Evaluation of the Effect of Rail Intra-Urban Transit Stations on Neighborhood Change

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Evaluation of the Effect of Rail Intra-Urban Transit Stations on Neighborhood Change Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Public Management and Policy Dissertations Summer 6-13-2017 Evaluation of the Effect of Rail Intra-Urban Transit Stations on Neighborhood Change Christopher K. Wyczalkowski Georgia State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/pmap_diss Recommended Citation Wyczalkowski, Christopher K., "Evaluation of the Effect of Rail Intra-Urban Transit Stations on Neighborhood Change." Dissertation, Georgia State University, 2017. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/pmap_diss/66 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Public Management and Policy Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EVALUATION OF THE EFFECT OF RAIL INTRA-URBAN TRANSIT STATIONS ON NEIGHBORHOOD CHANGE A Dissertation Presented to The Academic Faculty By Christopher K. Wyczalkowski In Partial Fulfilment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in Public Policy Georgia State University Georgia Institute of Technology August, 2017 Copyright © Christopher K. Wyczalkowski 2017 EVALUATION OF THE EFFECT OF RAIL INTRA-URBAN TRANSIT STATIONS ON NEIGHBORHOOD CHANGE Dr. Ann-Margaret Esnard, Chair Dr. Joseph Hacker Andrew Young School of Policy Studies Andrew Young School of Policy Studies Georgia State University Georgia State University Dr. Dan Immergluck Dr. Kyle Mangum School of City & Regional Planning Andrew Young School of Policy Studies Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia State University Dr. John Thomas Andrew Young School of Policy Studies Georgia State University Date Approved: 6/13/2017 To Mama i Tata iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are a great many people to whom I am indebted for their help in the completion of the manuscript, and my doctoral degree. Without help and encouragement, I certainly would not have been able to accomplish this task. More than anyone, I’m grateful to my wife and kids who endured my absence when I was working, and my tiredness when I wasn’t. I want to thank the Dissertation committee for their advice and guidance on this project. Dr. Joseph Hacker was my constant sounding board, friend, and advisor, not just for this project, but throughout the doctoral process. Dr. Dan Immergluck’s interest in my research and advice, particularly in the early stages when he agreed to meet me for coffee in Decatur, provided the confidence I needed to share this topic with the world in a dissertation. Dr. John Thomas provided the framework I needed to form this study as an evaluation. Dr. Kyle Mangum provided the urban economic background that I used to support the framework for this study. I particularly want to acknowledge Dr. Esnard. Dr. Ann-Margaret Esnard has been there from start to finish, providing mentorship, guidance, and most importantly encouragement. I could not have asked for a better mentor. I’d like to thank the faculty for sharing their knowledge, and all of my fellow students (Emmy, Xi, Kelechi, Komla, Obed, Chris, Mike … too many to name) for their steadfast support and advice over the last five years. A special thanks to Rahul Pathak, Sandy Zook, Eric Van Holm, Bryce Farbstein, and the adopted cohort member Mahmoud Elsayed for helping me get through the journey. Lastly, I want to thank my good friends Amir Gorji and Patrik Johnson for being a sounding board for all these years. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOLEDGEMENTS iv LIST OF TABLES viii LIST OF FIGURES ix SUMMARY xi INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 What is the Neighborhood Life-Cycle? 