the Authority with
the understanding that Bond Counsel will report to the
Authority through General Counsel.

Report of Secretary

Mr. Bennett reported on recent meetings held with Mr. Robert
Sommerville, President of the Atlanta Transit System, and stated
he thought any misunderstanding had now been removed. Mr. Sommer-
ville had said he would study MARTA's 701 report before making

any further statements. He also expressed an interest in meeting
with MARTA's consultants for briefings. Mr. Haverty commended
this effort.

General Manager

Mr. Stuart recommended appointment of a committee made up of mem-
bers of the Board to approve the procedures under which public
hearings and meetings were to be conducted as well as to conduct
such hearings and meetings. A design review committee should also
be formed and the Finance Committee reactivated. Mr. Bishop
suggested the formation of a public relations committee. Upon
motion by Mr. Bishop and seconded by Mr. Adamson, it was agreed
that Messrs. Rich, Blount and Stuart should appoint these com-
mittees and that Mr. Huie prepare bylaws.

Mr. Stuart stated that in the past Mr. McBrayer of Parsons,
Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel had represented MARTA at meetings

of the Technical Coordinating Committee and the consultants were
reimbursed under the retainer agreement. He requested approval
of the Board to make adjustments under the retainer agreement
now that the Chief Engineer of MARTA would replace Mr. McBrayer.
He also requested authorization for $2,000 for graphics under
the retainer agreement. Upon motion by Mr. Bishop and seconded
by Mr. Adamson, those two requests were approved.


Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel

Mr. Coil reported that the design firm of Lord and Den Hartog had
completed final drawings for the stations. He stated the 701
report was at the printer and copies should be available for the
next Board meeting. Mr. Haverty urged that steps be taken to
expedite completion of the report.

At the briefing prior to the Board meeting, a table had been pre-
sented showing costs of the system for the metropolitan area as
it related to the 65-mile system.

The report from Law Engineering Company on soil samples would be
ready within the next month; however, PBTB had been using the
information developed by that firm on a daily basis. Liaison was
being continued with the State Highway Department, municipalities,
cities and counties. Meetings had been held with the railroads.
In response to a question from Mr. Haverty, Mr. Coil said that
his firm was getting excellent cooperation from the Highway De-
partment and the railroads.

It was mentioned that the General Manager had had at least ten
conferences with the railroads, all of which were most satisfactory.

Eric Hill Associates

Mr. Eplan stated work was almost finished on the impact of the
system on certain facilities such as schools and fire stations.
The report on the impact on the poor and disadvantaged was being
written. The firm's current effort was giving line-by-line re-
views to the General Manager and engineers on recommendations as
to possible changes, conflicts and opportunities for development.
Reviews had been submitted on the east and west lines. He com-
mented that relationships with the engineers had been very good.

Mr. Muldawer, whose firm is assisting Eric Hill Associates in its
work, made a presentation showing potential development around

the Cultural Center as it related to rapid transit. The firm

will prepare such information regarding ten or twelve key stations.

1968 Proposed Budget

Mr. Stuart presented the proposed budget for 1968. This required
only Board review; approval of the budget would be requested at
the December meeting. The proposed budget showed a carry-over
from 1967 of $230,000 with income for 1968 estimated to be about
$1.5 million. Income was based on continuing participation of
local governments, money appropriated by the State, money authorized
by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, as well as
anticipated federal funds for applications to be submitted by the
first of the year. Operating expenses amounted to approximately
$1.6 million. Mr. Stuart was instructed to forward the proposed
budget to the governments after preparing a more detailed ex-
planation for each item.

Rail Equipment

Mr. Douglas discussed the various kinds of rail equipment and
pointed out the advantages and disadvantages of each. de recom-
mended to the Board that it consider steel wheels on steel rails.
If any other system developed more potential, it should be con-
sidered only if it demonstrated substantial savings. Mr. Douglas
pointed out that 70-foot cars seating 72 passengers would cost
approximately $200,000 per car.


The Vice Chairman adjourned the meeting at 4:50 P.M.

Next Meeting
November 7, 1967.

public items show