Scripto | Transcribe Page

Log in to Scripto | Recent changes | View item | View file

Box 21, Folder 6, Complete Folder

http://allenarchive.iac.gatech.edu/originals/ahc_CAR_015_021_006.pdf

« previous page | next page » |

Current Page Transcription [edit] [history]

(""'"/ J ) / I

I

'"'

I-

Fair Oaks

r, I -I

,-- \

I\ ' I

' ',

-

\_ l \ - - - - - - { ATL ANTA

J

z:

o: f-1

..J:

,I

I IL I

\ I

I

I

CL ARKSTON

1

\

I

\_ ,.; - , '

\

I

PINE L AKE l _J

\

20

\

.,

' Eas r LpU

\ \

I l

\

. .{

/

EAST LINE Covington

}__ ,r- ---~_'\,

~

y" -~ I .:::J

J ·=---- ,_,.. - J'

os,,o) . I!'

(,.,.. ...,,~o

. /

C- ~·--•, ~ l'j,0/ '\

"'!

..,

~I

r - - -'

\,

, ___g-'\k._('._W_op d•~ -

I

I I

>-~ ---,

' s:

_,_J

I

I I I

I __ I EAST PO INT

I

L_ _ l

I

-,

I

I

1 I

f-----

I

-- J

'\

CONSTITUTION

I

I

\ /

tl

j- 7

I

' ,

ATLANTA REG I ON METROPOLITAN PLANNING COMMISSION

PROPOSED RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM Basic System Regional System

... - - J

I~

••

. f-

-.t

"'-z;

"

, o~ - ;,~

f \} \.._....... ,:---

I

-- ·---

,.

~, -< --·--.-

l· >-<I:

~

I..J ' L>

I

~

-- ..J--- ·,

Co;:!.- ---

---

\

I

~

 :r. :

\

~ JO~ ESBORO

I

lJI \

___ _, "' .. , '-1

\

I

\

~

• I

Parsons Brinckerhoff - Tudor - Bechtel

June 196 7

�,, I '

Table 1.

ELEMENTS IN RECOMMENDED COST ALLOCATION FORMULA FOR MARTA CONSTRUCTION: PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION, PROPERTY TAX DIGEST, AND EMPLOYMENT, 1965 and 1983

County

> 3i: 3i:

Tax Digest (2) Actual Projected 1965 1983

50.5% 34. 2 9.0 6.3

63.1% 28.4 5.6 2.9

56.1% .31. 7 7.8 4.4

78.8% 15.3 4.1 1.8

72.6% 19.:2 5.3 2.9

66.7% 24.1 5.9 3.3

Total

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

Relative weights used in arriving at formula are shown in parentheses. Both 1965 and 1983 figures are weighted accordingly. The property tax digests were put on a comparable basis for each jurisdiction (100% of market value).

"'0 "' M

i I l j

I

II I

·,1 )

z

. M

r M

.."' >

0

-

0

>

~

.

M

L_

ProEosed Allocation Formula

. 57 .1% 31.1 6.7 5.1

M

I

Em:eloyment (3) Actual Projected 1965 1983

Fulton DeKalb Clayton Gwinnett

Notes:

z:

Po:eulation (1) Actual Projected 1965 1983

-19-

�Table 2.

1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 · 1975 1976 1977

POTENTIAL SOURCES OF CAPITAL FUNDS FOR THE 30-MILE RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM (000,000)

1/ Drawdown(curnul.)' Federal $ 25 $ 25 54 25 102 25 .158 25 207 258 298 320 . 332

$100

Availab_i:IJtr of Funds State

LOCtil

$ 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1 $33

$ 25

35

so so 30 9

-$199

'Y Totnl cwnulfltiva $ 54 29 64 29 54 4 54 34

$ 54 83 147 176 230 234 288 322

10

332

$332

1/ Preliminary schedule of needs for land purchase and construction established by the engineers.

y

MARTA revenue bonds supported by local government underwriting or general obligation bonds of local governments issued for rapid transit purposes.

It is noted that the above schedule of fund availability, as preliminary set forth, does not directly match the schedule of fund needs.

This is

simply because both sets of figures are necessarily tentative and preliminary. Both will be altered in the course of time. preliminary table is necessary,

The development of such a

however, in order to set the general dimen-

sions of the financial impact of MARTA operations upon the local. governments. Bond issues are tentatively sized and spaced tQ meet anticipated conditions in the bond market as well as provide the funds as needed.

In practice,

there may be more issues of smaller sizes or fewer issues of larger sizes than indicated in this_preliminary table. -27N A M M i " , I " I I II I , I I l I ·" A I I I O I A T I I

�~ --

-

.

· ------ - -- - --------.

(

These points are shown in the followi_ng table: Table 4.

ATLANTA COMPARED WITH OTHER METROPOLITAN AREAS ON.PROPERTY TAX PAYMENTS, 1964-65 Metropoli tari Atlanta

38 Largest Metro olitan Areas --.. · Median) __

$95.52

$129.94

Property revenue as percent of revenue from local sources

59.6%

-67.3%

Property revenue as percent of revenue from all sources

43.7%

48.6%

y

Per capita revenues to local governments from pro.p erty sources

y

r

1

All local governments in Metropolitan Atlanta combined.

Financing rapid transit through the property tax would involve a straightforward set of operations.

The local governments would execute

·,.

contracts with MARTA under which MARTA woul? _agree to perform the functions of operating a rapid transit system and the governments would obligate themselves to underwrite the capital costs of the system under specifie4 conditions and specified ceiUngs.

r

As crlready described, on~ method of \

financing wou ld be the issuance of general obl_igation bonds by t he local gover nments with t he payment of the pr oceeds t o the authority, such bonds being supported by pr oper ty t ax l evies within the cons t itional l i mitati ons

r

established for such bonds .

The al t ernat i ve method would be the levy of

specific millage rates to produce periodic payments to MARTA for the

r

-37- . HAMMIA , 8AllNl , l l l l A AII OOI ATII

/

�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• -

.. _ -

...:...-.- .....

_

. ,..,. _:...• · - . . ,...- ,.._..__ . ~-- . .. .. .. . .

··- ... ,. ···-, . .._ . , __ -·- -

�--·

-

-

. _ . _,,. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

- --

- - -

-

.

· · --

..... _

.

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

(

�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 -

�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

�-

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

�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-

�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

�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

�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--

�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

�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

�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

-

�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

�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 .

�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

�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

�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

�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 -

�_,

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

�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

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY GLENN BUILDING/ ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 / AREA CODE 404 52 4 -57 11

June 30, 1967

OFFICERS: Richard H. Rich, Chairman Roy A. Blount, Vice Chairman Glenn E. Be nnett, Secretary Henry L. Stuart, General Manager

GENERAL MANAGER'S QUARTERLY REPORT OF CONTRACT STATUS, JUNE 30 , 1967 Considerable progress has been made under our several contracts and a detailed review is timely.

Our contractural obligations total

$962,566 of which $616,709 (64%) represents the federal portion and $345,857 represents the local matching funds.

The status of work shown

is as of May 31, 1967: I.

The

11

701 11 Contracts signed June 28, 1966 total $183,566 of which

the federal portion is $122,376.

The local portion of Transit

Authority funds is $61,189, all of which has been paid to the ARMPC who is administering the work for us. update the 1962 report in its entirety.

These projects are to

The updated revisions

will appear as a technical version and a popular version of a bound report similar in format to the 1962 reports.

The work is

in three parts. A.

Hammer , Greene, Siler Associates has a $48 , 000 contract to update the financing aspects which is 90¾ complete.

It covers :

1.

Methods of financing.

2.

Sources of financing ~

3.

Derivation of formula for sharing the financial load between the several political jurisdictions.

4.

Assistance t o local governments t o eva luate thei r financial ability.

5.

P r eparation of a financial plan in line with the above .

�B.

PBTB has a $100 , 000 contract to update the other parts of the 1962 report which is about 85¾ complete .

It covers:

1.

Route and station locations (100¾ complete) a

2.

Patronage, revenues and operating cost predictions (90¾ complete).

3.

c.

Report preparation (50¾ complete).

ARM.PC will use the remaining $35 , 566 for administration and supervision of the HGS and PB-T-B contracts , its own staff 's work and auditing and overhead chargeable to the entire updating project.

Each of these units of work provides inputs to the others so they will continue to move ahead on a common front and should be wrapped up this summer.

The contractural completion date was May 2 , 1967 .

The work was considerably delayed by the late development of travel statistics by the Highway Department and the completion date will not be met .

The necessary statistics are now in hand and the

work is moving ahead at a good pace.

Our total project will not

be damaged by the delay. II.

The

11

702 11 Contract signed June 28 , 1966 is for $125,000 with PB- T-B

to carry out preliminary engineering work on the system from Oglethorpe to the Airport.

This is an interes t-free federal loan that

must be repaid when construction begins . volved .

No local funds are in-

The preliminary engineering work will be in sufficient

detail to enable us to initiate ri ght of way acquisition , to provide us with highly refined estimates of cons truction costs, and to provide us with a solid point of departure fo r the development of final , detailed design and the p r eparation of c ontract plans and specifications.

Funds are r equisiti o ned from HUD in the exact

amount required whe n we are invoiced . and payments have been made . -

Two $30 , 000 requisitions

The contract is 62¾ complete o 2 -

It

�i

'

covers: A.

Establishment of a design basis by developing information on:

B.

(74% complete)

1.

Utilities.

2.

Existing building foundations.

3.

Subsurface structures.

4.

Street and highway facilities.

5.

Railroad structures.

6.

Geology.

Preliminary design of typical and of selected special items (65% complete) i

c.

D.

1.

Structures.

2.

Stations .

3.

Functional layout of Transit Center.

4.

Functional layout of shops and yards.

5.

Equipment requirements.

Preliminary engineering plans (53% complete): 1.

Base maps.

2.

Alignment of tracks.

3.

Station sites .

Co st es t imates ( 16% comple t e ) 1.

Construction .

2.

Right o f way.

The contract carries a comple t ion date o f J u ne 30 , 1967 , b u t we have d ecided t o integrate this work wi th the wo rk being d one under the techni cal studies g rant (bel ow) .

As a result, all o f the

pre liminary engineering for the 44-mile system - Doraville - Forest Park and west from Hi ghtower Road to I-285 and east from Avondale Estates to I - 285 - is being d o ne simultaneously, aimed at a completion date of April 30 , 1968 . -

3 -

�III .

The Technical Studies Grant (Section 9) Contra cts are for a total of $554 , 000 of which the federal portion is $369 , 333 , and the local portion is $184 , 667 0

Federal funds are requisitioned

quarterly in advance at a rate indicated by progress of the work and the terms of the contracts . ed and received . the Impact Study.

$67 , 686 . 12 has been requisition-

One $12 , 000 payment has been made to ARMPC for I expect a bill from PBTB this month o

The work is divided into three parts: A.

PB-T-B has a contract signed February 2, 1967 for $500 , 000 which is 18% complete and covers: 1.

2.

System Extension Planning (35% complete): (a)

East Line - Avondale Estates to I-285 .

(b)

West Line - Hightower Road to I-285.

Preliminary Design of t¥:pical and of selected special structures (20% complete) :

3.

4.

5. B.

(a)

Structures .

(b)

Stations .

(c)

Equipment .

Preliminary Engineering Plans (30% complete) : (a)

Base maps .

(b)

Al i gnment of t r acks .

(c)

S tation site so

Cost Estimate s

(1 4% comp l ete ):

(a)

Co nstruc t i o n .

(b )

Righ t o f way.

Public He aring s a nd Re p o ~ts (no t started ) e

ARMPC has a contract si g ned March 10 , 1967 for $49 , 0 0 0 to make a Cocc.idor Impact Study.

$9 , 000 covers the supervision

and overhead they will provide to the subcontracts , Eri c Hill Assoc iates , who will do most of the work of assess ing the im-

4 -

�pact of our proposed rapid transit system on the community. We will receive recommendations for changes in community plans or rapid transit plans in the event that adverse impact or missed opportunities are discovered.

The job is 35¾ com-

plete. The work will check on our relationships to:

C.

1.

Land use and related controls.

2.

Public improvements planning.

3.

Urban design.

4.

Local development plans.

5.

Urban renewal projects.

6.

Private development plans.

7.

Benefit to disadvantaged groups.

8.

Other public programs.

Our impact on the Atlanta Transit will be substantial and $5,000 has been reserved to start studies in thi s fie ld . More money will be sought in future applications .

I am

in touch with ATS officials to determine the character of necessary study and plans. IV.

The Retainer Agreement is a contract with PB-T-B for planni ng , consultant , o r engineering services not covered by existing contracts .

Each item of work is authorized and budgeted by

the Board .

PB-T-B canno t initiate any work under thi s con-

tract that will cause total charges under the contract to e xceed $100 , 000 . Its condition as of June 30 , 1967 is as f ollows:

-

5 -

�Billing 4/1/676/30/67 Previously reported as complete pre-contract work; support before State Properties Control Commission; Soils Library study Mobilization (6 out of 8 authorized moves have been made)

Reported thru 3/31/67

Total thru 6/30/67

$30,943 ~10

$30 , 943.10

$ 2,192.70

12,697 . 84

14 , 890.54

93.37

1,198 . 93

1 , 292.30

497.33

806 . 37

1 , 303.70

4.00

1,443.12

1 , 447.12

868.59

310 . 64

1 , 179 . 23

$ 3,655.99

$47,400.00

$ 51 , 055.99

Participation in Atlanta Area Transportation Study ($1,500 authorized) Public Information Support ($2 , 000 authorized) Real Estate Consultation ($1,250 authorized; billing is complete.) Detailed Engineering ($7 , 000 authorized)

6 ,724. 77

Unexpended Authorizations Balance

42, 219.24 $100 , 000 . 00

-

6 -

�........./

l

J I"

>

~o

Fair Oaks

=>I 0 .

ul

r,

I \ \

I

' , __ '1 ' , ,__ ____ __f - z

J:

o:

ATL ANTA

I-'

...J: =>'I LL. I

EAST BR NCH Nor i

ru i d Hills I d I

,

\

\

I

I I

CL ARKSTON

'

1

\

--- '

\

\_

\ 20

\

.,

Eas t

\

I I

\

. .{

LoU I I

, '__ ,r-.. . -,r-\.-• I

Co vington

.

/

YA... -~

' J ·=--- -,..,-- J'

'

I ::::, /

EAST LINE

' ',

\

0,':

-...1~0

(

I

,-- - , I

I

..

 : (J-r--·

~---' I

<r! ...J~

I

_1

,-.

l __

Lj'(l~e_w_opd•A;(e_

r _ __

I

I I I I

I I

I ,_

,-1

'\

CONSTITUTION

I I

EAST POINT

I

-7

1.I . --,

,

I

I

....I

\ ,

>-~ --- ,

' s:l

I

L__ l

I

\~

.. ,.. J

\

I

' ,-

.... " ou.:,

I I

I

/ ~ ~z,;;;1/' ,,,'

-,

f---/

__JI

I I

I

- ---!

I I I I L __

ATLANTA REG ION METROPOLITAN P L ANNING COMMISS ION

PROPOSED RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM

i~ i~

Bas ic System Reg ional System

ju I~ . II>. <t

-·--

~

I...J .u > ·- ·,

Ii

\

~

\

. ---~,-. I

.· r-:

i

 

\.

~ JO~ESBORO

!

1...11

\

t

Parsons Br incker hoff -Tudor - Bechte l

J une 1967

�V I

MINUTES OF THE SIXTEENTH MEETING OF THE METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY JUNE 9, 1967

The Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority held its regular meeting on June 9, 1967, at 3:30 P.M. in the Conference Room of the Glenn Building~ Atlanta. Mr. Richard H. Rich, Chairman, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert F. Adamson (City of Atlanta) M. C. Bishop (Fulton County) Edgar Blalock (Clayton County) Roy A. Blount (DeKalb County) Rawson Haverty (City of Atlanta) K. A. McMillan (Gwinnett County) L. D. Milton (City of Atlanta) Richard H. Rich (City of Atlanta) MEMBERS ABSENT: Sanford Atwood (DeKalb County) OTHERS PRESENT: Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority H. L. Stuart, General Manager King Elliott, Public Information Director Earl W. Nelson, Chief Engineer H. N. Johnson, Secretary to General Manager Consultants Walter Douglas, Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade & Douglas, New York W. 0. 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

�Consultants (Cont'd.) R. W. Gustafson, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta David McBrayer, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Bob Barksdale, Parsons, Brinckerhof f -Tudor, Bechtel, Atlanta M. D. Den Hartog, Lord & Den Hartog/Parsons, BrinckerhoffTudor, Bechtel, New York Philip Hammer, Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates, Washington Lawrence Greene, Hammer, Greene , Siler Associates, Atlanta Leon Eplan , Eric Hill Associates, Atlanta W. Stell Huie, Huie & Harland, Atlanta Others Lorraine Bennett, Atlant~ Journal Dick Hebert, Atlanta Constitution Joseph E. Lay-;Robinson-Humphrey Jere A. Burruss, State Highway Department of Georgia Joel F. Stone, Jr., State Highway Departmen t of Georgia Robert W. Rosevear e , Traffic Engineer, DeKalb County Donald G. Ingram, Associate Director, Central Atlanta Progress, Inc. Andy Springer, Atlanta Traffic & Safety Council J. D. Wingfield, Jr., Jerry A. Coursey, A. Y. Brown, Gayle Harder, Mrs. Rachel Champagne, Miss Claudette Parrish, Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission The meeting was called to order by the Chairman. Minutes The minutes of the meeting of May 2nd had been mailed to members prior to the meeting . Mr. Bishop made a motion, seconded by Mr. Haverty, that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that they be unanimously approved. Mr. Huie called a tt ention to the fact that minutes of March 2, 1966, June 28, 1966, January 3 , 1967, and April 4, 1967, meetings had been approved at meetings which did not have a quorum present, and suggested that the Board ratify approval of those documents. Mr . Bishop made a motion that approval of these minutes be ratified , Mr. McMillan seconded the motion, and it was unanimously passed.

-

2 -

�Financial Report The General Manager presented the financial report as of May 31, 1967, which is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. Mr. Stuart commented that Gwinnett County was the only government in arrears on its commitments to the Authority. Income from interest had been slightly less than anticipated because less money had been invested, due to consultant payments having been made. There were no q'u estions, and the financial report was accepted. Progress Reports General Manager A meeting was held at 2:00 o'clock immediately prior to the regular Board meeting, for the purpose of hearing progress reports from the consultants. Engineers from Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, Mr. Philip Hammer of Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates, and Mr. Leon Eplan of Eric Hill Associates gave detailed reports on rapid transit consultant contracts in force. This was well attended by some 50 individuals, including local consultants, planners, architects, etc. Mr. Stuart said this would be a regular meeting each month, and it was hoped it would serve as a tool for information and coordination of efforts among the various governments and agencies concerned. Mr. Stuart said Cousins Properties, Inc., in development of the air rights in the gulch, had allowed SO-foot corridors between columns as well as a Y track, to accommodate requirements of the transit system. Liaison continued with Mr. Portman in the development of Peachtree Center. Mr. Stuart had met with airport developers and with principals in the Nasher project, and reported cooperation from both groups. 11

11

The General Manager had made nine public addresses during the month. Mr. Stuart reported on a conference in Washington, D. C., on May 22nd. The meeting was called by HUD, and was on design of urban transportation. An exhibit had been prepared by MARTA with the help of the engineers, and Mr. Stuart showed slides of the e x hibit, and taped excerpts of addresses by Mr. Charles Haar and others were presented . A brief report of the recent national meeting of the Institute for Rapid Transit held in Atlanta was made by the General Manager .