3 1.2 Rail Intra-Urban Transit Stations and Neighborhood Change 5 1.3 Study Area and Analytical Approaches 6 1.4 Research Question and Hypotheses 8 1.5 Chapter Contents 11 BACKGROUND AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 13 2.1 Neighborhood Change Framework 14 2.1.1 Filtering 16 2.1.2 Gentrification 19 2.1.3 Gentrification and Filtering Cycle 28 2.1.4 Typology 29 2.2 Public Transportation System Effects and Methodological Approaches 32 2.2.1 Hedonic Regression Studies 34 2.2.2 Quasi-Experimental Approaches 37 2.2.3 Other Studies 39 v CASE STUDY: ATALNTA, GEORGIA 42 3.1 The Metro Atlanta Region: Growth and Development 47 3.2 MARTA – Genesis and Evolution 55 3.3 Types of MARTA Stations in Neighborhoods 63 DATA AND METHODOLOGY 70 4.1 Data & Unit of Analysis 72 4.2 Treatment Selection 74 4.3 Control Group Selection 78 4.4 Hypotheses 81 4.5 Operationalization of Neighborhood Change 90 4.5.1 Individual Indicators 92 4.5.2 Neighborhood Change Index 1 93 4.5.3 Neighborhood Change Index 2 96 4.6 Methods 99 4.6.1 Measuring Short-term Effects of Intra-Urban Transit 99 Stations on Neighborhood Change 4.6.2 Measuring Long-term Effects of Intra-Urban Transit 101 Stations on Neighborhood Change RESULTS 105 5.1 Do New MARTA Stations Have Short-Term Effects on 118 Neighborhood Change? 5.2 Do MARTA Stations Have Long-Term Effects on 123 Neighborhood Change? vi DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 134 6.1 Summary of Key Findings 137 6.2 Contributions to Scholarship 138 6.3 Limitations 140 6.4 Future Research 142 APPENDIX A 147 APPENDIX B 173 APPENDIX C 183 APPENDIX D 189 REFERENCES 197 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1 Top 10 urbanized areas in the United States 44 Table 3.2 MARTA Station Names, Type, and Date Opened 60 Table 3.3 TSADS Station Types 67 Table 4.1 Data sources 73 Table 4.2 Variables in the Fixed Effects Model 88 Table 5.1 NCI2 1 Descriptive Statistics by Decade 115 Table 5.2 NCI2 DID Models 125 Table 5.3 Fixed Effects Model output 129 Table 5.4 2010 to 2014 NCI2 DID Models 131 Table 5.5 Post-Match Fixed Effects Model 133 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 Neighborhood Life-Cycle 4 Figure 1.2 Top ten U.S. heavy rail transportation agencies 7 by Unlinked Passenger Trips (UPT) Figure 3.1. Atlanta, GA Rail Intra Urban Rail and Highway Networks 45 Figure 3.2 Atlanta Street Patterns 1864 50 Figure 3.3 City of Atlanta and Ten County population over time 52 Figure 3.4 City of Atlanta black/white demographic change 53 Figure 3.5 Study Area % White residents per census tract 54 Figure 3.6 MARTA Rail Monthly Ridership 62 Figure 3.7 Study Area population density (1980-2010) 66 Figure 3.8 MARTA East Line Construction 1979 68 Figure 3.9 MARTA Rail Map 69 Figure 4.1 Analysis Flow Chart 71 Figure 4.2 MARTA Stations and Census Tracts East Line 78 Figure 4.3 Treatment and Control Groups Around New 83 Neighborhood MARTA Stations Figure 4.4 Factors affecting neighborhood change 84 Figure 5.1 Neighborhood Change Index 1 – Stage 1 109 Figure 5.2 Neighborhood Change Index 1 – Stage 2 110 Figure 5.3 Neighborhood Change Index 1 Count of Tracts for Each Category 111 Figure 5.4 NCI1 Change Gentrification to Filtering/Filtering to Gentrification 112 ix Figure 5.5 NCI1 Stable Tracts 115 Figure 5.6 Neighborhood Change Index 2 Natural Breaks Classification 117 Figure 5.7 DID Models NCI21 128 Figure 6.1 Neighborhood Change Theoretical Models 143 x SUMMARY Development of heavy rail intra-urban public transportation systems is an economically expensive policy tool for State and Local Governments that is often justified with the promise of economic development and neighborhood revitalization around station areas. However, the literature on the effects of rail intra-urban transit stations on neighborhoods is relatively thin, particularly on the socioeconomic effects. This quasi-experimental study evaluated the effect of heavy rail intra-urban transit stations on surrounding neighborhoods, using Atlanta, Georgia and its transit