-

3 -

�Mr. Stuart said Aldermen Cook and Griggs, Representative Winkles, and others had recently toured the proposed transit lines. The General Manager announced that the Advisory Committee, discussed at the May meeting, had been formed, and was composed of the following professionals from the principal design disciplines in Atlanta: Chairman - Professor Howard K. Menhinick Richard L. Aeck, representing American Institute · of Architects Richard M. Forbes, representing American Institute of Planners H. Boyer Marx, representing American Society of Landscape Architects Roy J. Boston, representing American Society of Professional Engineers The purpose of this committee would be twofold: (1) to provide professional review of design work and (2) to discuss proper relationships between the several consultants. Mr. Stuart asked for approval of an amendment to the 1967 budget, adding an expenditure item of $5,000 for fees to this committee. Mr. Haverty made a motion that this amendment to the budget be approved, Mr. Bishop seconded the motion, and it was unanimously passed. Mr. Stuart and Mr. Huie had visited the State Department of Industry and Trade. Mr. Huie felt contractual arrangements could probably be made with the State for funds on a quarterly basis during the first two years. The State had appropriated $250,000 for the next two years, limited by the Constitutional provision restricting the State's contribution to ten percent of the cost of any one project. Consultants Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel Mr. John Coil gave examples of photogrammetry and aerial photography and the methods used to show projected plans and profiles of the system. The engineers had examined the gulch area further to determine the best rights-of-way for the transit system . In formation was being transmitted to the State Properties Control Commission . Preliminary work had begun on a contract for taking soil samples in the central and east- west lines . Mr . Coil said one company in the joint venture would do preliminary des_ign of special structures in the system. Liaison wor k on coor dinating plans for the airport and transit system continued. Effor ts t o

-

4 -

�coordinate the Highway Department's plans for the Brookwood interchange had been made. Mr. Coil said the firm had reviewed architectural definitives and had four which showed concepts for a transit center. The Chairman recognized the importance of coordinating plans for the transit lines to the airport, but cautioned the engineers against too detailed plans at this time in view of the realistic time lag on this line. Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates Mr. Philip Hammer reported that final figures for financing the system would be completed within a few days. He said there had been some changes in annual requirements which would more advantageously fit into a financial plan and the receipt of federal funds. He mentioned a plan staging the development of the system so that participation on the part of the outlying counties would begin simultaneously with construction in those areas. Other Business The Board accepted the resignation of Mr. Robert W. Adamson as Treasurer of MARTA. Mr. Adamson had been appointed as a member to replace Mr. Mills B. Lane, Jr. At Mr. Adamson's suggestion, the Board agreed to ask Mr. Herbert Dickson, Executive Vice President of the C. & S. Bank, to serve as Treasurer of MARTA. The Chairman reported that Fulton County Commission would soon appoint a replacement for Mr. Pulver. July Meeting Because of the July 4th holiday, the nex t regular meeting was scheduled for Friday, July 7th, at 3 : 30 P.M . Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 4 : 45 P.M.

-

5 -

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANS IT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA BUDGET

REPORT

MAY 31, 1967

BUDGET 1967 Unappropriat ed Surplus

ACTUAL JANUARY 1, 1967 TO MAY 31, 1967

$128,281.64

$1 28, 281.64

$ 84,030 . 00 23,190 , 00 82,770 . 00 91,800 . 00 18,210 . 00

$ 42 , 015 . 00 11,595 . 00 20 , 692 . 50 45 , 900 . 00 4 , 552 . 50

$300 , 000 . 00

$1 24 , 755 . 00

INCOME Appropriations : City of Atlanta Clayton Count y DeKalb Count y Fulton County Gwinnett Count y Sub - Totals Inter est Income Feder al Funds : 702 Loan Se c t ion 9 Grant Inter e s t on Fede r al Funds Sub -To tal s

$

5 , 520.00

$ 95 , 000 . 00 276, 000 . 00 0

$

1,780 . 40

$ 60,000 . 00 67 ,6 86 , 12 25 2, 05

$371 , 000 . 00

$1 27, 938 , 17

TOTAL I NCOME

$676 , 520 , 00

$254 ,47 3 . 57

TOTAL I NCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS

$804 , 801 , 64

$382,7 55 .21

$ 68 , 950 , 00

$ 22 , 270 . 30

10 , 500 , 00

4,826 . 87

1 , 109 . 00 533. 00 1 , 680 , 00 10 , 000 , 00 99 . 00

75 0 . 10 266 , 67 402, 85 0 0

$ 92 2 871. 00

$ 28 , 516 , 79

EXPENSES St a ff Costs : Sa l a ries Ex penses Benefits : Social Se curit y Guarant y Fund Health and Ac cident I nsura nce Re tir ement Wor kme n ' s Compensation Sub- Totals Board Meetings

$

CARRIED FORWARD

$ 96 , 021.00

3 , 150 , 00

$

1, 400 . 00

$ 29 , 916 . 79

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA BUDGET

REPORT

MAY 31, 1967

BUDGET 1967 TOTAL I NCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS BROUGHT FORWARD

ACTUAL JANUARY 1 , 1967 TO MAY 31, 1967

$804 , 801.64

$382, 755 .2 1

$ 96,021.00

$ 29 ,916 . 79

EXPENSES Brought For ward Administ r ative and Of fice Overhead : Rent Communi cations and Postage Furn i tur e and Equipment Suppli e s Printing Auditor Accountant Public In f ormation Spe c ia l Projects

$

Ins urance: Public Liability Depository and Forgery Fid elity Bond Sub - Tot a ls Couns e l Consu ltants : Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission : 701 Matching Urban Design Study : Section 9 Matching Atlanta Transit Study : Section 9 Matching Parsons , Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel : 702 Loan Section 9 : Federal Matching Retainer Agreement Research and Te chnical Services

3,000 . 00 2 , 000 . 00 2 ,000 . 00 3 ,6 00 . 00 1 ,000 . 00 25 0 . 00 1,000 . 00 33 , 000 . 00 0

$

1,250 . 00 743 . 09 411 . 97 1, 008 . 23 623.56 25 0 . 00 250 . 00 9 , 436. 90 34 . 00 0 0 0

72 . 00 56 . 00 199 . 00 $ 46, 177 . 00

$ 14, 00 7 . 75

$ 20,000 . 00

$

$ 31,2 50 . 00

$ 29,939 . 00

32,66 7 . 00 16,333 . 00

12, 000 . 00 0

3,333 . 00 1 ,66 7 . 00

5,451.30

0 0

95,000 . 00

60, 000 . 00

240,000 . 00 120,000 . 00 60,000 . 00 2, 000 . 00

0 110,800 . 00 14,220 . 55 1,490 . 84

$602,250 . 00

$228,45 0 .3 9

TOTAL EXPENSES

$764,448 . 00

f}.277 ,826223

SURPLUS

~

nof! ,228, 2a

Sub-Totals

f±0,3.23,6f±

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION MAY 31, 1967

ASSETS Cash in Banks : C & S National Bank First National Bank - Payroll Trust Company of Georgia Fulton National Bank - Section 9

$ 26,536.42 3,941.57 1,000.00 64,144.08

Investments: U. S. Treasury Bills U. S. Treasury Bills - Section 9

95,979.98 25,794.09

Petty Cash

25.00

Accounts Receivable: Federal Funds - 702 Loan Gwinnett County - 1967 Gwinnett County - 1966

$30,000.00 4,552.50 4,552.50

39,105.00

TOTAL ASSETS

$256,526 . 14 LIABIL!T!ES

Accounts Payable

$ 32,708 . 12

Payroll Taxes Withheld and Accrued Res erves : Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel: Section 9 Matching Retainer Agreement: Transportation Study Public Information Surveying TOTAL LIABILITIES SURPLUS

1,545.76

110,800 . 00 $

25.23 928 . 16 5,589 . 89

6,543.28 151,597.16 $104,928.98

�July 3, 1967

Mr. Charles C . Ford Bank Building Corporation 132 6 Fulton National Bank Building Atlanta , -G eorgi a 30303 Dear Check: Thank you very much for your kind l e t ter . We were all pre ent at Mr . Sommerville ' s fine presentation la t week. This matter will be referred to the Rapid Transit A uthority for full consideration.

Sincerely,

Ivan Allen, Jr. M ayor IAJr: o

�BANK BUILDING CORPORATION 132(3 FULTON NATIONAL BANK BUILDING

ATLANTA , GEORGIA 303 03

5 23 - 6052

June 30, 196 7

The Honorable Mayor Ivan Allen Jr. City Hall Atlanta, Georgia Dear Mayor Allen: Mr. Bob Sommerville, President of the Atlanta Transit Company, talked to t he Nor th side Kiwanis Club th is noon. He presented to t he membership an i nterim p rogra m for the moving of mass transportation. I am certain that you are familiar with this program so I will not go into the details, but I believe it has a great deal of merit . It' s a dvantages are cos ts, time to place in operation, and it' s flexibility. The bus as a complete unit gives this method quick mob ility on or off the rapid expr ess rou t e . I believe that if we could give this a good trial that it might result in something revolutionary in the rapid transit program. I wou ld like to go on record as endorsing this program to you and offering any assistance to ini ti ate it.

CCF :hs cc: Mr. Robert L. Sommerville

�rP

METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHOR ITY GLENN BUILD ING / ATLANTA , GEORGI A 30303 / A REA CODE 404 524 -5711 OFFICERS: Rich a rd H. Ri ch, Chairman Roy A. Blount, V ice Cha irman G lenn E. Bennett , Se cretary Hen ry L. Stuart, Gene ra l M anager

June 29, 1967

NOTICE TO:

Board of Directors Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority

FROM:

Glenn E . Bennett, Secretary

The next regular meeting will be held on July 7, 1967, at 3:30 P.M., in the Conference Room of the Glenn Buildi ng , Atlanta. The tentative agenda is as follows: 1.

Minutes of last meeting .

2.

Financial report .

3.

Report of :

4.

a)

General Manager

b)

Engineering consultants

c)

Economic consulta n t s

Othe r business .

�7 f

METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY GLENN BUILDING/ ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 / AREA CODE 404 524 -5711 OFFICERS: Richard H. Rich, Chairman

June 2, 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, S e c r e t a ~

The next regular meeting will be held on June 9, 1967, 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.

Report of:

4.

a)

General Manager

b)

Engineering Consultants

c)

Economic consultants

Other business.

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY GLENN BUILDING/ ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 / AREA CODE 404 524-5711 OFFICERS: Richard H. Rich , Chairman

May 18 , 1967

Roy A. Blount, Vice Chairman Glenn E. Bennett, Secretary Henry L. Stuart, General Manager

Mr . William A. Cunningham 262 East 78 t h St reet New York, N. Y.

Dear Mr. Cunninghanu Yours of May 8th t o Mayor Allen has been referred to me for consi derati on. We have under way now rapid tran it development in Atlanta that i s closi ng out t he p l anning s t age and starting the preliminary engineering . Ahead of us is the heavy- duty polit ical job of selli ng th project to the public so that public financing can be made available to us in sufficient measure to permit us to get into detail final design. For the immediate future I can offer you little encouragement becau ewe are keeping our t f f very small and putting mot of our resourc s into the hands of our consultants . After public fin ncing is received, we will be in a po ition to consider eriou ly people of your background becau e it will be neces ary to enlarge the administr tive, ngineering and public information t ffs . I do not foresee public financing t this l v l during the current y ar, and only with srna bing succe can I v n predict it for next year . In th m nwhile, I am very glad to have your resum and will ke pit at th top of my file which has b en set up to how us the resources that may be avail ble when it is necess ry to nlarge our t ff. I a ur you that wh n the time comes w will giv serious consideration to your pplication.

With bet wish s. Sincer ely yours,

l LS:J/ BC:

Mayot l l ] )llen, Jr .

H. L. Stuart, General Manager .

�May 15, 1967

MEMORANDUM TO:

Richard H. Rich, Chairman Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority

FROM:

Glenn E. Bennett, Executive Director, Atl~nta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission, Secretary, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Tr Authority

SUBJECT:

t

·

Some Planning Principles and Non-Engineering Aspects of Rapid Transit

I would like to set down here some of the basic philosophy which has guided us in transit planning, and also to mention possibilities for the future. Transit in Atlanta will be a tremendous influence; it will be the biggest single factor in guiding growth in many parts of the Metropolitan Area. The Planning Commission concluded in 1960 that a balanced transportation system with transit would (1) help shape the pattern of development of the region in a desirable and efficient way, and (2) provide the necessary access to central Atlanta so that the orderly growth of employment and business activity could take place there. The Planning Commission is concerned with serving the economic need and shaping the metropolitan area. MARTA has been created primarily to "build a railroad" in accordance with the generalized plan which has been tested against planning factors. We have come to the engineering stage now. This is a time when cost estimates need to be based on specifics. If the Planning Commission could have built a railroad, we would not have needed MARTA. As we make decisions on precise locations we are continuing to test and re-test basic assumptions made earlier with respect to population growth , density, economic change , and many social factors. Serving the disadvantaged people , the educational institutions , the new centers of interest , such as the stadium , auditorium , and cul tural center , are of great concern to us at this stage . We are

�r~ -

aware of the opportunity we have for relating harmoniously all of the exciting activities in the developmental stages in central Atlanta, and upgrading the City's aesthetics and urban design. These are non-engineering factors which are currently receiving attention from planners. The present work program of the staff of the ARMPC includes an updating of earlier regional land use plans. In connection with this we have developed statements of region a l goals related to transportation. These are polic y statements. Th ey set up criteria against which transportation improvements can be measured . For example, one section deals with aesthetic standards as follows : "New or improved transportation facilities should be located and designed so as to enhance the appearance of the region, with appropriate regard to topography , soils, wooded areas and water bodies , as well as the character of e x isting and projected man-made development." Th e objective of a regional plan is to guide new growth into sensible patterns, and discourage extensively scatte red urban de v elopment which is wasteful of land a nd other resourc e s. Transportation s y stems are the greatest single influence on deve lopm e nt. Consequently, planners study the effects of any proposed transportation improv ements, such as roads and highways of all categories and transit, on future land uses. Here are a couple of paragraphs from our polic y statement on the pr e servation of neighborhoods a nd community v alu e s, a lso on pres e r v ing freedom of choice : "Neighborhoods are considered the basic unit of resid ential community de ve lopment. They may be defined in one or mor e of se ve ral way s : b y tr a di t ion, th rough identification b y th e r e sid e nts , from obser ved patt e rns of common a lity in ag e a nd ch a racter of d eve lopme nt , by natur a l o r ma n-m a de ba rr i e r s, a s th e limits of local trade or s er vice areas , a nd so forth Whe re t hey c a n be d e fine d, th e integrit y of sound or r e n e wable neighborhoods s hould be protect e d : ma jor tr a nspor t ation art e ri e s sh ould be lo cated a nd design e d so a s to bou nd , not penetrate , such a re a s . " "Re sidentia l de v elopmen t a nd renewa l s h ould be pl a n ned a n d c o nd ucted s o a s to make av ail abl e in e v ery sector of the reg ion h ousing of a wid e r an ge o f t ype s and c o s t , thus a llowi ng t he indi v i du al max i mum freed om to choo s e where he wi shes to l ive . To enhance t h is fr ee d om of choice , all resident i a l area s s hould hav e comp a rab le acce ssib ility to a r ea s of emp l oyment , re c reati onal and c omme r cial acti v ity . Pub li c t r ansportation

-

2 -

�facilities should provide this comparable accessibility for residents least able to depend on private transportation." All of this ARMPC planning policy relative to transportation is consistent with the objectives of the H oU oD o programs. Federal money has improved and expanded planning all over the country; there's no doubt about it. Atlanta can boast a little over having the oldest publicly supported metropolitan planning agency in the United States. Because of local initiative back in 1947 we ,have had metropolitan planning long before the feds got into the business. Now , many cities have agencies something like ours, but because we had a foundation of area-wide planning we could do a comprehensive transit plan in 1961, a nature preserve plan in 1962, an airport plan last year, code studies two years ago, and carry on many other activities in the field of economic and social research. HUD knows this. It has a bearing on present transit work; the transit routes are a part of the overall metropolitan plan and not independent and separate. We are now working on area-wide water and sewer problems , capital improvement programming, preparation for the 1970 census, and other items in addition to MARTA non-engineering work. HUD knows this. Sidelines include metropolitan training schools for police officers and improved communications and records systems for law enforcement agencies, to mention a few. Let's look at Central Atlanta. This is a concern of ARMPC because it's the h e art of the region. It is the subject of much study by the City of Atlanta in the community improvement plan (CIP } which is aimed toward the establishment of priorities for redevelopment of land all over the City. Now that Central Atlanta Progress , I nc. is organized and well staffed, we have the opportunity to better serve the original purpose of rapid transit with respect to downtown interests, both private and public. Growth and development occurs in Atlanta with or without public planning. Portman's Peachtree Center is far along; cousins' air rights project is starting with an 8,000-car park ing facilit y ; the Nasher Park Place 18-acre air rights project is under study by architects, planners, and economists , and Georgia State College has a big and significant expansion program . La ter this year contracts are e x pected to be let for Georgia Plaza Park , a landscaped open space with underground parking garage. The State, Fulton County , and the City of Atlanta are cooperating on this venture which will result in an attractive government - centered public park which will upgrade the area near the Capitol . Now we have the opportunity to coordinate all of these activities and others , and create before long a central At lanta plan with both short-range and long -range goals. Transit is an integral part of any downtown plan , and our present alignments of routes wi ll tie together all the major developments mentioned above .

-

3 -

�A corridor impact planning study is now in progress, as you know. It will show the relation of transit to low-income groups and their economic and social needs. Other considerations are the relation of transit to educational institutions, vocational schools, community centers, and renewal projects. The transit corridors, the lines of the system, will be pulsing and throbbing with growth and our efforts to properly direct and control these dynamics must never cease. Planners are now working with both private and public agencies in an attempt to identify the many possibilities which the transit corridors offer us for enhancing community values, serving the largest number of citizens, and guiding development toward most sensible and efficient patterns. In our discussions with H.U.D. officials and when we talk to. our transit visitors who will be in town next week, I think we ought to keep some of these points in mind. I want to take this opportunity, Dick, to e x press our gratitude to y ou for the time and energy you are putting into this task, which is at times extremely difficult and complex. Without your leaders h ip it would be much more so!

-

4 -

�MINUTES OF THE FIFTEENTH MEETING OF THE METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY MAY 2, 1967

The Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority held its regular meeting on May 2, 1967, at 3:30 P.M. in the Conference Room of the Glenn Building, Atlanta. Mr. Richard H. Rich, Chairman, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: M. C. Bishop {Fulton County) Rawson Haverty {City of Atlanta) K. A. McMillon {Gwinnett County) W. A. Pulver (Fulton County) Richard H. Rich (City of Atlanta) MEMBERS ABSENT:

Robert F. Adamson (City of Atlanta) Sanford Atwood (DeKalb County) Edgar Blalock (Clayton County) Roy A. Blount (DeKalb 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 W. Nelson, Chief Engineer H. N. Johnson, Secretary to General Manager Consultants J. A. Coil, Resident Manager, Parsons, Brinckerhoff-TudorBechtel, Atlanta Lawrence Greene and Raul Garcia, Hammer , Greene, Siler Ass ociat es, Atlanta W. Stell Huie, Huie and Harland, Legal Counsel for the Authority

�Others J. D. Wingfield, Jr., Planning Director, Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission Mrs. Rachel Champagne, Assistant to the Executive Director, Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission Margaret Hurst, Atlanta Constitution, Reporter Thomas Nooner, General Railway Signal Company, Rochester, New York Frank Scott, Resident Representative, General Railway Signal Company, Atlanta Otto Hikade, General Railway Signal Company The meeting was called to order by the Chairman. Minutes The minutes of the April meeting were unanimously approved by the members present. Due to lack of a quorum it was agreed that this action would be ratified by the Board at the June meeting. Financial Report The General Manager reported that payments from the local governments, with the exception of Gwinnett County, were on schedule. Gwinnett County remains in arrears for the fourth quarter of 1966 and the first quarter of 1967. Staff costs were running according to budget, and a payment of $29,939.00 had been made to the Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission in 1967, completing a commitment of $61,188.00 for 1966 and 1967, as matching funds for 701 Project Ga. P- 49. The statement is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes . Progress Reports General Manager Mr . Stuart said studies were continuing on the feasibility of an e x tension of the West Line to ser v e Si x Flags Over Georgia in Cobb County . It was belie ved th a t r ight - of-wa y into this area would not be difficult to secure . It had not been determi n ed whether or not the patr on a ge would mak e this e x te n sion economic ally feasible , in v iew of the s eason al natur e of the r ec r eation f acility.

-

2 -

�The General Manager said he .was selecting a group of five professionals from the fields of architecture, landscape architecture, city planning, and engineering, who would comprise an advisory committee to the Authority for the purpose of reviewing plans as the work moves from preliminary engineering into urban design. Mr. Stuart said the organizational meeting of this committee would be held soon, and he would ask for approval of an amendment to the budget at the next meeting, to cover retainer fees for this committee. It was announced that Mr. Robert L. Adamson, Treasurer of the Authority, had been appointed a Director to fill the unexpired term of Mr. Mills B. Lane, Jr., a City of Atlanta appointee, who had recently resigned. The General Manager asked for approval of an expenditure of $2,000.00 for annual membership dues in the Institute for Rapid Transit. He said the annual workshop was helpful and provided an exchange of information with the eleven member operating or emerging transit authorities in the country. After discussion of the program of the Institute and the benefits of such a membership, it was decided that the $2,000.00 annual dues could not be justified at this time. The annual meeting of the Institute for Rapid Transit, to be held in Atlanta May 24-26, will provide an opportunity for members of the Board to observe its work. Mr. Stuart showed slides of operating transit systems in Montreal, Toronto and Philadelphia, having recently returned from a trip to observe these systems. He said each system had gotten started without federal aid. A comparison of the systems pointed out continuing improvements in materials, decor, maintenance, and technology. The General Manager announced that the Department of Housing and Urban Development was sponsoring a one-day meeting in Washington on May 22, on design in urban transportation. At the request of HUD, the Authority would provide an exhibit at that meeting, showing plans and progress of the Atlanta system, and Messrs. Stuart, Elliott and Nelson would attend. Mr. Rich said this would be an important meeting, and requested all members who could go to do so. Mr. Stuart had also asked the newly formed Advisory Committee to attend. Public Information Director Mr. Elliott reported on his recent trip to San Francisco. He had gathered information from the Bay Area Rapid Transit Dis trict to assist in the development of the Authority's public

-

3 -

�information program. A tentative outline of his findings would be used in the Authority's planning for a bond referendum. He showed slides of the BARTD rapid transit system now under construction in San Francisco. Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel Mr. Coil reported on a recent meeting with the Rapid Transit Committee of the Atlanta Chamber of Commerce at whi'ch time this Committee was brought up to date on planning and engineering progress. Enlargements of recently acquired aerial photographs were being assembled to support the Authority's display at the Urban Design Conference in Washington on May 22. Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates Mr. Greene reported briefly for Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates and stated they were now receiving final cost estimates from Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel covering the entire rapid transit system, broken down into five stages of development. A complete draft copy of HGS's report would soon be presented to the Authority and the Planning Commission for review. Mr. Bennett stated he had received approval from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to extend the completion date of 701 Project Ga. P-49 to August 2, 1967. The extension of time had been necessitated because of a delay in receipt of information from the State Highway Department. The approval of the extension would permit all work to be completed according to contracts. The Chairman introduced Mr. Earl W. Nelson, newly employed Chief Engineer for the Transit Authority, and welcomed him on behalf of the Board. Mr . Rich reminded the Board of the luncheon meeting on Tuesday, May 9, at the Commerce Club, at which time representati v es from the supporting governments would be brought up to date on rapid transit progress in the metropolitan area . At this time certain legislation would be discussed which the Authority would seek to hav e appr oved in the ne x t session of the Gene r al Assembly . Inquiry was made regarding the r ecov ery of Mr. L. D . Milto n f r om a recent oper atio n, and it was the e xpressed sentiment of the Boar d that he would soon be completely r eco v e r ed a n d back at his o f fice .

-

4 -

�Mr. Rich requested that maps of all areas under discussion be displayed at future meetings of the Board. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 P.M. June Meeting Date Due to the absence of the Chairman from the City on the next regular meeting date of the Board, June 6, it was suggested that it be postponed until 3:30 P.M., Friday, June 9. Members will be contacted in the interim in order to determine if this date is satisfactory.

-

5 -

�ME TROPOL ITAN

TLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUT"tlORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION APRIL 30 , 1967

BUDGET 19 67

ACTUAL JANUARY 1, 1967 TO APRIL 30 , 1967

$128,281.64

$128 , 281.64

$ 84,030 . 00 23 , 19'0. 00 82,770 . 00 91,800 . 00 18,210 . 00 $300 , 000 . 00 $ 5,520 . 00

$ 42 , 015 . 00 11 , 595 . 00 20,692 .5 0 4-5,900 . 00 4,552.50 $124,755 . 00 $ 1,780. 40

$ 95, 000 . 00 276 , 000 . 00

$ 30 , 000 . 00 40 , 000 . 00

TOTAL INCOME

$371 , 000 . 00 $676,52 0. 00

$ 70, 000 . 00 $196 , 5 35 . 4 0

TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATE D SURPLUS

$804,801. 64

$324, 817 . 04

$ 68 , 950 . 00 10,500 . 00

$ 16 , 583 .15 3 , 172 . 44

1 , 109 . 00 5 33 . 00 1 , 680 . 00 10 , 000 . 00 99 . 00 $ 92 , 87 1. 00 $ 3 , 150 . 00

613 .2 0 266 . 67 322 . 28 0 0 $ 20 , 957 . 74 $ 1 , 200 . 00

Unappr op riat e d Surplus INCOME App ropriations : Ci t y of At lanta Clay ton County DeKa l b County Fu lto n County Gwi nnett County Sub-Totals Interest Income Federal Funds: 702 Loan Section 9 Grant Sub ~Tota l s

EXPENSES Sta ff Cos ts : Salaries Expenses Benefits: Social Security Guar anty Fund Health and Accident I nsur anc e Retirement Workme n's Comp ensat ion Sub-Totals Boar d Mee tings Administrative and Office Overhea d: Re nt Communications and Post age Furniture and Equipmen t Supplies Printing Au di tor Accountan t Public Information Insurance : Public Liabi lity Depository and Forgery Fidelity Bond Su b - Totals CARRIED FORWARD

$

3, 000 . 00 2 , 000 . 00 2 , 000 . 00 3 , 600 . 00 1 , 000 . 00 25 0. 00 1 , 000 . 00 33 , 000 . 00

72.00 56 . 00 199.00 $ 46,177 . 00 $142 , 198 . 00

$

1, 000 . 00 5 36 . 83 117 . 81 904 . 02 623 . 56 25 0. 00 25 0. 00 6,742. 05

0 0 0 $ 10 , 424 . 27 $ 32,582 . 01

�METROPOLITA~ ATLANTA RAPID TP.ANSIT AUTHORITY A"'L.A..1.l'TA, GEGRGIA STATENE n F Fl~ANCIAL Cl t~ DITION APRI L 30 , i96 7

oUDGET 1 967

TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS BROUGHT FORWARD

ACWAL JAYtJA&Y 1 , 1967 T

APRIL 30 , 1967

$804,801. 64

$324,8 17.04

Brought Forward

$142 ,19 8 .00

$ 32 , 582 . 01

Counsel Consult ants: Atlanta Region Metropolitan Plann i ng Commission: 7 01 Matching Urban Design Study: Section 9 Match i ng Atlanta Transit S tudy : Section 9 Matching Parsons, Brinckerhoff -Tudor -Bechte l: 702 Loan Sect ion 9 : Federal Matchi ng Retainer Agreement Research and Technical Serv i ces

$ 2 , 000.00

$

$ 31 ,25 0 .0

$ 29 , 939.00

EXPENSES

4,299.74

32,667 . 00 16 , 333 . 00

0 0

3,333 . 00 1 , 667 . 00

0 0

95 , 00 .00

30 , 000 . 00

24 0 , 000 .0 120 , 000.00 60 , 000 . 00 2,000.00

0 110 , 800.00 15 ,048.70 817.58

2602 , 250 00

$186, 605 .2 8

TOTAL EXPENSES

$764 , 448.00

$223 , 487. 03

SURPLUS

~

.n o1, 330 . Ol

Sub-Totals

400~~3 . 6~

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA STATE~IBNT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION APRIL 30 , 1967

ASSETS Ca sh in Banks : C & S Nat ional Bank Fi r s t Na t ional Bank - Pay roll Tr ust Company o f Georgia Fu l t on Nat i onal Bank - Section 9

$ 48, 456 . 47 15 ,342 . 04 1 , 000 . 00 4, 457 .96

Investmen t s: U. S . Tr ea sury Bills U. S . Treasury Bills - Section 9

$ 90 , 003 . 56 55 , 542 . 04 25 . 00

Pet t y Ca s h Acco unt s Receivable : Gwinne t t County - 1967 Gwinnet t Count y - 196 6

$4 , 552 . 50 4 ,552.5 0

9 , 105. 00 $2 23, 932 . 07

TOTAL ASSETS LI ABILITIE S $

Accounts Pa yable

910 .67

Payro ll Taxe s Wi t hh e ld a nd Accr ued Reserves: Varsons, Brin c kerho ff- Tudor - Be ch t e l: Section 9 Ma t chi ng Retainer Agre ement : Tran s por ta tion Study Pu bl ic Informa t i on Surveying

TOTAL LIABILITIES SURPLUS

3, 519 . 96

110 , 800. 00 $

118 . 60 1 ,11 2.61 6, 140 .22

7 , 371. 43 12 2,602. 06 $1 01, 330. 01

�MINUTES OF THE FOURTEENTH MEETING OF THE METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY APRIL 4, 1967

The Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority held its regular meeting on April 4, 1967" at 3:30 P.M. in the Conference Room of the Glenn Building, Atlanta. Mr. Roy A. Blount, Vice-Chairman, presided in the absence of Mr. Bennett, Mr. Huie acted as Secretary. MEMBERS PRESENT:

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) W. A. Pulver (Fulton County) Richard H. Rich (City of Atlanta) MEMBERS ABSENT: L. D. Milton (City of Atlanta) Mills B. Lane, Jr. (City of Atlanta) OTHERS PRESENT: Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority King Elliott, Public Information Director H. N. Johnson, Secretary to Ge n e r a l Manager Cons ul tan ts J. A . Coil, Resident Manager, Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor Bechtel, Atlanta W. 0 . Salter , Vice President, Parsons Brinckerho ff, Quade & Douglas, Inc. , San Francisco Raul Garcia, Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates, Atlanta W. Stell Huie and Harry Morg an, Huie a nd Harland, Legal Counsel for the Authority

�Others J. D. Wingfield, Jr., Planning Director, Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission Leon Eplan, Eric Hill Associates, Inc., Atlanta The meeting was called to order by the Vice-Chairman . . In the absence of Mr. Bennett, Mr. Huie acted as Secretary. Minutes Upon motion by Mr. Blalock, seconded by Mr. McMillan, reading of the minutes of the March 7 meeting was dispensed with and they were unanimously approved. Mr. Huie noted that a correction had been made in the March minutes regarding cost estimates as reflected in the last sentence under the Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates report. A corrigendum had been forwarded to all concerned by the Secretary and was included in the unanimous approval of the March minutes. Financial Report The financial report was presented by the Vice-Chairman in the absence of the General Manager who was in Montreal attending the Rail Transit Group Conference of the American Transit Association. The statement reflected that Gwinnett County was in arrears for the 4th quarter of 1966 and 1st quarter of 1967 and Clayton County for the 1st quarter of 1967. Appropriations for the 1st quarter had been recei v ed from the City of Atlanta and DeKalb County. DeKalb County 1 s payment was received after preparation of the Financial Statement where it was entered as an accounts receivable item. Second quarterly payment for 1967 from Fulton County had also been received . The financial statement was accepted by the Board and is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. Progress Reports Vice - Chairman

Mr. Blount presented the members with a copy of the General Manager's "Quarterly Report of Contract Status , March 31, 1967" to bring them up to date on the present status of the various contracts with MARTA. After some discussion the report was accepted by the Board and is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes.

- 2-

�Parsons Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel Mr. Coil stated the contractor for aerial photography was continuing his work in connection with field measurements in order to provide back-up information for photogrammetry. This work is proceeding on schedule and PBTB expects to receive the first completed work in about 3 or 4 weeks. Patronage studies are being processed in New York utilizing a computer. This data is being incorporated into the patronage study here. Several alternate means for transferring rapid transit cars on the EastWest to the North-South Lines has been considered. More study is being given to this before making a recommendation in this area. Mr. Coil said the Technical Coordinating Committee had been briefed concerning the proposed rapid transit system and that Planning Directors of the governments supporting MARTA had been supplied with maps of the proposed system. Initial discussions with the various local governments is scheduled to begin next week. Preparation of text and supporting drawings in connection with the report on the 701 Contract was proceeding and should be completed in approximately 6 weeks. Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates are in the process of preparing certain aspects of this work which will be incorporated in the total plan. He stated that they had met with the City Consultant on plans for construction at the airport and would continue to consult with airport officials from time to time to keep abreast of developments. Mr. Rich inquired as to the possibility of running a spur of the transit line to the airport if the new air terminal is not constructed within a reasonable period of time. Mr. Coil said all possibilities for serving both the airport and the surrounding community would be considered. Mr. Haverty asked that consideration be given to the extension of the West Line from I-285 across the Chattahoochee River into Cobb County to serve the new amusement area, Six Flags Over Georgia, if income derived from such a move would justify it. Mr. Rich asked PBTB to give consideration to such a plan in order to protect future right-of-way through the industrial section in that area. He instructed Mr. Coil to meet with the General Manager and report at the next meeting on the feasibility of a study to extend the West Line to Six Flags Over Georgia. Mr. Blount said the Stone Mountain Authority had asked about the possibility of extending the East Line to Stone Mountain and this should also be considered. Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates Mr. Garcia said they were currently assembling two final reports , the first being a segment of the joint 701 report pre pared by PBTB and HGS which will summarize their analysis, consider potential sources of financing, and contain a formula

- 3-

�for distributing the local share of MARTA's costs to the five counties and the City of Atlanta, allowing for the inclusion or exclusion of local areas such as Cobb County. The second report is a comprehensive compilation of HGS work materials produced primarily for the benefit of MARTA and ARMPC staffs. HGS's study of possible new sources of funds reveals that a sales tax would produce the required volume of revenue, is easily implemented and is efficient. He stated there had been some discussion of a statewide sales ta~- distributed back to local governments on a per capita basis. HGS is currently analyzing the potential revenues from such a tax for the metropolitan area and will include these findings in the final report in addition to their estimates of the revenue from a local option sales tax and other possible sources. Further investigations are being made of the availability of potential federal funds. Mr. Garcia stated their representatives would like to meet with members of MARTA prior to putting together their final analysis and report. MARTA Award Messrs. Rich and Elliott had returned during the meeting from Jekyll Island where the Chairman had accepted the distinguished meritorious award presented to the Transit Authority by the Association County Commissioners of Georgia at their Annual Convention April 2-4 at the Buccaneer Motel, Jekyll Island, Georgia. Mr. Rich read the text on the Certificate of Appreciation to the Board. It is quoted below: "Association County Commissioners of Georgia presents to, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, Certificate of Appreciation: For its intergovernmental leadership and for the progress it has made to provide the counties of Clayton, DeKalb, Fulton and Gwinnett, and the City of Atlanta, a fast, economical and comfortable transportation system. As befitting an intergovernmental agency, its leadership is composed of representatives of the involved governments dedicated to the promotion of a common advantage . It is under this kind of leadership, the ultimate goal will be achieved . Presented April 3, 1967 at 53rd Annual Convention at Jekyll Island. Signed Bruce Schaefer, President; Hill R. Healan , Execu tive Director."

-4-

�Transit Line Tours Mr. Blount said all members of the Board had not yet toured the various transit lines and urged that they arrange to do so at their earliest convenience.

Mr. Rich said it was important to begin planning now for any legislation MARTA may require at the next session of the General Assembly. Mr. Blount stressed the importance of effective liaison between MARTA, county and city officials, and the legislative delegations. He urged all MARTA Directors to be in close and frequent contact with their respective governmental and legislative leaders, discussing the plans and needs of MARTA. A meeting with county and city officials is planned for May 9, 1967. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 4:15 P.M.

W. Stell Huie Counsel and Acting Secretary

NOTE:

The next meeting of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority is scheduled for Tuesday, May 2, at 3:30 P.M.

- 5-

�--

METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPI D TRANSITY AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA BUDGET REPORT MARCH 31, 1967

BUDGET Una ppropri a ted Surplus

ACTUAL JANUARY 1 , 196 7 TO MARCH 31 , 196 7

$128,281.64

$128,281.64

$ 84,030 . 00

$ 21,007 . 50

23,190 . 00 82,770 . 00 91,800 . 00 18,210.00

5,797.50 20,692.50 22,950.00 4,552.50

$300,000.00 $ 5,520 . 00

$ 75,000 . 00 $ L520.90

$ 95,000 . 00

$ 30,000.00

276,000.00

40 2 000 _.00

$371,000.00

$ 70,000.00

TOTAL I NCOME

$676,520.00

$146,520.90

TOTAL I NCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS

S8Qfl:.8Ql 6~

$274,802.54

$ 68,950 . 00

$ 12, 487 . 65

10 , 500 . 00

1 , 792 . 79

1,109 . 00 533 . 00 1 , 680.00 10,000 . 00 99.00

53 2. 71 133 . 34 241. 71 0 0

$ 92,871.00 $ 3 , 150 . 00

$ 15 , 188 . 20 900 . 00 $

I NCOME Appropriations: Cit y of Atlanta Clay ton County DeKalb Count y Fulton County Gwinnett County Sub-Totals Interest Income Federal Funds: 702 Loan Section 9 Grant Sub - Totals

EXPENSES St af f Cos ts: Sa l ar i e s Ex pen ses Benefits : Soc ial Securit y Gua r an ty Fund Hea lth and Ac cid en t I n suranc e Retir ement Wo~kmen ' s Compansation Sub - Totals Board Meet ings Admi nis tra t i ve and Off ic e Over head : Rent Commun ic a ti ons and Post a ge Furni t ure and Equ i pment Suppl i e s Printing Audit or Accountant Public Informa tion I n s urance : Public Liabilit y Deposit or y and Forgery Fi de lit y Bond Sub - Totals CARRIED FORWARD

$

3,000 . 00 2, 000 . 00 2, 000 . 00 3 , 600 . 00 1 , 000 . 00 250 . 00 1 , 000 . 00 33, 000 . 00

$

72 . 00 56 . 00 199 . 00

750 . 00 36 3 . 03 0 628. 15 623 . 56 250 . 00 0 5 , 058 . 91 0 0 0

~ 46 2 177 . 00

$

$142 , 198 . 00

$ 23 , 761.85

7,673 . 65

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA BUDGET REPORT MARCH 31, 1967

TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS BROUGHT FORWARD

1967

ACTUAL JANUARY 1, 196 7 TO MARCH 31, 196 7

$804,801.64

$274,802.54

$142,198.00 $ 20,000.00

$ 23,761.85 $ 3,092.74

$ 31,250.00

$ 29,939.00

EXPENSES Brought Forward Counsel Consultants: Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission: 701 ~atching Urban Design Study: Section 9 Matching Atlanta Transit Study: Section 9 Matching Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel: 702 Loan Section 9 : Federal Matching Retainer Agreement Research and Technical Services

32,667.00 16,333.00

0 0

3,333.00 1,667.00

0 0

95,000.00

0

240,000.00 120,000.00 60,000.00 2,000.00

0 92,333.00 13,985.97 597.58

$602,250.00

$136,855 . 55

TOTAL EXPENSES

$764,448 . 00

$163,710.14

SURPLUS

~

Hll,Q22 .~Q

Sub - Totals

~Q.J.SJ.6~

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION MARCH 31 , 196 7

ASSETS Cash in Banks: C & S National Bank First National Bank - Payroll Trust Company of Georgia Fulton National Bank - Sec tion 9

$30,354.81 6,543.55 1,000.00 5,313.88

Investments: U. S. Treasury Bills U. S. Treasury Bills - Section 9

70,261.29 34,686.12 25.00

Petty Cash Accounts Receivable: Clayton Count y DeKalb County Gwinnett County - 1967 Gwinnett County - 1966

$ 5,797.50 20,692.50 4,552.50 4,552.50

35,595.00 $183,779.65

TOTAL ASSETS LIABILITIES Accounts Payable

$

2,046.01

Payroll Taxes Withheld and Accrued Reserves: Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel: Section 9 Matching Retained Agreement: Transportation Study Public Information Right-of-Way Procedure Study Surveying TOTAL LIABILITIES SURPLUS

124.18

62,333.00 $

301.07 1,193.63 0

6,689.36

8,184.06 72,687.25

$111, 092 • 40

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY GLE NN BU ILD ING / ATLANTA , GEORG IA 30303 / AREA CODE 404 524 -5711 OFFICERS:

Richa r d H. Ri ch , Cha irm an Roy A. Blou nt, Vice Chair man

Gl e nn E. Bennett , Se cretary

March 29, 1967

Henry L. Stu a rt , General Ma n ager

GENERAL MANAGER'S QUARTERLY REPORT OF CONTRACT STATUS, MARCH 31, 1967. Cons i derable progress has been made under our several contracts and a detailed review is timely.