authority, the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA), as a case study. Atlanta is an expansive American city, with a large public transportation system, but low population density and no large-scale policies promoting growth around MARTA rail stations. The study period, 1970 to 2014, covers the entire period of MARTA’s existence – stations opened between 1979 and 2000. Neighborhood change was operationalized with a neighborhood change index (NCI), built on the Neighborhood Life-Cycle framework, with an adaptation that incorporates both the filtering (negative NCI) and gentrification (positive NCI) models of neighborhood change. The study differentiates between an initial effect of new MARTA rail stations, and a long-term effect. Control groups were formed using one and three mile buffers, as well as a matching strategy. Difference-in- difference (DID) models find very little evidence of a positive relationship of NCI with the opening of new MARTA rail stations. The economic recovery that began in 2010 is of special interest for housing research. To address this time-period this study utilized two models, with mixed results. The DID model suggested a negative effect of stations on the xi NCI. To control for selection bias in the 2010 to 2014 economic time-period, this study utilized propensity score matching to balance the treatment and control group on observed characteristics. A time and tract fixed effects model using the matched treatment and control groups found a significant positive effect of stations on neighborhood change. To test the long-term effect, a time and tract fixed effects model (1970-2014) with the NCI as the dependent variable found a positive NCI effect of MARTA stations on neighborhoods. Therefore, overall, positive neighborhood change (on the NCI scale) can be attributed to MARTA transit stations. Since 2002 MARTA ridership has slightly declined; therefore, the study concludes that given stagnant ridership, lack of supporting policy, and the finding of a positive relationship between MARTA transit stations and gentrification, the stations are a positive amenity, and are a significant contributor to neighborhood change.
Recommended publications
  • BANKHEAD STATION Transit Oriented Development
    BANKHEAD STATION Transit Oriented Development AREA PROFILE Area Demographics at 1/2 Mile Population 2012 1,902 % Population Change 2000-2012 -38% % Generation Y (18-34) 28% % Singles 83% Photo: Transformation Alliance 1335 Donald Lee Hollowell Parkway Housing Units 752 Daily Entries: 1,902 Atlanta, GA 30318 Housing Density/ Acre 1.5 Parking Capacity: 11 Spaces Bankhead Station is a heavy rail transit station facility locat- % Renters 74% ed near the geographic center of the City of Atlanta, several Parking % Multifamily Housing 49% Utilization:* N/A miles west of Midtown Atlanta on MARTA’s Green Line. Bankhead provides rapid rail service to major destinations Median Household Income $22,232 Station Type: Elevated including the Buckhead shopping and business district (23 % Use Public Transit 31% minutes), Midtown (11 minutes), Downtown (7 minutes) and Business Demographics Total Land Area +/- 3 acres Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport (23 minutes). Employees 234 Weekly Daily Entries MARTA’s adopted Transit Oriented Development Guidelines Avg. Office Rent Per SF $9.51 1,902 1,907 classify Bankhead as a Town Center station. This classifica- Avg. Retail Rent Per SF N/A tion system reflects both a station’s location and its primary Avg. Apartment Rent (1-mile) $520 function. The Guidelines define two types of Town Center 1,834 stations, one in “…historic town centers, such as Decatur or East Point”, the other as “…focal points for new town center- Sources: Bleakly Advisory Group, 2012. TOD nodes planned and built from the ground up in re- FY13 FY14 FY15 sponse to twenty-first century transit opportunities”. Bank- head station will likely be the latter, particularly with its proximity to the Atlanta BeltLine and the Bellwood Quarry MARTA Research & Analysis 2016 which is planned to be developed into the Westside Reser- *Data is not gathered if below 100 voir Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Program of High Capacity Transit Improvements City of Atlanta DRAFT