Our contractural obli-

gat i ons total $962,566 of which $616,709 (64¾) represents the federal porti on and $345,857 represents the local matching funds. The status of work shown is as of February 28, 1967: I ..

The

11

701 11 Contracts signed June 28, 1966 tot(';ll $183,566 of

which the federal portion is $122,376.

The local portion of

Trans i t Authority funds is $61,189, all of which has been paid to the ARMPC who is administering the work for us. These p r o j ects are to update the 1962 report in its entirety. The updated revisions will appear as a technical version and a popular v ersion of a bound report similar in format to the 1 962 r epor ts ~ Ao

The wo r k is in three par tso

Ha mmer o Gr een e r Siler Associates has a $48 , 000 contr a c t t o upd a te t he f inancing aspects whi c h is a b o ut 70¾ c omplete o

I t c o v e rs:

lo

Methods o f financing .

2o

Source s o f fina ncing .

3o

Derivation o f f ormula for sharing the financial

- 1 -

�load between the several political jurisdictions. 4.

Assistance to local governments to eva~uate their financial ability.

5.

Preparation of a financial plan in line with the above.

B.

PBTB has a $100,000 contract to update the other parts of the 1962 report which is about 70¾ complete.

It

covers: 1.

Route and station locations (90¾ complete).

2.

Patronage, revenues and operating cost predictions (75¾ complete).

3.

c.

Report preparation (20¾ complete).

ARMPC will use the remaining $35,566 for administration and supervision of the HGS and PB-T-B contracts, its own staff's work and auditing and overhead char9eable to the entire updating project.

Each of these units of work provides inputs to the others so they will continue to move ahead on a common front and should be wrapped up this summer. is May 2, 1967.

The contractural completion date

The work was considerably delayed by the

late development of travel statistic~ by the Highway Department and the completion date will not be met.

The necessary

statistics are now in hand and the work is moving ahead at a good pace.

Our total project will not be damaged by the

delay. II.

The

11

702 11 Contract signed June 28, 1966 is for $125,00 0 with

PB- T-B to carry out preliminary engineering work on the - 2 -

�system from Oglethorpe to the Airport.

This is an interest-

free federal loan that must be repaid when construction begins.

No local funds are involved.

The preliminary

engineering work will be ·in suffic;ient detail to Gnable us to initiate right of way acquisition, to provide us with highly refined estimates of construction costs, and to provide us with a solid point of departure for the development of final, detailed design and the preparation of contract >·

plans and specifications.

Funds are requisitioned from HUD

in the exact amount required when we are invoiced. $30,000 requisition and payment has been made.

One

The contract

is 44% complete. It covers: A.

B.

Establishment of design basis by developing information on:

(65% complete)

1.

Utilities.

2.

Existing building foundations.

3.

Subsurface structures.

4.

Street and highway facilities.

5.

Railroad structures.

6.

Geology.

Preliminary design of typical and of selected special items (49% complete): 1.

Structures.

2.

Stations.

3.

Functional layout of Transit Center.

4.

F~nctional layout of shops an<:\ yards. = 3 -

..,

·,

�5.

c.

n.

Equipment requirements.

Preliminary engineering plans 1.

Base maps.

2.

Alignment of tracks.

3.

Station sites.

(45% 1complete):

Cost estimates (not started): 1.

Construction.

2.

Right of way.

The cont,ract carries a completion date of June 30, 1~67, but we have decided to integrate this work with the work being don~ under the technical studies grant (below).

As a result,

all of the preliminary engineering for the 44-mile system . Doraville-Forest Park and west from Hightower Road to I-285 and east frqm ~vondale Estates to I-285 - is being done simultaneously, aimed at a completion date of O,ecem'ber 31, 1968. III. The Technical studies Grant (Section 9) Contracts are for a

total of $ 554,000 of which the federal portion is $369,333, and the local portion is $184,667.

Federal funds are re-

quisitioned quarterly in advance at a raie ipdicated by prog~ess of the work and the terms of the contracts. has been requisitioned and received.

$40,000

$20,000 of local funds

must be deposited to this account out of our next receipts.

I anticipate that we will be invoiced for parts of this work in May, 1967 . The wo;k is divided into three parts and contracts have just been signed and work is just getting und,r way. A.

PB-T-B has a contract signed February 2, 1967 for $500,000 -

4 -

�covering: 1.

Preliminary Engineering: (a)

East Line to I-285.

(b)

West Line to I-285.

(c)

Northeast Line - Oglethorpe to Doraville.

(d)

South Line Airport to Forest Park.

2.

Support at public hearings on whole system.

3.

Formal Technical Report on all preliminary en9ineering (702 and Section 9).

B.

ARMPC has a contract signed March 10, 1967 for $49,000 to make a Corridor Impact Study.

$9,000 covers the

supervision and overhead they will provide to the subcontracts, Eric Hill Associates, who will do most of the work of assessing the impact of our proposed rapid transit system on the community.

We will receive recommendations

for changes in community plans or rapid transit plans in the event that adverse impact or missed opportunities are discovered. The sub-contracts will check up on our relationship to: 1.

Land use and related controls.

2.

Public improvements planning.

3.

Urban design.

4.

Lo cal deve lopme nt pla n s.

S.

Urban ren ewal pro jects.

6.

Private d e v el o pment plans.

7.

Benefit to disadvantaged groups.

8.

Other public programs.

- 5 -

�c.

Our impact on the Atlanta Transit will be substantial and $5,000 has been reserved to start studies in this field .

More money will be sought in future applications.

I am in touch with ATS officials to dete~mine the character of necessary study and plans . IV.

The Retainer Agreement is a contract with PB-T-B for planning, Consultant, or engineering services not covered by existing contracts .

Each item of work is authorized and budgeted by

the Board.

PB-T-B cannot initiate any work under this con-

tract that will cause total charges under the contract to exceed $100,000.

Its condition as of March 31, 1967 is as

follows: Billing 1/1/673/31/67 Pre-contract work (Billing is complete)

$

Total Reported 12/31/66

Thru 3/31/67

964.61

$27,436.00

$28,400.61

2,249.45

10,448.39

12,697.84

387.38

811.55

1,198.93

Support before State Properties Control Commission ($1,000 authorized)

Complete

1,073.99

1 , 073 .99

Soi l s Library Study ($1400 author i zed)

Complete

1 ,468 . 50

1,468.50

P ublic Relati o ns Su ppor t ( $2, 000 autho rized)

446.71

359.66

806.37

Real Estate Co nsultati o n ($1250 autho r i zed) (Billing is c omplete )

1,443.12

1,443.12

310.64

310.64

Mobilization & Relocation (6 out of 8 authorized moves have been made.) Participa t ion in Atlanta Area Transportation Study ($1500 authorized)

Detailed Engineering ($2,000 authorized 1/3/67) ($5,000 authorized 3/7/67) Total Expenditures

$5,801.91

Unexpended Authorizations

$41,598.09

$47,400.00 $ 8 , 184 . 06

Balance

$44 ,4'15 e 94, -

6 -

�The road ahead: We have had one round of discussions with the Uo

s.

Depart-

ment of Housing and Urban Development about the next application we should file o

Matching funds for this grant will be those appro-

priated by the 1967 General Assemblyo

The applicati'on will cover:

lo

Title searches of selected right-of-way parcels.

2o

Early acquisition of critical right-of-way parcelso

3o

A plan for relocation of uprooted personso

4o

Employment of Urban Planning (architectural) consultants.

So

Continued work on Atlanta Transit System impact and coordination plan e

60

First steps in detailed design of Transit Center.

7o

Financial operations plan and organization.

8.

Preservation of historical sites and structures.

Target date for this application is July 1 , 1967.

Further

conferences with HUD people will ca1 ,~fully refine the particulars of the above o

Item 2 has top priori ty o

-

7 -

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY GLENN BU ILDIN G / ATLANTA , GEORGIA 30303 / AREA CODE 404 524 - 5711 OFFICERS: Richard H. Ric h , Chairman Roy A. Blount, Vice Chairman Glenn E. Bennett , Secretary

April 5, 1967

Henry L. Stuart , Genera l Manage r

Honorable Ivan Allen, Jr., Mayor City of Atlanta City Hall Atlanta, Ga. 30303. Dear Mayor Allen: I am enclosing financial statements of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority as of March 31, 1967, as required under Section 16(b) of the 1965 MARTA Act No. 78. With kindest regards. Sincerely,

HLS:JJ Enclosure. cc:

Mr. Charles L. Davis, City Comptroller City of Atlanta 501 City Hall Atlanta, Ga. 30303. Copy of financial statement attached . H.L.S .

�METROPOLI TAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSITY AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA BUDGET RE PORT MARCH 31, 1967

Unappropriated Sur plus

BUDGET

ACTUAL JANUARY 1, 196 7 TO MARCH 31, 196 7

$128 , 281.64

$128,281.64

$ 84,030 . 00 23,190.00 82,770.00 91,800.00 18, 210.00

$ 21,007 . 50 5,7 97.50 20 ,6 92 .50 22.,950 . 00 4 ,552.50

INCOME Appropriations: Cit y of Atlanta Clay ton Count y DeKa l b County Fulton Count y Gwi nne t t Count y Sub - Tota l s Int e rest Income Federal Funds: 702 Loan Sec tion 9 Grant

$300 ,000 . 00 $ 5,5 20.00

$ 1,520 . 90

$ 95 , 000.00 276,000.00

$ 30 ,000.00 40,000.00

Sub-Tot a ls

$371,000.00

$ 70,000.00

TOTAL INCOME

$6 76,520.00

$146,5 20.90

TOTAL I NCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS

S8Qfi. 8Ql 6~

$274 ,802 .54

$ 68,950.00 10 , 500.00

$ 12,487.6 5 1 ,792 .7 9

1 , 109. 00 533 .00 1,680. 00 10 , 000.00 99 . 00

53 2 . 71 133.34 241. 71 0 0

$ 92,871. 00 $ 3,150.00

$ 15,188 . 20 900.00 $

$ 75,000 . 00

EXPENSES Sta ff Co sts: Salaries Ex pens e s Benef it s: Social Security Guaranty Fund Health and Accid ent Insurance Re t irement Wor kme n 's Compansa tion Sub-Totals Board Meeting s Administrative and Office Overhead: Rent Communica t i ons a nd Po s tage Furniture and Equipment Supp l ies Printing Auditor Accoun tant Public In formation Insurance: Public Liability Depository and Forgery Fidelity Bond Sub-Totals CARRIED FORWARD

$

3,000.00 2, 000 . 00 2, 000 . 00 3,600.00 1 ,000.00 25 0.00 1 , 000.00 33, 000 . 00

$

72 . 00 56. 00 199.00

~ 46 I 177. 00 $142,198.00

75 0.00 36 3. 03 0 628.15 623.56 250.00 0 5, 058.91 0 0 0

$

7,673. 65

$ 23,761.85

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA BUDGET REPORT MARCH 31, 1967

TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS BROUGHT FORWARD

1967

ACTUAL JANUARY 1, 196 7 TO MARCH 3L 196 7

$804.801.64

$274.802.54

$142.198.00 $ 20.000.00

$ 23.761.85 $ 3.092.74

$ 31,250.00

$ 29,939.00

EXPENSES Brought Forward Counsel Consultants: Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission: 701 ~tching Urban Design Study: Section 9 Matching Atlanta Transit Study: Section 9 Matching Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel: 702 Loan Section 9: Federal Matching Retainer Agreement Research and Technical Services

32,667.00 16,333.00

0 0

3,333.00 1,667.00

0 0

95,000.00

0

240,000.00 120,000.00 60,000.00 2.000.00

0 92,333.00 13,985.97 597.58

$602.250.00

$136.855.55

TOTAL EXPENSES

$764.448.00

$163.710.14

SURPLUS

~

nu.Q22.~Q

Sub-Totals

~Q.J5J,6~

�r

METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION MARCH 31, 1967

ASSETS Cash in Banks: C & S National Bank First National Bank - Payroll Trust Company of Georgia Ful t on National Bank - Section 9

$30,354.81 6,543.55 1,000.00 5,313.88

Investments: U. S. Treasury Bills U. S. Treasury Bills - Section 9

70,261.29 34,686.12 25.00

Petty Cash Accounts Receivable: Clayton County DeKalb Count y Gwinnett County - 1967 Gwinnett County - 1966

$ 5,797.50 20,692.50 4,552.50 4,552.50

35,595.00

TOTAL ASSETS

$183,779.65 LIABILITIES

Accounts Payable

$

Payroll Taxes Withhe ld and Ac crued Re serves: Parsons , Br inc kerho f f-Tudor-Bechtel: Sect i on 9 Ma t chi ng Retained Agreemen t: Transportation Study Public Information Right - of-Way Proc edure Study Surveying TOTAL LIABILITIES SURPLUS

124. 18 2,046.01

62 ,333.00 $

301. 07 1,193.63 0

6,689.36

8,184.06 72, 687. 25

$111,092. 40

�MINUTES OF THE THIRTEENTH MEETING OF THE METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY MARCH 7, 1967

The Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority held its regular meeting on March 7, 1967, at 3:30 P.M. in the Conference Room of the Glenn Building, Atlanta. Mr. Richard H. Rich, Chairman, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT: Sanford Atwood (DeKalb County) M. C. Bishop (Fulton County) Roy A. Blount (DeKalb County) Rawson Haverty (City of Atlan t a) K. A . McMillon (Gwinnett County) L. D. Milton (City of Atlanta) W. A. Pulver (Fulton County) Richard H. Rich (City of Atlanta) MEMBERS ABS ENT: Edgar Blalock (Clayton County) Mills B. Lane, Jr. (City of Atlanta) OTHERS PRESENT: Metropo litan Atlan ta Rap id Transit Au tho rity : . H. L . Stuart, Genera l Manager Gle nn E . Be nn e tt, Secr etary Robe rt F. Ad a ms o n , Treasu rer King Elliott , Public Information Direc tor H. N. Johns o n , Secretary to General Manager Co nsultants: J. A. Coil, Resident Manager, Parso ns, Brinckerhof fTudor, Bechtel, Atlanta Lawrence Gr eene , Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates, Atlanta Raul Garcia, Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates, Atlanta Tom Watson Brown and Harry Morgan, Huie and Harland , Legal Counsel for the Authority

�Others: Charles Haar, Assistant Secretary for Metropolitan Development, Department of Housing & Urban Development, Washington Vincent Hearing, Administrative Assistant, Department of Housing & Urban Development, Washington Art Davis, Deputy Director of Land and Facilities Development, Department of Housing & Urban Development, Washington Charlie Sonnebron, Public Relations Director, Department of Housing & Urban Development, Washington Edward H. Baxter, Regional Administrator , Department of Housing & Urban Deve l opment, Atlanta A. Frederick Smith, Acting Assistant Regional Administrator for Program Coordination and Services, Department of Housing & Urban Development, Atlanta Thomas J. Armstrong, Acting Assistant Regional Administrator for Metropolitan Development, Department of Housing & Urban Development, Atlanta Henry Fillmer, Department of Housing & Urban Development, Atlanta Jack Ingram, Department of Housing & Urban Development, Atlanta Otis Brumby, Cobb County Observer J. D. Wingfield, Jr., Planning Director, ARMPC Rachel Champagne, Assistant to the Ex ecutive Director, ARMPC Junie Hamilton, Atlanta Journal Alex Coffin, Atlanta Constitution Earl W. Nelson, Deputy Division Director, State Highway Department of Ohio The meeting was called to order by the Chairman . Minutes : Upon motion by Mr . Blount, seconded b y Mr . Bishop , the read ing of the minute s of the Febru ary meeting was dispensed with and they were un a nimously appr o v ed . F i na ncia l Repo r t : The f i n a n c ia l r e p o rt wa s p r es e nted b y the Ge n e r a l Manag e r. The s t a t eme nt r e f lected the fact that the counties o f Clayto n, DeKalb and Gwi n nett were in arr ear s f o r t h ei r 1 967 appro priations. The Gen e ral Manager said h e had bee n in c o n t act with

-

2 -

�these governments and expected payments soon. After a brief discussion of the format of the statement, it was accepted by the Board. The financial statement is attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. Progress Reports: 1.

General Manager: Mr. Stuart reported on a recent trip to W3shington, and mentioned visits with Congressmen Fletcher Thompson and Ben Blackburn. He said he had sent information about MARTA to each of the Congressmen to inform them of ~he plans for the area and to solicit their help in Congress. Mr. Stuart had toured the proposed southern line of the system and mentioned possible alternates. The Chairman and others discussed the need for the southern line to serve the stadium if possible. An application to the State of Georgia for transit funds was being prepared, and Mr. Stuart said it would be submitted at the appropriate time.

2.

Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel: Mr. John Coil, Resident Manager of Parsons, BrinckerhoffTudor, Bechtel, reported that his firm had studied alternate southern lines and had developed an alternate which would generally follow the south expressway. In answer to questions by members of the Board, he said access of this proposed alternate southern line to the airport terminal should depend upon plans of the local governments to build a new air terminal. Mr. Coil said coordinated timing of construction of the two proposed facilities would be extremely important. The engineers felt that in the absence of firm plans for relocating the terminal, the proposed transit line should not be designed to serve that particular location. Detailed design of proposed construction in the gulch area had been reviewed with contractors, who had cooperated in the design and placement of supporting columns of buildings so as not to interfere with the transit system's proposed turn - around in the area .

- 3 -

�Mr. Coil said the contractor for aerial photography, MAPCO, Inc., had been given authority to complete photogrammetry on the east, west, and central lines, in that order of priority. Preliminary cost estimates for the 63.5 mile system had been completed and the engineers were ready to work with the economic consultants toward further refinement of those estimates. Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel had submitted a plan and profile of the proposed Atlanta system to their San Francisco office. Through the use of computers there, a program could be developed showing most economical speeds and timing between stations. 3.

Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates: Mr. Lawrence Greene of Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates reported that a new set of tentative cost estimates by six breakdowns had been submitted to them by the engineers. More information was to be submitted on estimated patronage and a cost schedule by years. The Hammer firm was developing final figures on required participation by the local governments. Analyses of costs being developed would include the total system, including the Cobb County portion. In response to questions of Boa rd members, it was e x plained further by Mr. Greene and Mr. Coil that cost estimates would be prepared for (1) the initial system; (2) the intermediate system (about 36 miles, with e x tensions) and (3) the tota l system of approx ima tely 63 . 5 miles. Thes e co s t estimates would not include a ny capi tal i mpr o vemen ts o t h er than r oll i ng s tock .

Contr acts for Corridor Impact S tudy: The General Man ager asked f o r a u tho rizat i on t o execu te a c ont r act between t h e Metropol itan Atl a nta Rap i d Tran sit Au tho rity a nd t he Atlanta Region Me tro p o litan Plann ing Co mmission, for $49 , 000 . 00 to c over the cost o f the c orrid or impact s t u dy , di s cu ss ed a t the Feb r u ary me eting . Mr. Bishop made a motion that the Genera l Manage r be empowered to e x ecute the contract b e tween the Me tropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority and the Atlanta Region Me t r opolita n Planning

-

4 -

�Commission for $49,000.00 for the corridor impact study. Mr. Blount seconded the motion, and it was unanimously passed. Mr. Bennett said the Planning Commission had, at its February 27 meeting, passed a similar resolution authorizing the execution tif this contract.

Authorization under Retainer Agreement: The General Manager reviewed an earlier authorization by the Board for an expenditure of $2,000.00 for study of relocation of tracks in the gulch area to cooperate with proposed construction in the area and also provide for transit lines. This had been used successfully, and Mr. Stuart said he anticipated the Nasher Corporation would soon require similar studies for the area near the State Capitol if MARTA's interests in that area were to be protected. He requested authorization to contract with the engineers for an additional $5,000.00 if required, for similar studies in the Capitol area. Mr. Bishop made a motion that the General Manager be empowered to negotiate a contract under the retainer agreement for whatever work was required for studies in the Capitol area gulch in connection with proposed construction in that area, with a limitation on the contract of $5,000.00, making a total authorization for the studies of the two areas limited to $7,000.00. Mr. McMillon seconded the motion, and it was unanimously passed. Authorization for Opening of a New Bank Account : Mr. Stuart said a new bank account was needed for funds of the new project recently approved, and after discussion, it was agreed that these funds would be deposited in the Fulton National Bank. It was further agreed that authorization for signing of checks be the same as the account of the 702 project , namely : either the Chairman, Vice Chairman or Secretary, and either the General Manager or Chief Engineer . Mr . Haverty made a motion that the General Manager be empowered to open a new bank account in the Fulton National Bank, for the deposit of funds of the newly approved p r oject , and that s ig na tur e authori zation fo r that accoun t be the same as t h e 70 2 account . The motio n was duly s e conded a n d un animous ly pa ss ed.

-

5 -

�-Statements by Officials from HUD: Mr. Charles Haar, Assistant Secretary for Metropolitan Development, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, had met with elected officials and professional staff of the local governments at a luncheon meeting earlier, and had presented a check f or $40,000.00 to Mr. Rich. This represented the first installment of the newly approved project to the Transit Authority. Mr. Haar commended the Authority for its work and expressed the willingness of officials in the Department to cooperate with local governments whose plans were coordinated for development of needed capital improvements. Mr. Baxter of the Regional Office also expressed confidence in MARTA, and offered the full resources of his office to assure that an appropriate share of federal funds would continue to be made available to metropolitan areas in the South~ east. The Chairman expresset1 the need for better communication with the public and said full understanding by the community was necessary to the success of the project. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 4:45 P.M.

NOTE: ---

The next meeting of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority is scheduled for Tuesday, April 4.

-

6 -

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION FEBRUARY 28,

1967

ASSETS Cash in C& S First Trust

Banks: National Bank National Bank - Payroll Company of Georgia

Investments -

$41,925 .. 22 10,968.94 31,000.00 99,626.96

U. S. Treasury Bills

25. 00

Petty Cash

4,552.50

Accounts Receivable - Gwinnett County (1966)

$188,098.62

TOTAL LIABILITIES $32,812 . 12

Accounts Payable

1,600 . 06

Payroll Taxes Withheld and Accrued Reserves: Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel: Section 9 - Matching Retainer Agreement: Transportation Study Public Information Right-of-Way Procedure Study Surveying TOTAL SURPLUS

92,333.00 $

663.70 1,509.57 1,250. 00 2,000.00

5,423.27 132,168 . 45 $' 55,930 . 17

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA BUDGET REPORT FEBRUARY 28, 1967 ACWAL

JANUARY 1, 1967 TO BUDGET · 1967 ' ' FEBRUARY 28, 1967 $128,281.64 $128,281.64

Unappropriated Surplus INCOME Appropriations: City of Atlanta Clayton County DeKalb County Fulton County Gwinnett County Sub-Totals

$ 84,030.00 23,190.00 82,770. ocr 91,800.00 18, iio. oo $300,000.00 5,520.00

$ 21,007.50 0 0 22,950.00 0 43,957.50 $

Interest Income Federal Funds: 702 Loan Section 9 Grant Sub-Totals

$ 95,000.00 276,000.00 $371,000.00

TOTAL INCOME

$676,520.00

$ 30,000.00 0 $ 30,000.00 $ 74,844.07

TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS

$804,801.64

~-2.03.,,1.2 5. 71.

$ 68,950.00 10,500.00

$

1 , 109.00 533.00 1,680 . 00 10,000.00 99.00 $ 92,871.00 $ 3,150.00

369.01 133. 34 161. 14 0 0 $ 10,223.30 500.00 $

$

$

886.57

EXPENSES Staff Cos ts: Salaries Expenses Benefits: Social Security Guaranty Fund Health and Accident Insurance Retirement Workmen's Compensation Sub-Totals Board Meetings

8,311.06 1,248.75

Administrative and Office Overhead: Rent Connnunications and Postage Furniture and Equipment Supplies Printing Auditor Accountant Public Information Insurance: Public Liability Depository and Forgery Fidelity Bond Sub-Totals

72 . 00 56 . 00 199 . 00 $ 46,177 . 00

$

CARRIED FORWARD

$142,198 . 00

$ 15 , 263 . 27

$

3,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 3,600.00 1,000. 00 250 . 00 1,000 . 00 33,000.00

$

500 . 00 281. 43 0 401.89 0 0 0 3,356.65 0 0 0 4 , 539 . 97

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA BUDGET REPORT FEBRUARY 28, 1967

ACWAL

BUDGET 1967 TOTAL INCOME AND UNAPPROPRIATED SURPLUS BROUGHT FORWARD

JANUARY 1, 1967 TO FEBRUARY 28, 1967

$804,801.64

$203,125.,71

BROUGHT FORWARD

$142,198.00

·$ 15,263.27

Counsel

$ 20-, 000. 00

$

$ 31,250. 00.,.._

$ 29,939.00

EXPENSES

Consul tan ts: Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission: 701 Matching Urban Design Study: Section 9 Matching Atlanta Transit Study: Section 9 Matching Parson, Brinckerhoff-Tudor-Bechtel: 702 Loan Section 9: Federal Matching Retainer Agreement Research and Technical Services

1,818.70

32,667.00 16,333.00

0 0

3,333.00 1,667.00

0 0

95,000.00

0

240,000.00 120,000.00 60, (YOO. 00 2,000.00

0 92,333.00 7,243.99 597.58

$602,250.00

$130,113.57

TOTAL EXPENSES

$764,448.00

$147,195.54

SURPLUS

~

~

Sub-Totals

40. 3,2J. 64

,2,2,9JO,.lZ

�r

.

l

~

.

.

·

~TROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY GLENN BUILDING/ ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 / AREA CODE 404 524-5711 OFFICERS: Richard H. Rich, Chairman

March 17, 1967

Roy A. Blount, Vice Chairman Glenn E. Bennett, Secretary Henry L. Stuart, General Ma nager

a/ ~ u-

MEMORANDUM TO ALL HOLDERS OF MARTA MINUTES OF ~ MEETING OF MARCH 7, 1967: FROM:

GLENN E. BENNETT , SECRETARY

CORRIGENDUM

On Page 4 , sixth paragraph, of the minutes of the meeting of March 7, 1967, there is an inaccurate statement which should be deleted. The statement reads, "These cost estimates would not include any capital improvements other than rolling stock." The cost estimates prepared b y the engineers , not by the economists, do in fact include all capital improvements other than rolling stock. Pl ease attach this note to your copy of the minutes.

�March 14, 1967

Mr. Roy Christian Kendel 644 Memorial Drive, S . E . Atlanta , Georgia 30312 Dear Mr. Kendel : This will acknowledge i:-eceipt of your letter expressing your concern about rail transportat:i.on in Atlanta. I am. forwarding your letter to the Rapid Transit Authority in ord r that they may have the benefit of your views . Sincerely yours,

Ivan Allen, Jr.

Mayor

IAJ/br

�ROY CHRISTIAN KENDEL 644 Memorial Drive, SE Atlanta 12, Georgia-U.S.A. 3 0312 Mac:ch 7th, 1967-Tuesday-P Mayor IVAN ALLEN CITY HALL of ATLANTA, GEORGIA. Dear Mayor Allen: ••• And Good Morning~ While the Yankees get the faster (150 to 183 m.p.h o) trains, and get into the jet-age of rail road passenger trains, we here in the south have to settle for a depleting policy of pass~nger railroad trains as the malnutriciously anemic skeleton services catering to the Georgians and the Atcbantans. In one decade vve have had a remarkable doubling and more of our population here in Atlanta, but, in retros pective viewing, we see the shameful fact that the rail services serving a p opulation mul tiply ing city a s ours, h a s lost the ma jority of its p a ssen g e r tra ins. In the last three and half y ears alone, we have lost Pullman Service t o Sto Louis, Cincinnati, Mobile, New Orleans , Jacksonville , a nd to Brun s wick, Memphis, Kansas City, Portsmouth, Norfolk, and t o Birmingha m (depa rted, once , late, a nd s e t out e a rly) i and , t here i s the now-dea d service to Cha rles ton a nd Wilmington. Let's whip the North in s-ome~ing -- how about a new railroad sta tion, for a starter, then over- nite Sleeper trains to Jack sonville, and t he othe r city d e s tinations me ntioned a bove . Sure, we need a i r service, but w e a l so need railroad long-ha ul a nd medinm =haul rail service. Mayor, what can you do to improve ou r i mage in front of t h e ot her 49 Stat es and the thou s and s o f other cities i n the U nited St ates? After a ll , we are a l arge, important city -- i n a very important State". Roy Chri:s:tian Kendel

�,

.

.. .... .. . ..·~ . .

I

/

I I I

I ~,e, l"'-y /'1 , , ,,,.

""!ASJ.IIN& TON

�1---f;

METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY GLENN BUILDING/ ATLANTA , GEORGIA 30303 / AREA CODE 404 524-5711 OFFICERS: Richard H. Ri ch , Chairman Roy A. Blount, Vice Chairman Glenn E. Bennett , Secretary

February 27, 1967

Henry L. Stuart , General Manager

MEMORANDUM TO:

BOARD OF DIRECTORS METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY

FROM:

GLENN E. BENNETT, SECF.ETA~

The Board of Directors Transit Authority will at 3:30 o'clock P. M., of the Glenn Building,

of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid hold its March meeting on March 7, in the Sixth Floor Conference Room ·Atlanta.

The agenda is attached. A highlight of the meeting will be the presence of Mr . Charles Haar, Assistant Secretary for Metropolitan Development, of the Department of Housing and Urban Dev e lopment. Mr. Haar is the official in Washington with direct r e sponsibility for th e a dministration o f a great amount of federal aid to metropolitan areas.

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY 800 GLENN BUILDING ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 REGULAR MEETING - MARCH 7, 1967 AGENDA

1.

Introduction of Guests.

2.

Minutes of February 15, 1967, Meeting.

3.

Financial Report.

4.

Remarks - Mr. Charles M. Haar Assistant Secretary for Metropolitan Development, Department of Housing · and Urban Development

5.

Brief Reports: General Manager Engineers Economists ARMPC

6.

Finalizing Agreement between MARTA and ARMPC for "Corridor Impact Study."

7.

Other Business.

Nex t Meeting

April 4

�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

February 6, 1967

Glenn E. Bennett, Secretary Henry L. Stuart, General Ma nager

Honorable Ivan Allen, Jr., Mayor City of Atlanta City Hall Atlanta, Ga. 30303. Dear Mayor Allen: I am enclosing financial statements of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority as of December 31, 1966, as required under Section 16(b) of the 1965 MARTA Act No. 78. With kindest regards. Sincerely yours,

H. L. Stuart, General Manager.

HLS:JJ Enclosures cc:

Mr. Charles L. Davis , City Comptro ller City of Atlanta 501 City Hall Atlanta, Ga. 30 303.

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA BUDGET REPORT DECEMBER 31, 1966 BUDGET 1966

INCOME APPROPRIATIONS : City of Atlanta Clayton County DeKalb County Fulton County Gwinnett County (Includes $9,105.00 Rec e ivable) SUB-TOTAL INTEREST 702 LOAN TOTAL I NCOME

ACTUAL 1- 1- 66 TO 12- 31- 66

$ 84,030.00 23,19 0 . 00 82,770 . 00 91,800.00

$ 84 : 030 . 00 23 ,190 . 00 82,770.00 91, 800 . 00

18,210.00 $300,000.00

18---2 210. 00 $300,000 . 00 429.48

0

60,000.00 $36 0 ,000, 00

$300,429.48

$ 36,591.69 1,458 . 31 1,000 . 00

$ 26,316.73 2,189. 08 1,646 . 22

99 7. 50 400.02 400.00 10,000 . 00 50 . 00 $ 50 ,897 . 52

705.32 266 . 68 337 . 31 9 , 294.78 99.28 40 ,855 .40 $

0

EXPENSE STAFF COSTS : Salaries Ex pense Allowance Re i mbur sed Trave l Benefits: Social Security Guaranty Fund Health Insuranc e Re t i rement Workmen' s Compensat i on SUB - TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE AND OFFICE OVERHEAD: Rent Communi cation artd Postage Furni tur e and Equi pment Supp lies Printing Insurance: Pers onal Propert y Public Liability Deposi tory and For gery Fidelity Bond Auditor Public· I n forma tion SUB - TOTAL A.R.M.P . C.: Administrative Serv ices 701 Matchi ng Funds COUNSEL CONSULTANTS : Hammer, Greene & Siler P.B.-T.B.: 702 Funds Cost Plus Research and Technical Service s BOARD MEETINGS TOTAL EXPENSE EXCESS I NCOME OVER EXPENSE

$

2,750 . 00 800 . 00 2,5 00. 00 500 . 00 1 , 000 . 00

15 . 00 60 . 00 72 . 00 285,00 500 . 00 19 , 000 . 00 $ . 27 ,482. 00

$

5, 000 . 00 30 , 594 . 00 18 , 478 . 55

1,56 0 .00 6 0 , 000 . 00 50 , 000 . 00 0 3,6 00. 00 $247,612 . 0 7 $112, 38Z, 23

$

2,7 50 . 00 1 , 049.68 3, 094 . 14 2 , 090.93 243.85

25 . 00 72 . 00 93 . 79 331. 00 500 , 00 14,9 92.5.§, $ 25 , 242. 95

$

5, 000. 00 31,25 0 . 00 22,7 06 .21

1,56 0 .00 0 41,598. 09 1,335 . 19 2,600.00 $172,147 .84 $1,28,28l,6b:

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION DECEMBER

31, 1966

ASSETS Cash in Banks: C & S National Bank First National Bank - Payroll

$ 7,611.03 21,037.40

Investments - U. S. Treasury Bills

93,730.89

Petty Cash

25.00

Accounts Receivable - Gwinnett County

9,105.00 $131,509.32

TOTAL

LIABILITIES Accounts Payable

$ 1,662.46

Payroll Taxes Withheld and Accrued

1,565.22 3,227.68

TOTAL

SURPLUS EXCESS INCOME OVER EXPENSE

$128,281.64

�ATLANTA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY . POST. Of"F"ICE: BOX 89?

ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30301

January 18, _1967

I :-·

<

I JESSE HILL, JR. ACTUARY

Mr. ·Richard H. Rich, Chairman , Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority 808 Glenn Building . . .. 120 Marietta Street, ·N. Atlanta, Georgia 30303

'

Dear .Mr. Rich:

!

w.

I

I

Thank · you very much for your letter of January 13, 1967. We are especially encouraged and appreciativi of your assurance that when and if the System is built and during its construction that employment will be on a non-discriminatory basis, and your offer of a meeting to bring the Summit up to ·date on tentative plans ...

!

·,

I

i

i•

I I I

Please authorize ·Mr~ H. L. Stuart, General Manager, to respond to the -following to the best of his knowledge and available projection based on information obtained from planning engineers, planning consultants and experience of other cities with operative systems: . If our Atlanta system progresses as scheduled will the present skeleton staff remain the same throughout 1967, 1968, 1973. What staff additions will be needed for 1967, 1968 and 1973, first projected operative year, respectively? (Give classification, duties, qualifications and estimated salary) Thank you very much for your cooperation and for your usual fine public spirit and outstanding progressive leadership you have given our city over the years in business and civic programs.

I

I

Very truly yours, . ATLANTA UMMIT LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE

f

-~

I

!

cc:

Jesse Hill, Jr., Co - Chairman Rev. S. W. Williams,Co-Chairman Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr . Alderman Q. V. Williamson Mr. H. L. Stuart

.,

' .

~

-.

--

xn,0 1

.

�:JJe/idtjje,nJ/etm e/~Ae1•n{ll!J~1ud.q}; 11,h, sJtuvw2. ~ !(//7 ,w/

MILLS B. LANE,JR. PRESIDENT

January 16, 1967

Dear Ivan: Here's a copy of my letter to Dick Rich at the end of the year. Rapid Transit just isn't my cup of tea, so seriously let's replace me. It seems awfully silly to me that the Transit Authority and others interested in downtown traffic flow seem to want to avoid Robert Sommerville of the Transit Company. He really ought to be participating at every turn of the road in everything connected with t r ansportation here in Atlanta.

~

Mills B. Lane, Jr .

The Honorable Ivan Allen, Jr. Mayor City of Atlanta City Hall Atlanta, Georgia

�December 29, 1966

Dear Dic k : I 've been a poor attendant at Transit Authority meetings this past year. Accordingly, have contributed very little. Looking at the year ahead, with the ~nc r easi ng tra vel t ha t wil l be required around the state a nd the time that I will be away from Atl a nta ; a ttendance will probably be poorer •.

For t his reason, _ I should like to be dropped . as n me mber of the Authority and have a more a ctive part icipant appointed in my p l a ce. Sincerely,

Mills B. Lane, Jr~

Mr . Richard H. Rich Rich ' s , Inc. Atlant a , Georg ia

'

\

�ATLANTA LIFE lNSURA...."N"GE COMPANY PO ST Of"F' I CE BOX 897

ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30301 .

January 11, 1967

JESSE HILL, JR .

1::----

--

ACTU ARY

VIA CERTIFIED MAI.L RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

,_

Mr. Richard H. Rich, Chairman Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority Glenn Building Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Mr. Rich: We have enclosed herewith a copy of a letter received from Mr. H. L. Stuart, referring to our letter addressed to you as Chairman of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit -Authority. We are requesting a reply to our letter to you. We do riot consider the letter by Mr . .Elliott referred to in Mr. Stuart's letter as a proper response. We again request the information which we will be happy to receive from Mr. Stuart, if you so designate, but we request the information in writing. On receipt of the written information we will cooperate in arranging a subsequent conference with Mr. Stuart for explanations at a convenient community site as he is doing for other groups in the city. C

Very truly yours, , THE ATLANTA SUWMIT LEADERSHI P CONFERENCE Jesse Hill, Jr. ,Co-Ch~ma n Rev. S. W. Williams,Co-Chairman

cc:

Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. Alderman Q. v. Williamson Mr. Richard H. Rich ( extra copy to private business address ) Mr. Roy A. Blount Senator Leroy Johnson Mr. L. D. Milton Mr. King Elliott

- - - - - -·---

�~-< I j : .:: · ' ' '

MIETROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY GLENN BUILDING/ ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 / AREA CODE 404 524-5711 t r ·

~

OFFICERS: Richard H. Rich, ChairmQn Roy A. Blount, Vice Chairman

January 10, 1967.