    Proposed Program of High Capacity Transit Improvements City of Atlanta DRAFT Estimated Capital Cost (Base Year in Estimated O&M Cost (Base Year in Millions) Millions) Project Description Total Miles Local Federal O&M Cost Over 20 Total Capital Cost Annual O&M Cost Share Share Years Two (2) miles of heavy rail transit (HRT) from HE Holmes station to a I‐20 West Heavy Rail Transit 2 $250.0 $250.0 $500.0 $13.0 $312.0 new station at MLK Jr Dr and I‐285 Seven (7) miles of BRT from the Atlanta Metropolitan State College Northside Drive Bus Rapid Transit (south of I‐20) to a new regional bus system transfer point at I‐75 7 $40.0 N/A $40.0 $7.0 $168.0 north Clifton Light Rail Four (4) miles of grade separated light rail transit (LRT) service from 4 $600.0 $600.0 $1,200.0 $10.0 $240.0 Contingent Multi‐ Transit* Lindbergh station to a new station at Emory Rollins Jurisdicitional Projects I‐20 East Bus Rapid Three (3) miles of bus rapid transit (BRT) service from Five Points to 3 $28.0 $12.0 $40.0 $3.0 $72.0 Transit* Moreland Ave with two (2) new stops and one new station Atlanta BeltLine Twenty‐two (22) miles of bi‐directional at‐grade light rail transit (LRT) 22 $830 $830 $1,660 $44.0 $1,056.0 Central Loop service along the Atlanta BeltLine corridor Over three (3) miles of bi‐directional in‐street running light rail transit Irwin – AUC Line (LRT) service along Fair St/MLK Jr Dr/Luckie St/Auburn 3.4 $153 $153 $306.00 $7.0 $168.0 Ave/Edgewood Ave/Irwin St Over two (2) miles of in‐street bi‐directional running light rail transit Downtown – Capitol
    [Show full text]
  • Soohueyyap Capstone.Pdf (6.846Mb)
    School of City & Regional Planning COLLEGE OF DESIGN A Text-Mining and GIS Approach to Understanding Transit Customer Satisfaction Soo Huey Yap MS-GIST Capstone Project July 24, 2020 1 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Transit Performance Evaluation……………………………………………………………………………….. 3 1.2 Using Text-Mining and Sentiment Analysis to Measure Customer Satisfaction………… 5 2. METHODOLOGY 2.1 Study Site and Transit Authority……………………………………………………………………………….. 9 2.2 Description of Data…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 9 2.3 Text-Mining and Sentiment Analysis 2.3.1 Data Preparation……………………………………………………………………………………….. 11 2.3.2 Determining Most Frequent Words…………………………………………………………… 12 2.3.3 Sentiment Analysis……………………………………………………………………………………. 13 2.4 Open-Source Visualization and Mapping………………………………………………………………… 14 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1 Determining Most Frequent Words………………………………………………………………………… 16 3.2 Sentiment Analysis…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 17 3.3 Location-based Analysis…………………………………………………………………………………………. 19 4. CHALLENGES AND FUTURE WORK……………………………………………………………………………………. 24 5. CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….… 25 6. REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 26 7. APPENDICES……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 29 Appendix 1: Final Python Script for Frequent Words Analysis Appendix 2: Results from 1st Round Data Cleaning and Frequent Words Analysis Appendix 3: Python Script for Sentiment Analysis using the NLTK Vader Module Python Script for Sentiment Analysis using TextBlob Appendix 4:
    [Show full text]
  • The Transformation Alliance