Glenn E. Bennett, Secretary Henry L Stuart, General Manager

Mr. Jesse Hill, Jr • • -; Atlanta Life Insuran.~e .: company P. o. Box 897 Atlanta, Ga. 30301.

, I

J

Dear Mr. Hill:

/. I I •

 ;,

/

1.'

' .,

Yours of/ January 4th to Mr. Rich expressing interest of the Atlanta Sll.IT\ffiit Leadership Conference in the growth and development of rapi'd trsi.nsit .1,has been referred to me for reply.

.

. ,

':

It is very importa~t that all citizens of Atlanta understand that the · developmen:t of a . rapid transit system for our city ,.· is a complex, long-rai\ge , undertaking. It cannot be reduced to a half dozen questio~s and,·· answers.

.

.

.. ' ,

With reference . to I-lfem 3 of your letter, you already

1;

have Mr. Elliott '.s lett~r of;: Jan:,1ary 4th, and I confirm its contents to you. ..,

,r

_;

Stop by the o~ fice anytime and we will go into the items in your letter and into all of the other complexities involved. • I

I

i H. L. Stuart, General Manager. HLS :JJ

I

~

cc : Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr. · Mr. Richard H. Rich Mr. Roy A. Blount Senator Leroy Johnson Mr. L. D. Milton Rev. Samuel W. Williams Mr. King Elliott

l

-

--..~, 1' .

.

~

'J<

. ,..• 1;:' .

---.

I


..--- --- ---

�MINUTES OF THE ELEVENTH MEETING OF THE METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY JANUARY 3, 1967

"

The Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority held its regular meeting on January 3, 1967, at 3:30 P.M. in the Conference Room of the Glenn Building, Atlanta. Mr. Richard H . Rich, Chairman, presided. MEMBERS PRESENT:

Sanford Atwood (DeKalb county) Roy A. Blount (DeKalb County) Rawson Haverty (City of Atlanta) K. A. McMillan (Gwinnett County) W. A. Pulve r (Fulton County) Richard H. Rich (City of Atlanta) MEMBERS ABSENT:

M. c. Edgar Mills L. D.

Bishop (Fulton County) Blalock (Cl a yton County) B. La ne, Jr. (Ci t y of Atlan t a) Milton (City of Atlanta)

OTHERS PRESENT:

Metropol i tan At l a n ta Rapid Tr a nsi t Auth ority: H. L . Stuart , Ge n eral Ma n a g e r Glenn E . Bennett, Secretary King Elliott , Public Information Dire ctor H. N. Johnson, S e c r etary to Genera l Manager Co nsultants: J. A. Coil, Res i dent Manager, Parso ns, Brinckerhoff- Tudor, Bechtel, Atl anta Raoul Garcia, Ha mmer , Greene, Siler As s o ciates, Atlanta W. Stell Huie and Tom Wats o n Brown, Huie and Harland, Legal Counsel for the Authority Others: J. D. Wingfield, Jr., Planning Director, Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission

�Others

(Cont'd.):

Mrs. Rachel Champagne, Assistant to the Ex ecutive Director, Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission Jerry Coursey, Transportation Planner, Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission w. Roy Newsome, Regional Planner, Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission

The meeting was called to order by the Chairman. Minutes: Minutes of the December 5, 1966, meeting, which had been mailed, were unanimously approved, upon a motion by Dr. Atwood, seconded by Mr. Pulver. The Secretary called the attention of the Board members to a letter of e xplanation from the economic consultant, regarding one item in the minutes of the December 5, 1966, meeting. This related to a statement that financial officers of the governments had tentatively approved the bases for a formula for cost-sharing of rapid transit capital expenditures among the governments. The Secretary suggested that this letter be made a part of the minutes as a matter of explanation . In an effort to keep the participating governments fully informed of the progress being made by the Authority, the Secretary was directed to make certain that all participating governments receive a complete set of all minutes . Financial Report: Th e f inancia l r eport f o r De c emb er , 1 966 , nd th b 1 nc sh t as o :t Decemb e r 31, 1966 , t og e t h er with a f ina.ne i a. l s t at ement s howing tota l i temized expen d i t u res u nder t h open - 1 d d

t ai ner agr ~ement wi t h Pars ons , Br i nckerhoff - Tudor , Bechtel, wer e un a nimou s ly accepte d upon motion b y Dr. Atwo od, s e c onde d b y Mr .

E1oun .

Mr . Ben nett pre sen ted an accoun ti n g o f Committee o f 1 00 f u nds f o r which he had been cus t odi a n. An a d v a nce of $10,000 . 00 had b e en made by Forward Atlanta t o assist in public information

work r el ati ve t e Amendment Ne . 14 whi Gh was appr oved i n t he Nove mb e r , 1 96 6 , g e n era l e l e ct i on . Fund s e xp e n d e d t o t a l e d $3 , 489 . 43 , and the balance of $6,510 . 5 7 was to be returned to Forward Atlanta . This was accep ted by the Bo ard, and Mr . Rich requested the General Manager t o write a letter of appreciation to Forwa r d Atlanta on behal f o f the Board .

-

2 -

~

�All financial reports are attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. Progress Reports: 1.

General Manager. The General Manager reported on his appearance before the Committee on the Study of State and Local Governments of the Georgia House of Representatives. The Committee recommended that the State provide 10% of the total cost of the rapid transit system. He referred to negotiations which he had carried on with representatives of developers in the gulch area and the L. & N. Railroad, relative to rapid transit plans in the gulch. It appeared that all plans for development of the gulch had taken · into account the needs of the rapid transit system. After some discussion on the subject of handling the Authority's public information, particularly that part of it relating to financial considerations affecting local governments, it was agreed that all press releases prepared by the Authority's staff would be cleared with at least one member of the Board, preferably the Chairman or the Vice Chairman.

2.

Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel. Mr. Coil reported on work which Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel had been carrying out during the past month. He said that the study of the north, northeast and east lines had been almost completed. Right-of-way maps had been prepared for the estimator, who was working in San Francisco on preliminary cost estimates. The firm was negotiating with several companies for aerial photography of the system, and expected to acquire this photography at an early date. In the discussion which followed Mr. Coil's report, it was agreed that at the earliest possible time, members of the Board should inspect routes, alignments and station locations recommended by the engineers, and that the highest governing authorities of the City of Atlanta - that is, the Mayor and the Board of Aldermen - should be apprised of the recommendations of the engineers and the decisions on specific route locations by the Authority . In order to acquire the necessary property within the city limits , it was essential that the Board of Aldermen and the Authority be in agreement prior to public hearings which are required by law .

3.

Hammer, Greene , Siler Associates. Mr. Garcia reported that his firm had assembled data for Cobb County comparable to that which had been secured earlier for the other governments. Meetings had been held with finance officers of DeKalb County, and similar meetings were planned with Fulton

- 3 -

. /

V

�County and the City of Atlanta, to discuss recommendations in the reports which had been submitted to the Authority. The firm was assembling material explaining their research, and drafting the final report. Reappointment of committees: The Board had established two committees in 1966. One was the Finance Committee, composed of _Mr. Lane, Mr. Blount and Mr. Rich. A second was called the Financial Advisory Committee. This was the professional finance officers of the local governments. The reappointment of appeared to exist on letter from Mr. Lane to resign because of

these committees was postponed. A vacancy the Board since the Chairman had received a in which he stated that he was being forc~d pressure of other work.

Reappointment of Auditor: In accordance with provisions of the Rapid Transit Authority Act it was necessary to appoint an auditor annually. The Arthur Andersen Company was unanimously reappointed for 1967, at a fee of $300. Authorization to Execute Contracts: The General Manager requested authorization to execute a contract between the Authority and the Department of Housing and Urban Development to provide for the use of a grant of $396,333.00 under Section 9 of the Mass Transit Act of 1966. The grant had been approved but the contract documents had not been received. He further requested authorization to execute a contract between the Authority and Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel for engineering work to be performed in accordance with the grant. Copies of this agreement had been circulated to members of the Board. Upon a motion by Mr. Haverty, seconded by Dr . Atwood, Mr. Stuart was authorized to execute both contracts at the appropriate times . The General Manager asked for authority to authorize, if necessary, the e x penditure of $1 , 250.00 by Parsons, Brinckerhoff- Tudor , Bechtel for a right-of-way e x pert, Mr . Charles H. Shaw of San Francisco , to assist him in matters relating to right-of-way acquisition procedures. The General Manager also asked authorization to e x pend under the open-ended ret ainer agreement, an amount up to $2 , 000 .00 for

- 4 -

�surveying work, if required, to stake out certain alignments in the vicinity of the Union Station and Terminal Station area, to coordinate rapid transit plans with air right development plans. Authority's Funds: At Mr. Haverty's suggestion it was decided that the question of distribution of the Authority's funds among local banks be left as a matter for the Finance Committee to work out with the General Manager. Amendment to the Retainer Agreement: In view of the fact that a new contract was being made with Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, it was considered to be in the best interest of the Authority that an amendment be made to the retainer agreement, consistent with its treatment of the other two contracts in effect with Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel, that is, the 701 and 702 contracts. It was unanimously agreed that the following resolution be adopted: RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, Section 6 of the Retainer Agreement of June 28, 1966, between the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority and Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel provides that the existence of other contracts between the Authority and Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel and between the Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission and Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel will not cause the total compensation to Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel under the three contracts to be more than the cost that would prevail if all the work was performed under the terms of the said Retainer Agreement; and WHEREAS, a new contract will be executed between this Authority and Parsons, Brinckerhoff-Tudor, Bechtel covering essentially the same work program but in a different geographical area than the other contracts; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , that Section 6 of said Retainer Agreement be amended to place this new con tract in the same perspective as the aforementioned contracts.

-

5 -

�Proposed Amendments to Rapid Transit Act: Mr. Huie stated that in an effort to further perfect the Act under which the Authority was constituted, certain amendments had been suggested for presentation to the forthcoming Legislature. These related to: 1.

Giving to the Authority the power of eminent domain.

2.

Broadening the definition of "professi'onal services."

3.

Clarifying the question of spending funds of the Authority for public information and public education.

4.

Giving the Authority the right to invest surplus funds.

5.

Changing the requirements for expenditures which require competitive bidding.

During the discussion of methods of communication between the Board of Directors and the delegations to the General Assembly, it was suggested by Mr. Rich that the Board, if possible, meet with the local delegations. Mr. Huie would make an effort to arrange appropriate meetings. February Meeting Date: It ~as agreed that because some members would be absent from the city on February 7, 1967, the next scheduled meeting date, the February meeting would be held on February 14, 1967, at 3:30 P.M. and appropriate notices would be sent. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 4:45 P.M.

-

6 -

�HAMMER.GREENE.SILER ECONOMIC

CO N SU L , - A NT S

ASSOCIATES

W A S H : N GTON

/.\TLAN T.6

230 Peachtree Street, N . E . Atlanta, Georgia 30303

December 15~ 1966

Area Code 404 / S24-6441

Mr. Glenn E. Bennett, Executive Director Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission 900 Glenn Building Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mr. Henry L. Stuart, General Manager Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority 808 Glenn Building Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Gentlemen: The minutes of the December 5~ 1966 meeting of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority contain an excerpt from a verbal progress report made to the Authority on the financial considerations analysis which should be clarified. With reference to the tentative fornrula for allocating the estimated share of local costs of a mininrum operational system among participating governments, the statement on page 4 says: All local finance officers had given tentative approval .to these proposals." This statement could be misintepreted. We did not mean to imply that the finance officers had agreed to the fornrula; rather, that there was general agreement among them that the economic indices and the analysis procedure usect in arriving at a tentative formula seemed to be reasonable . We recognize that any agreements on this subject nrust come out of negotiations between the heads of local governments and the Authority. Philip Hammer and Raul Garcia of this firm met with James Carr oll , Charles Davis and John Still , the finance officers of DeKalb County , City of Atlanta and Fulton County r espect i vely, on Fr iday , November 18 , 1966 . At these meetings they r eviewed our r esear ch into t ax digests , our estimates for planning pur pos es as to the pace and degree of financ ial suppor t that mi ght come from Feder a l

./ ~

�Mr. Glenn E. Bennett Mr. Henry L. Stuart December 15, 1966 Page 2 and State sources, the estimated local share of capital costs for the minimum operational system, and our research into economic indices that appeared to be reasonable in arriving at an equitable distribution of the local share of capital costs among the participating governments. Our understanding was that all of the financial officers were in agreement that the data fairly represented population and economic trends and projections for their jurisdictions and that the research procedures were realistic. We did not ask and did not expect these finance officers to agree to any allocation formula on behalf of their respective governments. I believe we all recognize that the materials presented to MARTA and ARMPC represent a research model which will make possible the development of a recommended allocation formula by this firm when final capital requirements are obtained from the engineers now updating the 1962 study. Moreover, it is not at all clear at this time whether a fixed or sliding-scale formula would be desirable. We will make available all materials necessary to help the Authority and local participating governments make a determination on this question. It is my understanding that Mr. James Carroll, Internal Auditor, and Mr. Marvin Beadle, Planning Director of DeKalb County have asked MARTA and ARMPC for copies of the preliminary data we presented at the December 12 meeting of ARMPC. Enclosed are three copies of that tabular material as well as three copies of our tax digest estimates and allocation formula indices contained in our staff memorandum of December 2~ 1966. We wish to advise that the tax digest data discussed with the finance officers was presented in constant 1965 dollars while the data attached has been converted to current dollars to reflect anticipated inflation. We stand ready to provide any financial data and personnel you may require in talks with the finance officers and heads of local participating governments . It is understood that these conferences are now being scheduled . We believe such talks would be very fruit ful in preparation for subsequent meetings planned for early 1967, at which time the new capital cost data will be available to tlevelop up-to-date information on indicated local government financial support r equirements . Sincerely, ~;?;----

cf°

a~~.£:p-

A1an E. Welty Principal cc :

Philip Hammer

�METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA BUDGET REPORT DECEMBER 31, 1966

INCOME APPROPRIATIONS ; City of Atlanta Clayton County DeKalb County Fulton County Gwinnett County (Includes $9,105.00 Receivable) SUB-TOTAL INTEREST 702 LOAN TOTAL INCOME

ACTUAL 1-1-,66 TO 12-31- 66

BUDGET 1966 $ 84,030.00 23,190 . 00 82,770.00 91 ,8 00.00

$ 84 : 030 . 00 23,190.00 82,770.00 91,800.00

18,210.00 $300,000.00

18,210 . 00 $300,000 . 00 429.48

0

60,000.00 · 0 $360,000.00 $300,429.48

EXPENSE STAFF COSTS : Salaries Expense Allowance Reimbursed Travel Benefits : Social Security Guaranty Fund Health Insurance Retirement Workmen's Compensation SUB-TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE AND OFFICE OVERHEAD: Rent Communication and Postage Furniture and Equipment Supplies Printing Insurance: Personal Property Public Liability Depository and Forgery Fide lity Bond Auditor Public Information SUB-TOTAL A.R.M.P.C.: Administrative Services 701 Matching Funds COUNSEL CONSULTANTS : Hammer, Greene & Siler P. B.-T . B.: 702 Funds Cost Plus Research and Technical Services BOARD MEETINGS TOTAL EXPENSE EXCESS INCOME OVER EXPENSE

$ 36,591.69 1,458.31 1 , 000 . 00

$ 26,316.73

997 . 50 400.02 400.00 10,000.00 50 . 00 $ 50,897.52

705 .32 266.68 337 . 31 9,294 . 78 99 .28 $ 40,855 . 40

$

2,750 . 00 800.00 2,5 00.00 500.00 1 , 000 . 00

15 . 00 60.00 72 .00 285.00 500 . 00 19,000.00 $ 27,482.00 $

5 , 000 . 00 30,594 . 00 18,478.55

1,560.00 60,000.00 50,000.00 0 3,600 . 00 $247.,,612 . 07 Sll2,38Z,93

2,189.08 1 , 646 .2 2

$

2,750.00 1 , 049.68 3,094.14 2 , 090.93 243.85

25 . 00 72 . 00 93 .79 331. 00 500 . 00 14,992 . 56 $ 25.242.95 $

5 , 000 . 00 31,250 . 00 22,706 . 21

1,560 . 00 0 41 , 598 . 09 1,335 .1 9 2 , 6 O.Q..:.,QQ fil 7 2 , 14 !_,u8.~ $128 ,281 , 64

�i METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY ATLANTA, GEORGIA STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION DECEMBER

31, 1966

ASSETS Cash in Banks: C & S National Bank First National Bank - Payroll

$ 7,611.03 21,037.40

I nvestments - U. S. Treasury Bills

93,730.89

Petty Cash

25.00

Accounts Receivable - Gwinnett County

9,105.00

TOTAL

$131,509.32

LIABILITIES Accounts Payable

$1,662.46

Payr oll Taxes Wi thhe ld and Accrued

1,565 . 22 3 ,22 7 .68

TOTAL

SURPLUS EXCESS INCOME OVER EXPENSE

$128,281.64

�COMMITTEE OF 100 Final Report on Finances December 28, 1966

Expenses for meetings, including meals Secretarial services

$1,588.97 925.00

Printing

77.91

Postage /Petty Cash

73.00

Equipment Rental

72.10

Telephone

102.45

Robert Sibley and Associates (Publ i c Relations)

650.00

TOTAL

$ 3,489.43

Amoun t Rece i ved

$10,000.00

Total Cost of Public Information Effort AMOUNT RETURNED

3,489.43 $ 6,510.57

All e x pend i tur es listed above were made from funds provided t hrough the FORWARD ATLANTA COMMITTEE .

In addition , a number

of ind 1 v .i duals and firms def r ayed other e x penses i n curred .

�r

ATLANTA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY POST OF'F"ICE BO X B97

ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30301

4 January 1967 JESSE HILL, JR. ACTUAR Y

Honorable .Richard H. Rich, - Chairman Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority 808 Glenn Building 120 Marietta Street, N. W. Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Dear Sir: . .

The Atlanta Summit Leadership Conference is keenly interested in the growth and development of our great city. As a collective leadership group of the Atlanta Negro Community we seek as a matter of public policy and practice, that our Negro citizens share with6ut discrimination on account of race or color in all opportunities, service and programs of _our dynamic booming city. Specifically, as regards to MARTA, our requests and concerns are as follows: .

.

l.

We request a clear understanding and firm commitment of non-discrimination in ·employment at all levels including ·administration, transit center, sub-stations and train operators. ·

2.

In order to insure a completely desegregated operational staff, we request an estimate of personnel need~ ~ncluding job descriptions, job qualifications and projected expected salaries for various jobs; by the following years 1967, 1968 and 1973. (It is our desire to begin now to alert training institutions and N_e_g ro ci tizens of these coming employment opporturiities. We also feel that there are experienced Negro citizens in New York, Philadelphia, Chicago and other citi es with operational rapid transit who would be interested in opportunities in our gr e at city. )

�' .

Honorable · Richard H. Rich Page 2 January 4, 1967

3.

We desire a conference at an early date with appropriate MARTA representatives and MARTA General Manager H. L. Stuart with the Summit Conference, for purposes of discussing methods of route and sub-station selections.

4.

We hope t6 have 100,000 Negroes eligible to vote at the time of the proposed 1969 Bond Issue. The Negro record of voting for progress in Atlanta is unexcelled by no sizeable part of our electorate.

5.

We note under current plans that of the 36 miles of transit system to be opened by 1975 only 4.3 miles. . have been earmarked to serve the large . Negro westside population; and this short transit leg stopping at Hightower Road is totally unacceptable·, inadequate and unrealistic as a west- · ward limit.

6 • . We note that the present MARTA employee staff is

all-white. As setforth in #2 above pl~ase inform us presently of current staff needs. Very ATLANTA

.......... ....

____~,-.

Rev. Samuel W. Will iams, Co-Chairman

,_;.. ..;.'.-· ··~

cc:

Mayor Ivan Allen, Jr Senator Leroy Johnson H. L. Stuart L. D. Milton· Alderman Q. V. Wi lliamson


X I 110 I

�I:.I

.J

........ ~ ,U. l,::,· lX

·~

'---------'

OU.J j(

J ,\ ,/(), J

- -·

t ou 1x


·

I

.I I

I I

METROPOUTAN ATLA

A RAPID TRA

SIT AUTHO RITY

GLENN BUILDING/ ATLA - A, GEORGIA 30303 / AREA CODE 404 52 4 -5711 OFFICERS:

I

Richard H. Rich, Chairman

i-

Roy A. Blount, Vice Chairman

j

January 10, 1967.

Glenn E. Bennett, Secretary

1!

Henry L Stuart, General M anager

1'

II

I I

r. Jesse Hill, Jr. Atlanta Life Insurance Company P.O. Box 897 Atlanta, Ga. 30301. Dear Mr. Hill: Yours of January 4th to Mr. Rich expressing interest of the Atlanta Summit Leadership Conference in the growth and development of rapid transit has been referred to me for reply. It is very important that all citizens of Atlanta understand that the development of a rapid tran.si t system for our city is a complex, long-range undertaking. It cannot be reduced to a half dozen questions and answers. With reference to Item 3 of your letter, you already have Mr. Elliott's letter of January 4th, and I confirm its contents to you. Stop by the office anytime and we will go into the items in your letter and into all of the other complexities involved. Yours very truly,

J/1~

H. L. Stuart, General Manager. HLS:JJ cc: ~ r Ivan Allen, Jr . Mr. Richard H. Rich Mr. Roy A. Blount Senator Leroy Johnson Mr. L . D. Milton ~ev. Samuel W. Williams Mr. King Elliott

I

'

�j_ __

I

L: --

j -

• .&. , H"1, 1 1

C

-- - - -


.

---

I 1

I: January 4, 1967

I, •

I:

Mr . L. D. Mi lton, President Ci t i zens Trust Company 212 Auburn A.venue, L y o • Atlanta, Ge orgiae Der .Mr . Milton:

Enclosed are copies of letters to Dr. Samuel Williams Je s se Hill, Co-Chairmen o f the Atlanta Summit Leader~ship Conference.

and Mr .

Several stories have app.ared in The At lanta Journal and Constitu tion r elating to statements ma de by leaders of the Surmni t Conferen ce, vhich apparently are not based on the most recent plans devel oped for rapid transi t o It is my fee ling that a meeting should be arranged with members o f the Summit Conference at which Mr . Stuart could expla i n fully our present plans and answer any quest ions raised . I f such a meeting is arranged, perhaps you could attend in your capacity as a me mber of the Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority .

I would appreciate any comments or sugges t ions you might have about thi s s ituation . Sincerely,

King Elliott ,

Public Information Director. KE:JJ

Enclosures .

.'

,.

. ----

l,, . ) . ,

......,

\ >:1 I X

�_;________ w

,1, .10 :>I

-·- .l - -

-- L~-.


J anuary 4,

U ..·==-~,,_-=-

--

A,H) , 1'1

·-==-=·

OtJ ' I )\'.

I QtJ-.1)(

967

' I

Dr... Samuel h":llliams -r;,riendsr>.ip Baptist Ci. urch 437 iV. i tchell S treet# So w.. I

I I

IiI,I

Atlanta , Georgia .. Dear Dr. Williams :

, I

·',: II

,, '

'I'

I I

,I

As we agreed in o ~ rece nt telep tone conver~e.t.ion, it ould be helpful for the Atleni:.a su.-r..mit Leadership Conie:::-e:::1ce and other leaders of the:! ~i•c.gro Coxr.munity· t(..:i have the b 0.n 0 fit .-!: recent chi- ngea i 1 t. e r a pid transit plan f.or ~etropolitan Atlanta

l!eaz- ng the mos

If a meetirig of leading Negro citiz€ns can l>e sot up, n'l.i TA Ge neral Mana.ger, could ex9lo.in the

1..1r,. Henry L . Stuart,

original plan £or rupid tre.nsit aid could posed chunges no·

utline chii:lnges and p re--

being con.side:-ed by the engi 1ocr·· n g consul t;z;.nto .,

He ~rould use slides and other visual ai<ls in discuzsing this 2lan and its effect on the p e ople nnd governr.ients involved If you will l e t me knm-1 when you might like to hQve s uch a meeting, I will

wo.rk it into Mr. Stua·t 1 s schedule. Also, I would like to irivito yon. and !r .. Jesse Hil_ a s Co--Chairmen of the Sumi-nit Conferenc~, to visit our office.;; b oforo such a meeting in order that you might meet. .Mr. Stuart.. .:Ie ca n brie f you on the detail5 of the rapid tr~nsit plans, and you c~n out-ine to him some of the specific ·tonics you would like to , ave diecus3ed at the meeting~ (·

lf you will gi.ve rr a call, we can discuss the details involved in the two meetings referred to abm,e.

Since rely yours , Ring 1-·. aJ.iott,

Public Information Oirecto.: .. cc:

Mr. Jesse Hill Blind Copy:

Mr. L. D. Milton

�I

I, I

I

-

.. o,.u1 0:,1-~ ·1:<

.f..Otl.0·--,n:,d .._

iI '

.

,J - -- -

- -- . - -

L: ._.}l A,H·,.,i;;; ·----Q tl ,I)(

I'

.. ., I I

. I'

'I

i

January 4, 1967

' i

Hro Jesse Hill Atlan:.a Life Insurance

co~

148 Auburn J\venue , No E ..

A~lanta, Ga o 11. 'I

Dear Nro Hill :

'

Enclosed is a copy of a letter I ·h ave sent t.Q Dr.. Sam "'~-

'1

l'

Williams .. The letter grew out of a conversa·i:ion I had with Dr" Williams after publication of a news story in 'I'he Atlanta ou n 1:.:: Constitution, Sunday, Dec~mber 11, 1966,. It was my imp·css:lon that m mb!:!rs of the Atlanta St.'\r.mit Le~dership Conference .~d not h::..d access to the .. os t recent plans of the -fetropoli tan .tlanta :::ta::,id Transit: Authority and th:3.t a meeting mi3ht be arranged for p~csentation of. these plans.. Dr. Willi~ms agz:ced tha t a r:l;:!eting, with a presentation by lv"ir .. Henry L., Stuart, !"..'\.:1TA General -Ianager, ;ould be beneficial. He suggested that ue t:.-y to set up such a meeting

after the holidays , and th.is is the purpose of my letter to him and to you .. If you feel such a meeting and presentation would be 'helpful., I will be happy to '\,-or - with you in setting up the arrang0monts . Also, I would like to invite you and Dr. Williams to vi~i· our offices to meet Mr . Stua~tG He cun brief you on our plans b~fore the meeting o and you could outline to him some of the specific questions you would like to hrive diocuoscd o Mr .. Ben Perry, ne:,·s Director of Radio station WAOK, talked with Mr. Stuart last .we.:.k about soo-.e questions you had rai ocd about anploy.nent practiceD, job raquire."ents , etc. in a recent speech. These questions deserve answers, ana ·we will be happy to discuss thera with you .. Our offices are locat.ed et 808 Glenn .Building, 120 Marietta

Street, N.. w.. If you will give me a call , we can discuss detail!l of the ttro meetings referred to above Sincerely yours ,

':

cc, Dr. Samuel Williams Blind Copy:

Tl'

.....

Mro

King Elliott, Public Information Director a

L. D. Hilton


·· -~~---.........

�/yJ J nuary 11, 1967

. I'

1),, t

f

Mr. Arm nd May P . O. Bo 4056 Atl nta, Georgia

30302

Dear Annand: Thank you so mu.ch for your letter and th information from the City of Montreal bo

their trans

trta.tio

y tem.

I am forwarding this to the Tr

it Authozity

aa I am au it will be of great intere t to them. Sincerely your•,

Ivan All a, Jr. yor

'JA.Jr/br

CC: Mr. H. L. Stewart

/~

�RAPID TRANSIT

F

OGR~SS

METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY

"MARTA

REPORTS TO THE

PEOPLE IT SERVES . . . "

SEPTEMBER 1967 VOL. 2 . NO. 9

FINANCIAL PLAN OFFERED PROPOSES "HAMBURGER-A-WEEK"COST TO LOCAL CITIZEN Rapid transit can be built at a maximum cost to the taxpayer of 3 mills in Fulton County and 1.6 mills in DeKalb County, according to economic consultants of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority. The figures are contained in the final draft of a report by Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates prepared as part of the revision of the 1962 plan for rapid transit for Metropolitan Atlanta. The 1967 revision of the plan is expected to be completed in the next few weeks. , The report shows that the basic 30-mile system, which will cost about $332 million, can be built with local funds of $199 million, state funds of $33 million, and federal funds of $ 100 million. The Fulton County share would be $146,265,000 (73.5%) and the DeKalb County share $52,735,000 (26,5%). Clayton and Gwinnett Counties would not contribute to the capital construction costs until work is begun on the extensions to complete the 52-mile system when additional federal funds are expected to become available. The Clayton and Gwinnett f,inancial support would include a pro rata share of the costs of the basic system. "This report shows that the maximum cost of rapid transit in Fulton County to the owner of a $15,000 house would be $12.00; the same person in DeKalb County would pay about $6.40 maximum," MARTA General Manager said. "In Fulton County, this amounts to the price of a hamburger a week, or two or three cups of coffee a week," he told the MARTA Board of Directors at their regular meeting today. "And these amounts would be paid only for about 5 years; the rest of the time the costs would be even lower," he continued.

"When Clayton and Gwinnett counties assume their share of the costs, their rate would be a maximum of 1.5 mills, or about $6.00 a year to the owner of a $ 15,000 house," Stuart explained. • "The report of our financial consultants proposes what appears to be a practical and feasible approach to financing construction of the rapid transit system," he said. "Our final plans are taking shape and preliminary engineering is developing well. · If a successful referendum can be held in November 1968, we would begin construction in Spring of 1969. If this program develops in this manner," he stated, "we would have the first line operating about the end of 1973 and the basic 30-mile system in service in 1975. The entire 52-mile system could well be in operation before 1980, or in about the same length of time it is taking to complete the perimeter expressway. "We need to begin construction as early as possible," he concluded, "since every year's delay costs us $18 to $20 million thru inflation and increased construction costs. The basic 30-mile system would have 24 stations and would run from Brookhaven to College Park and from Decatur to Lynhurst Drive near i-285 on the west, with a northwest stub to Northside Drive. The electrically-driven, air-conditioned cars would operate at maximum speeds of 70 miles per hour, averag(Continued on Page 2, Col. 1)

FEDERAL

STATE STATE

FULTON DeKALB

FULTON FEDERAL

$332 MILLION (30 Miles)

$479 MILLION (52 Miles)

�THIS MANY CARS PARKED HERE ...

(Co ntinued fro m Page 1)

ing about 40 miles per hour including station stops. Trains would run as often as every 90 seconds du ring rush hours. The commuter will ride to Transit Center, just a block fro m Five Poin ts, in about 13 minutes from Brookhaven, 9 minutes fro m Decatur , and about 13 minutes from College Park .

... COULD REMOVE MANY CARS FROM HERE

American Transit Association Convention-October 22-26, 196 7, Regency-Hyatt House, Atlanta. The ATA has as members only those operating transit systems (railroads, bus lines, rapid transit, etc.)

METROPOLITAN ATLANT A RAPID TR A NSIT AUTHORITY 8 08 GLENN BLD G. • 1 20 M AR I ETTA S T . . N . W . ATLANTA , GA . 30 3 03 · PHONE 524-57 1 1

" DIREC T ED B Y THE GEO R GIA STATE LEGISL A TURE TO DE V ELOP A RA PID T RANSI T S YS TE M FOR THE 5 -COUN T Y ME TRO P OL IT AN A TL AN T A A RE A."

Edited by KING ELLIOTT

BOARD OF DIRECTORS OFFICERS: RICH ARD H. RI CH, Chairman Roy A. BLOUNT, Vic e Chairman J. DI CKSON, Treasurer GLENN E. BENNETT, Secretary

HERBERT

CITY OF ATLANTA: L. D. M ILTO N ROBERT F. ADAMSON RAWSON HAVERTY RI CHARD H. RICH CLAYTON COUNTY: EDGAR BLALOCK DEKALB COUN T Y: DR. SANFORD ATWOOD ROY A. BLOUNT

w.

FULTON COUNTY: A. PULVER MITCHELL C . BISHOP GWINNETT COUNTY: K. A . M CMILLON COBB COUNTY (Obs erver) OTIS A . BRUMBY, JR.

MARTA STAFF: HENRY L . STUART, Gen eral Manager EARL W . NELSON , Chief Engineer KING ELLIOTT, Director of Public lnfor·m ation H . N. JOH NSON, Sccrct«ry to General Manag_c r

An important factor in attracting commuters from their cars to rapid transit is the "Park-N-Ride Prin ciple," according to a noted transportation expert. George L. DeMent , Chairman of the Board of the Chicago Transit Authority, recently discussed the importance of parking facilities in connectio n with rapid transit stations. Referring to the new Skokie Swift exte nsion to the Chicago rapid transit system, he said , "The 522 Park-N-Ride spaces provided at the outer Dempster Street terminal has proved to be a major factor in the success of Skokie Swift. This Park-N-Ride is used to 100 per ce nt capacity every weekday . It is obvious to the Ch icago Transit Authority that the patronage of the highly successful Skokie Swift operation would be increased automatically if additional parking spaces could be provided at the Dempster Term in al. Simila r examples could be cited for the Park-N-Ride lots along other Ch icago lines." DeMe nt noted that " the Cleveland Tra nsit System has given emphasis to Park-N-Ride . Seven 'Rap id' stations have been provided with 5,2 18 free parking spaces ...Additional parking spaces soon will be provided along the air port rapid tran sit exte nsion now under construction ." He quoted a survey which " indicated that parking spaces are being used at a rate of 1.3 ca rs per day. and that each car carries an average of 1. 2 passengers. He says further that "the Toro nto Tra nsit Commission will provide parking spaces for 3,000 cars at t hree stations along the Bloo r Street subway extension now unde r construction. with (Co11 ri1111ed 0 11 Page 3. Col. I I

�CITY PLANNING AND RAPID TRANSIT The American Institute of Planners has a strong interest in the development of a rapid transit system for the Atlanta Metropolitan. Area. The specific interest in MARTA and its proposed system is related to the "balance" and relationship of the transit network to the rest of the metropolitan area and to the total transportation system of the metropolitan area- as it exists and is planned. The planner is concerned with the relationships that will be an outgrowth of the system. What impact will MART A lines have on public and private property? Which areas will be likely to develop because_ of a MARTA installation-a station, for instance? Will the system be sensitively related to neighborhoods and business areas, or industrial areas? How? Will the system put stations in places where other planning and development activities provide an opportunity to "multiply" the effect of the investment in transit by an investment in urban renewal, or a college, or a new business area, or a special school? Can better relationships be established between elements of the transit system and the environment? The planning profession is interested in the general and the comprehensive dimensions of the city and the metropolitan area. Therefore, the planning interest in the transit system will extend beyond the tracks and the stations, into a concern for nearby property- and, more important, property that is not so near. The planning concern for all of the Atlanta area is oriented to maximizing the livability of our "place," and deals equally with the areas impacted and not impacted. In the areas being served (giving the word "impact" a positive tone) the planner is likely to seek to make the favorable impact more favorable , more utilitarian, more significant to the area in terms of its present and future role in the city , whether this role is related to change, redevelopment, more intensive developRichard M. Forbes ment, new uses or no change. The planning attitude about any pubEc or private investment is based on what the facility will mean to people in their environment. What will it mean to citizens as they travel to and from work, to recreation, to shopping? This is one level of concern. What it will mean to people at home , if they live near the transit line, is another concern. For example, will it cause an unpleasant industry to develop nearby? The planning concern reduces itself to a concern for our city, our place , our environment. The planner wishes to make Greater ' Atlanta the best possible place in which to live and work. He consequently sees transit as a marvelous opportunity to use a large public investment as one of the elements that will help to do that. However, transit will make a positive contribution only if it is very carefully related to each part of the area and to other projects and plans so that the system is balanced. This relationship to the whole is o( prime importance. _________

MARTA TALKS ... AND LISTENS The story of rapid transit plans for Metropolitan Atlanta is finding interested audiences throughout this area. Between the first of June and mid-September, the MARTA directors and staff talked to some 1700 members or more than 30 civic and other groups, illustrating the MARTA story with slides or motion picture films. In addition, many other discussions were held with city and county officials, planning departments, state legislators, and citizen groups such as Chambers ofCommerce 1 and Central Atlanta Progress. After the formal presentations, the meetings were generally opened for questions. In_the picture below, Henry L. Stuart, MARTA General Manager, is listening to a question being asked by a member of the Atlanta Civitan Club.

1

Richard M. Forbes, Assistan t Professor of Real Estate and Urban Af fairs at Georgia State College, is a member of the MARTA Advisory Committee, representing the planning prof ession. He is a member of the A merican Institute of Planners, and other professional groups. (Continued froin Page 2, Col. 2)

additional spaces planned for the Yonge Street Subway Extensio n just authorized. The new 10-mile extension in South Jersey will provide nearly 5,000 parking spaces at six locations with provision for fu ture expansio n. Over 16,000 parking spaces ·at 23 statio ns will be provided along th.e . 75-mile rapid transit system being built in San Francisco. Quoting DeMent , "There is no longer a question of the need for such facilities. It is o nly a question of how much parking should be provided fo r any given rapid transit installat ion ." The system being designed fo r the Atlanta area will include adequate parking facilities at suburban stations.

A MARTA display depicting progress in the development of rapid transit was part of the fifth Annual Fall Sale at J amestown Shopping Center in College Park recently. The event was sponsored by the College Park Jaycees in cooperation with merchants at the shopping center. The MARTA display shows the location of Transit Center in downtown Atlanta, and the various lines considere d for rapid transit routes. The display back of College Park Jaycee President Paul Green shows in the upper left corner a cutaway view of how Transit Center might be designed, with escalators connecting the two levels of trains with the sidewalks above. The lower left corner contains typical site development plans for the four levels of Transit Center while in the lower right corner is a map locating Transit Center in relation to downtown streets. The map in the upper right corner shows the areas in wh.ich the routes and stations will be located. Routes as planned in 196 1, 1962, an d 1966-7 are variously indicated. The display back of Joan Eschenbrenner, MARTA secretary , feat ures a large aerial photo of downtown Atlanta and pictures of various major building developments now under way near rap id transit stations. The MARTA exhibit aroused many enthusiastic comments from those who viewed it.

�MARTAnswers

MARTA ACTION

QUESTION : Why is MARTA planning to use the old-type steelwheel and steel-rail system instead of something new, like monorail? ANSWER: In the first place, monorail is not new or modern . As shown in the picture below, monorail has been around a long time- 70 years or so. A short monorail line has been operating across a river in Germany since 1906. The major reason for not using monorail, however, is simply that no monorail system has ever been a commercially successful operation in moving numbers of commuters. In recent years, short, relatively simple monorail systems have been built in Paris and Tokyo, and others have been used in World's Fairs in Seattle and New York, and at Disneyland. These small operations, however, do not meet MART A's design requirements to transport commuters at 70 miles per hour in capacities approaching 30,000 passengers per hour. T_here are other problems relating to cost, engineering, construction, and route location : Both the top-supported (suspended) and bottom-supported monorail systems are more expensive to construct system-wide than the conventional steel-wheel steel rail system . The topsupported monorail requires the support structure throughout the system, whereas MARTA's plans call for only 3½ miles of aerial structure. The top-supported monorail requires a much larger tunnel for subway where subway is essential. Trying to .eliminate the monorail subway brings us back to the problem MART A faced all along- where to put the routes through downtown Atlanta without using subway . There is no feasible surface route for either system.