    The TransFormation Alliance Strengthening Communities Through Transit The TransFormation Alliance is a diverse collaboration of organizations including, community advocates, policy experts, transit providers, and government agencies working toward a common goal to change how transit and community development investments shape the future, to offer all residents the opportunities for a high quality of life, linked by our region’s critically important transit system. Issues Driven People and Creative Placemaking Housing Choice and Transit Innovative Capital Equitable TOD Climate and Job Access Health Why It Matters Housing Cost Jobs Access 48% The percentage of income paid in 3.4% rent by City of Atlanta HH of jobs are accessible by a earning the lowest 20th 45 minute trip on transit. percentile. - Brookings Institute, 2016 Income Mobility 4% A child raised in the bottom fifth income bracket in Atlanta has just 4% chance of reaching the top fifth - Brookings Institute, 2016 MARTA links disparate communities The five highest median The five lowest median household incomes by MARTA household incomes by MARTA stop stop 1) Buckhead Station: 1) West End Station: $19,447 $104,518 2) Ashby Station: $21,895 2) Brookhaven-Oglethorpe 3) Oakland City Station: Station: $104,168 $23,000 3) East Lake Station: $97,037 4) Lakewood-Ft. McPherson 4) Lenox Station: $90, 766 Station: $25,236 5) Medical Center Station: 5) Bankhead Station: $26,168 $89,281 Station Area Typology Type A: • In/near major job centers • Improve job access Low Vulnerability + • Affluent
    [Show full text]
  • MARTA Jurisdictional Briefing City of Atlanta
    MARTA Jurisdictional Briefing City of Atlanta October 10, 2018 Jeffrey A. Parker | General Manager/CEO PRESENTATION OVERVIEW • More MARTA Atlanta Program / Approved Plan • State of Service • Ongoing Coordination Issues • Q & A 2 MORE MARTA ATLANTA PROGRAM / APPROVED PLAN MORE MARTA ATLANTA PROGRAM • Unanimous Approval by MARTA Board of Directors • $2.7 billion in sales tax over 40 years • Additional public/private funding to be sought • Targeted Investments: 22 Miles - Light Rail Transit (LRT) 14 Miles - Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) 26 Miles - Arterial Rapid Transit (ART) 2 New Transit Centers Additional Fixed-Route Bus Service Upgrades to existing Rail Stations • Two Years of Comprehensive Planning and Outreach • Nine Guiding Principles • Opportunities for more transit 4 THE PEOPLE’S PRIORITIES Based on public feedback, MARTA and City leaders refined the program, with emphasis on: Atlanta BeltLine Southeast/Southwest Station Enhancements $570M $600M+ $200M Plan builds out 61% of City‐adopted Includes LRT on Campbellton & SW Includes better access, amenities Atlanta BeltLine Streetcar Plan BeltLine and BRT link to downtown and ADA enhancements Clifton Corridor Downtown/Streetcar Bus System $250M $553M $238M Plus additional $100M contingent Connects BeltLine with downtown Includes more frequent bus on securing other local funding destinations and existing Streetcar service and new circulator routes 5 APPROVED PROGRAM 6 MORE MARTA Program MORE MARTA IMPLEMENTATION TO DATE • MARTA has already responded to public feedback. Since 2017, the
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid Transit Contract and Assistance Agreement and Amendments
    RAPID TRANSIT CONTRACT AND ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT AND AMENDMENTS Amendment Effective Date Description 1 December 21, 1973 Relocation of Vine City Station, addition of Techwood Station, and changing Tucker-North DeKalb Busway to rapid rail line 2 April 15, 1974 Consolidation of Piedmont Road and Lindbergh Drive Stations into one station 3 August 21,1974 Relocation of Northside Drive Station 4 October 10, 1978 Addition of Airport Station 5 September 1, 1979 Construction Priorities mandated by Legislation 6 May 27, 1980 Permits extension of System into Clayton County and waives “catch-up” payments 7 October 1, 1980 Relocation of Fairburn Road Station 8 June 1, 1983 Construction Priorities 9 May 11, 1987 Realignment of East Line between Avondale Yard and Kensington Station, deletion of North Atlanta busway and