MEIGS COLLECTION, Yale University Library - MONORA IL , 188 7 VERSION - Joe Vin cent Meigs (second row, six th from right) patented this early "monorail" in 1873. Th e running wheels were tilted at 45 degree angles; horizon tally -mounced steam-driven wheels ru nn ing on an up-

The Board of Directors at its September 5 meeting heard a report on a financial study by Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates, Inc. No action was taken on the report. No official action was taken by the Board since a quorum was not present. The next meeting of the MARTA Board of Directors will be Tuesday, October 3, 1967, 3:30 p.m., Room 619, Glenn Building, 120 Marietta St. , N.W.

The bottom-supported system would be somewhat more expensive for grade and aerial structure than the steel-wheel steel rail system, and considerably more expensive for subway because of the larger tunnel required. If expense were not the major factor it is , the question then arises, "what would monorail give you that the conventional system would not provide?" The answer is "nothing." The monorail is slower, has higher operational costs, and does not provide as comfortable ride. During the past 70 years, engineering problems relating to monorail have not been satisfactorily resolved. These include switching, high speeds (70 to 80 MPH), sway , and other technical problems. · These and other disadvantages may eventually be resolved, but no solution is in sight. By contrast , the dual rail system solved these and many other engineering and operational problems years ago. The dual-rail system will definitely provide what is needed in this area: 70 MPH speeds, safety, comfort, and convenience at less cost than any type monorail. Using a known and proven technology means MART A will be able to bring the system into operation at the earliest possible time . This is our goal. - Henry L. Stuart, MARTA General Manager

per set of rails provided propulsion. Th e Philadelphia City Council visited th e 1, 114-foo t long test track in East Ca mbridge, Mass., in 188 7. Th e revolutionary Meigs railway did no t gain acceptance, however; and the company fa iled a few years later.

RAPID TRANSIT

BULK RATE U. S. Postage

PROGRESS

Atlanta, Ga. Permit No. 20

METROPOLITA N ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY

808 GLE N N BLDG . · 1 20 MARIETTA ST . . N . W . P H O N E 52 4• 57 11 ( AR E A CODE 4 0 4)

·

ATLANTA , GEORGIA 30303

SEPTEM BER 1967 . VOL . 2, NO . 9

Mr. R. Earl Landers AJm1n. Asst. to the Mayor 206 Cl ty Ha 11

Atla~ta. Ga. 3030,

PA ID

�RAPID TRANSIT

ss METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY

"]Y.[ARTA

REPORTS TO THE

PEOPLE IT SERVES . . . "

DECEMBER 1967 VOLUME 2, No.12

ENGINEERS SUBMIT REVISED RAPID TRANSIT PLAN The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) has officially received from the engineers, Parsons BrinckerhoffTudor-Bechtel, an updated report covering a rapid transit system for Metropolitan Atlanta. The report was publicly released December 3. Richard H. Rich, MARTA Chairman, stated, "The report brings up to date a similar one prepared in 1962 for the Atlanta Transit Study Commission, a predecessor group to MARTA. As submitted to the Authority, the new report includes a financial feasibility study made by the economic consulting firm of Hammer, Greene, Siler Associates." "It should be clearly understood that this is not MART A's report," Rich continued. "Rather, it is a report of the engineers and the economic consultants to MARTA." "The engineers have been working on their updating for well over a year," he said. "Their report reflects changes that have occurred in population, employment, economy, land use , physical characteristics, travel demand, transit vehicle design and costs in the last five years. It proposes certain changes in previously proposed rapid transit routes and station locations to meet the changes in Atlanta itself." "The Authority and its staff have been working with the engineers and have studied the report. Generally, we think it looks

good, and it would become the skeleton of a balanced transportation system for Metropolitan Atlanta." "MARTA expects to make a more comprehensive report to the people of Georgia, especially those living in the Metropolitan Atlanta Area, sometime in 1968," he said. "We anticipate that report will cover an overall, balanced mass transit system for Atlanta. Coordinated with existing transit and transportation facilities, rapid transit will thus be a part of a total balanced transportation system which will meet immediate travel demands, as well as those anticipated in the future." "MARTA is beginning now a series of additional studies, consultations and, eventually, public hearings aimed at developing a plan for such a balanced transportation system. In this process we recognize that coordination with the Atlanta Transit System and the State Highway Department and the full cooperation and approval of Metropolitan Atlanta Area governments will be required. Toward this end, copies of the Engineers' report have been given in advance to these agencies," he concluded. While distribution of the full report is necessarily limited, the 16-page "Special Summary Report" is available to the public. Copies can be picked up at no cost at the MARTA offices, 808 Glenn Building, 120 Marietta Street. Additional stories on Pages 2, 3 and 4.

�GUEST EDITORIAL

METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY

(The fallowing editorial and cartoon on next page appeared in the ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, Sunday, December 3, 1967, and are reprinted with permission.)

808 GLENN BLOG . • 120 MARIETTA ST . . N. W . A TL ANTA . GA . 30303 • PHONE 524-57 11

"DIRECTED BY THE GEORGIA STATE LEGISLATURE TO DEVELOP A RAPID

1983-RAPID TRANSIT OR DOUBLE TRAFFIC

TRANSIT SYSTEM FOR THE S-COUNTY METROPOLITAN ATLANTA AREA . "

Edited by KING ELLIOTT

BOARD OF DIRECTORS OFFICERS: RICHARD H. RI CH, Chairman RoY A. BLOUNT, Vic e Chairman HERBERT J. DICKSON, Treasurer GLENN E. BENNETT, S ecr etary CITY OF ATLANTA: ROB ERT F . ADAMSON L. D. MILTON RI CHARD H. RI CH RAWSON HAVERTY CLAYTON COUNTY: EDGAR BLALOCK · DEKALB COUNTY: ROY A . BLOUNT DR. SANFORD ATWOOD

w. A .

FULTON COUNTY: PULVER MITCHELL C. BISHOP GWINNETT COUNTY: K. A. McMILL9N

  • * *

COBB COUNTY (Obs erver) OTIS A. BRUMBY, JR. MARTA STAFF: HENRY L. STUART, Gen eral Manager EARL w. NELSON, Chief Engineer KING ELLIOTT, Direc tor of Public Information H. N . JOI·INSON, S ecretary to General Manag_er

ROLE OF BUS TO BE STUDIED "The study of the role of buses in connection with rapid transit is entirely consistent with the philosophy and current programs of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, and we will cooperate fully with the Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission in the pursuanc.e of such a study," says Henry L. Stuart, MART A General Manager. The Atlanta Region Metropolitan Planning Commission on December 11 approved a resolution to "undertake a study to determine the proper and feasible role which surface buses can logically play in an interim, permanent, or combined rail-bus j mass transit system for Metropolitan Atlanta." Such a study had been recommended by the Atlanta Board of Aldermen on December 4. "As I understand it," Stuart continued, "the study will be 'of sufficient depth' to determine the proper role of the bus in a mass transit system to serve Metropolitan Atlanta. I hope such a study will address itself to all possible uses of the bus in connection with rapid transit and will examine proposals for reserved lanes for buses in expressways; reserved lanes on surface streets; paved lanes on railroad rights-of-way; 'Hy-Rail' buses which can operate on streets and also run on flanged steel wheels on railroad tracks; 'Heli-buses', which can be picked up by large helicopters and flown from one location to another; electric buses on elevated concrete roadways; 'Hover-Craft' air-cushion -vehicles; 'Mini-Buses'; and any other applications of buses now in use or under experimentation." "The results of such a study can be of considerable assistance to MARTA in the determination of a final proposal for a balanced transportation system," Stuart concluded. Yet to be decided are the cost and scope of the study and who is to perform it. -

-

--

-

-

-

- --

-

-

-

-

-

There is nothing more maddening for a man than to have 300 horses under his hood and nothing but a half-mile of good road and 300,000 cars between him and where he wants to go. When Andrew Jackson was President it took him a month to get from the Hermitage in Nashville to his office in Washington. Almost a century and a half of progress later, Atlantans on their way to work make just about that kind of time. And Rhett and Scarlett thought THEY had trouble getting out of town. The traffic situation in Atlanta, in short, is intolerable, and the number of cars in town is supposed to double by 1983. The only thing that can save us from devoting half our days to getting back and forth _slowly is a new transportation system. The system that can move the most people fastest, and get them in each other's way least, is rapid rail transit.

-

-

-

- -

" UNLESS WE MOVE TO MEET TRANSPORTATION needs on a balanced and comprehensive basis, we will continue to be confronted with such ironies as new aircraft, already in production, capable of flying from New York to Seattle in about the same time it takes a Manhattan taxicab to go crosstown." - Dr. William J. Ronan, Chairman, Metropolitan Commuter Transportation Authority (New York).

A new plan for such a system has been presented by engineers to the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority , which has been working since 1965 to carry out the mandate by which Metropolitan Atlanta approved rapid transit in 1964. The plan specifies exactly where the full 65-mile system eventually will go. The plan includes specifications and aerial photos showing what the new system will be like. It also tells us about how much it will cost-$479 million, at least, for the first 54 miles. This includes everything that is planned except the line that will go into Cobb County when and if that county' s citizenry realizes its value. (Only Cobb, of all the metropolitan counties, elected not to join MARTA.)

  • * *

Considerable impetus for the implementation of these plans (as for the travels of Scarlett and Rhett) is expected from the federal government. Some money is also expected from the State of Georgia. But more than half of it will probably have to come from the people of the Metropolitan area . Sometime next year the people of Fulton and DeKalb Counties, in which the first 21 miles will be laid, will vote on a bond issue to finance that first line, on which travel could begin by 1975. We not only hope but pray they will approve the issue. Every year construction of the system is delayed means it will cost more. It will be a big job, and won't be finished until 1985.

  • * *

It is either do this job, so that we can get to the central station under Broad Street from Brookhaven in 14 minutes, or from Forest Park in 17 minutes, or from Emory in 12-or else learn to tolerate that 1985 traffic, which is going to consist, you remember, of twice as many cars.

"THE SUBWAY IS THE BACKBONE of our transit system. It has given our downtown core the assurance of stability and permanence. Without doubt it has been and will continue to be the catalyst for a whale of a lot of new development and the redevelopment of older, uneconomic areas in our city ."

Ralph C. Day, Toronto Transit Commission Chaimzan

" THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION looks at the transit industry as the best means immediately at hand fo r solving the problem of peak hour commuting and downtown congestion." -A lan S. Boyd, Secretary of Transportation

�STATION

STOPS

FORfST PARK

ANYONE FOR RAPID TRANSIT ? RAPID TRANSIT BRIEFS MARTA DIRECTOR Sanford Atwood has been reappointed by the DeKalb County Commission to a new, four-year term which will begin January 1, 1968. The term of Roy A. Blount, the other director from DeKalb County will expire December 31, 1969. DEKALB COUNTY COMMISSION at its December 12 meeting adopted a resolution commending "MARTA for its approach to the problems and carrying out the wishes of the people" in the development of a rapid transit proposal. The motion was made by Commissioner Tom Callaway and was adopted unanimously. NEW YORK STATE voters overwhelmingly approved a $2.5 billion transportation bond issue November 7. The vote was 2,743,431 to 1,965,558, or about 3 to 2. As one observer put it, "Governor Nelson Rockefeller has shown that mass transportation is good politics." A ROME MAN h as ordered the first ticket for a rapid transit ride. Following a speech to the Rome Kiwanis Club, MARTA General Manager Henry L. Stuart received a letter from Mr. Dean Covington, a Rome lawyer, asking for the first ticket and enclosing a check for 25 cents. At this point, Stuart hasn't decided whether to deposit the check and open up a new account, or simply to frame the check and hang it on the office wall. MARTA CHIEF ENGINEER, Earl Nelson, was one of 500 transit experts who attended a one-day Washington conference on "New Approaches to Urban Transportation" on November 29. The conference was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. A RAPID TRANSIT EXTENSION to O' Hare International Airport was suggested in a consultant's report on needs for virtually doubling the airport's facilities pending the development of a third major airport for the Chicago area. The need for a rapid transit extension to the O'Hare airport was based on anticipations that highway routes would be "saturated" with traffic to that busy location by 1975. The report estimated that additional terminal facilities at O'Hare would cost $280 million and the rapid transit extension$60 million. GENERAL MANAGER STUART was a guest on an opening day of WRNG Radio Atlanta when the Station began its broadcasting operations Monday, December 4. Stuart discussed rapid transit with host, Art Bradley, and answered questions phoned in by the listening audience.

HOW FAST TO DOWNTOWN? The map above shows the travel times from the various proposed rapid transit stations to Transit Center near Five Points. This is one of many maps, charts, and tables contained in "A Special Summary Report," a layman's version of the 1967 engineering report released December 3rd. Copies may be picked up at the MARTA offices, 808 Glenn Building. Several architectural sketches show how stations might be constructed in various situations. The picture below is of an embankment station. The report contains a proposal for a financing plan which would use funds from local, state, and federal sources. The 30mile basic system could be built, 1mder this plan, for about $332 million. The proposed plan suggests a combination of $199 million local funds; $33 million from the State of Georgia, and $100 million from federal sources for the basic system. Assuming the local share would be paid from ad valorem taxes, this would amount to a maximum of 3 mills in Fulton County and 1.6 mills in DeKalb County. The 52-mile regional system would cost about $479 million, and would be based on an additional $100 million or more fe deral funds, and about 1.5 mills from Clayton and Gwinnett Counties. The report concludes. "The owner of a $20,000 home, for example, in 1978 would pay $18.00 more if his home was in Fulton County and $9.60 if his property was in DeKalb County. Such costs- no more than 35 cents per week and less in non-peak years- make rapid transit a good investment.

I

"'

�MARTAnswers QUESTION: How does the 1967 report differ from the 1962 report? ANSWER: Many significant changes in population, employment, housing and traffic have occurred in the Metropolitan Atlanta area since the 1962 rapid transit report was completed. Comparison of the new planning report with that published in 1962 reveals how the amended rapid transit plan directly reflects changes in the Atlanta region which have occurred in the same period of time. The revisions in the rapid transit plan include : Rearrangement of lines to make Pershing Point the northern terminus of the central distribution line, providing a Central Line station adjoining Atlanta's new Memorial Center. Relocation of Transit Center Station to the south side of the "gulch" opposite the new First National Bank Building to better allow for planned utilization of railroad air rights. Addition of a new station on the East Line to serve the State Capitol area and the mushrooming campus of Georgia State College. Extension of subway along the entire Central Line from Broad Street at Garnett Street on the south to Interstate 85 north of Pershing Point. Relocation of the South Line between East Point and Mountain View to provide direct service to the proposed new airport terminal complex. Introduction of numerous changes to improve station access, to assure a harmonious relationship between stations and the surrounding areas, and to impose higher standards of operation and comfort. QUESTION: Is the 1967 plan the official plan of how the system will actually be built? ANSWER: No. The 1967 report simply brings up to date the system propose d in 1962. It does not include, for example, extensions on the East and West lines to I-285 ; these ex tensions are part of a preliminary engineering work now under way under a separate contract. The new 1967 plan will be modified considerably befo re a plan is developed to present to the public. Then, a series of public meetings and formal public hearings will be held, at which the public will be able to express their opinions of the plans and to submit their ideas. After these meetings and hearings are concluded, the ideas and comments will be evaluated, and the Board of Directors will then make final decisions and develop a final plan and program. This final plan and program will then be submitted to the voters who will ultimately decide whether rapid transit will be built.

-,-~-•

QUESTION: When will the referendum be held? ANSWER: No final decision has been made , but MART A planning at this point is looking toward a referendum in November 1968. Given a successful referendum in 1968, first rapid transit service could begin in 1974, with the entire 30-mile basic system in operation in 1975 or 1976. -Hemy L. Stuart, MARTA General Manager

MARTAcTION At its December meeting the MARTA Board of Directors approved a budget and work program of $1.5 million for 1968. A more detailed explanation and breakdown of the $750,000 element for the preliminary design of the transit center was requested, and the budget was adopted subject to a satisfactory review of this item. In other action the Board of Directors authorized the General Manager to sign the contracts between MARTA and the State Department of Industry and Trade concerning the use of the state's appropriation of $500,000 for rapid transit; and reappointed Arthur Andersen Company as auditor for 1968. The Directors tentatively set the date for the nex t meeting for January 5 subj ect to confirmation by letter. The Board mee ting will be held in Room 619, Glenn Building, 120 Marietta Street, N.W., Atlanta.

ELSEWHERE ... BILLION DOLLAR PLANS for a rapid transit system are being developed for Sea ttle, Los Ange les, and Washington, D.C. A Seattle study calls for a 45-mile system at an eventual cost of $1.5 billion to build. Los Angeles has a preliminary report calling for a 62-mile system priced at $1.5 billion. And Washington, D.C. is now building a 25-mile system, proposing that it eventually be 95.3 miles with an eventual cost for the total sys tem of $2. 3 billion. In addition, the $1.2 billion San Francisco system is now under constru ction. MEXICO CITY is well under way in construction of its new subway sys tem. Plans call for all 22 miles of its 3 lines to be in operation by 1970. A NEW TYPE RAIL-BUS was demonstrated by Red Arrow Lines on the Philadelphia and Western Railway between Bryn Mawr and Bridgeport. The 49-seat diesel-powered bus has been equipped with retractable steel wheels for travel on railways as well as highways. Merritt H. Taylor, Jr., President of the Philadelphia Suburban Transportation Company, the parent firm of Red Arrow, said that if the bus tests out as expected, they _will be used to replace the company's 50 trolleys and trains operating in Delaware and Montgomery counties.

RAPID TRANSIT

BULK RATE U. S. Postage

PROGRESS

Atlanta, Ga. Perm it No. 20

PA ID

METROPOLI TAN ATL A N TA RAPI D TRAN S IT AUTHO R ITY

BOB GLENN BLDG. · 120 MARI E TTA S T .. N.W . PHONE 524 - 5711 (AREA CODE 404)

ATLANTA . GE O RGIA 30303

DECEMBER 1967. VOLUME 2, NO. 12

Mr . R. Earl Landers Co mp troller City of Atlanta 501 City Ha 11

Atlanta, Ga.

~l

~O~O~

�F ATLANTA OF COMPTROLLER CITY HALL

Atlanta, Georgia

30303

Dec ember 5, 1967 CHARLES L . DAVIS COMPTROLLER

EDGAR A. VAUGHN, JR. DEPUTY COMPTROLLER

MEMORANDUM TO:

Mro R. Ear l Landers

FROM:

Char les L. Davis

4)_

I am enclos i ng a c opy of a draft report made by Mr . Phi l Hammer f or Rapid Transit under date of J uly 19 , 196 7, as wel l as a c opy of a revised report made under date of Jul y 31 , 196 70 I have had several conferences with Mr . Hammer ; and in his original report , he was proposing to charge the citizens of Atlanta 2 mills at the very outset for Rapid Transit and increasing to 3 mills by 1971 . By a like token , he also proposed to charge DeKalb County 2 mills in 1969 and increasing to a high of 2. 8 mills in 1971 , then descending for the remainder of the life of the bonds o In the case of Fulton County , he was proposing to charge 1 mill at the very outset and increasing to a high of 1 . 9 mills in 1971 , then decreasing for the remaining life of the bonds . Mr . Hammer stat ed that this allocation would take into consideration such things as the ability of a government to pay the increase in tax digest of an area as the result of Rapid Transit and other factors . In our discussion , I pointed out that this was not a true yardstick , and I felt the millage should apply county-wide ; and in the future if this could be accomplished, this would not be a hindrance to us an others in annexing other areaso In his revised report , Mr . Hammer is proposing a county-wide levy , which can be f ound on Page 43 , of 1 mill for DeKalb County and 1.5 mills for Fulton County . These will increase in 1975 to 3 mills in Fulton County and 1.6 mills in DeKalb County . I have also noticed in the paper recently that Rapid Transit is proposing to amend the Transit Act by some eighteen points. Some of these points I am in full agreement with; such as, clarification between the maximum amount of dollars approved in the referendum and the millage rate that will be needed to raise the necessary funds. There are other points I think should be further pursued, particularly those relating to the investment of Rapid Transit funds and perhaps the right of eminent domain. It seems as if this has been a very hot point ever since the Rapid Transit Act was enacted.

Current Page Discussion [edit] [history]