addition of North Line, and modification of Proctor Creek Line 10 March 14, 1988 Relocation of Doraville Station 11 August 29, 1990 Extension of the Northeast Line to and within Gwinnett County 12 April 24, 2007 Extended sales tax through June 30, 2047 and added West Line BRT Corridor, I-20 East BRT Corridor, Beltline Rail Corridor and Clifton Corridor rail segment 13 November 5, 2008 Amended I-20 East Corridor from BRT to fixed guideway; added Atlanta Circulation Network; extended fixed guideway segment north along Marietta Blvd; extended the North Line to Windward Parkway; added a fixed guideway segment along the Northern I-285 Corridor in Fulton and DeKalb Counties; extended the Northeast Line to the DeKalb County Line 14 December
    [Show full text]
  • Hollowell/M.L. King Redevelopment Plan and Tax Allocation District
    Hollowell/M.L. King Redevelopment Plan and Tax Allocation District City of Atlanta TAD #8 Prepared by Atlanta Development Authority for City of Atlanta Georgia October 2006 City of Atlanta TAD#8: Hollowell/M.L. King Redevelopment Plan and Tax Allocation District Hollowell/M.L. King Redevelopment Plan & Tax Allocation District Contents NOTE: Headings followed by a (n) denote information required per Georgia Code Title 36, Chapter 44. A. Executive Summary 4 The Vision for Hollowell/M.L. King and Key Objectives of the Hollowell/M.L. King TAD 4 TAD Goals and Objectives 5 Location and Boundaries of Hollowell/M.L. King Tax Allocation District (TAD) 6 Overview of Tax Allocation Districts 12 Legal Basis and Qualifying Conditions for the Hollowell/M.L. King Redevelopment Plan 12 Concept Plan: Activity Nodes 16 Private Redevelopment Program 24 Public Redevelopment/Improvement Projects 25 Financing Potential of the Hollowell/M.L. King TAD 26 Summary Conclusion 27 B. TAD Purpose, Objectives and Boundaries (A) 29 The Vision for Hollowell/M.L. King and Key Objectives of the Hollowell/M.L. King TAD 29 Location and Boundaries of TAD 31 Overview of Tax Allocation Districts 39 C. Key Findings within the Redevelopment Area (B) 40 Legal Basis and Qualifying Conditions for the Hollowell/M.L. King Redevelopment Plan 40 History and Neighborhoods 42 Qualifying Criteria 43 Page 1 City of Atlanta TAD#8: Hollowell/M.L. King Redevelopment Plan and Tax Allocation District Key Findings of Property Conditions within the Hollowell/M.L. King TAD 47 Demographic Findings, Market Conditions and Market Trends 56 D.
    [Show full text]
  • Served Proposed Station(S)
    CURRENT PROPOSED ROUTE NAME JURISDICTION PROPOSED MODIFICATION STATION(S) STATION(S) SERVED SERVED Discontinue Service -N ew proposed Routes 21 and 99 would provide service along Jesse Hill Ave., Coca Cola Pl. and Piedmont Ave. segments. New proposed Route 99 would provide service along the Martin Luther King, Jr. Dr. segment. New proposed Routes 32 and 51 would provide service on Marietta St. between Forsyth St. and Ivan Allen Jr. Blvd. New proposed Route 12 would provide service on the Howell Mill Rd segment between 10th St. and Marietta Chattahoochee Ave.. New proposed Route 37 would provide service on Chattahoochee Ave. between Hills Ave. and Marietta Blvd and Marietta Blvd City of Atlanta, 1 Boulevard/Centennial between Bolton Dr. and Coronet Way. New proposed Routes 37 and 60 would provide service on Coronet Way between Marietta Blvd and Bolton Rd Georgia State Fulton County Olympic Park segments. Service will no longer be provided on Edgewood Ave. between Piedmont Ave. and Marietta St.; Marietta St. between Edgewood Ave. and Forsyth St.; Marietta St. between Ivan Allen, Jr. Blvd and Howell Mill Rd; Howell Mill Rd between Marietta St. and 10th St.; Huff Rd, Ellsworth Industrial Blvd and Marietta Blvd; Chattahoochee Ave. between Ellsworth Industrial Blvd and Hill Ave.; Bolton Pl., Bolton Dr.; Coronet Way between Defoors Ferry Rd and Moores Mill Rd, and Moores Mill Rd between Bolton Rd and Coronet Way. Proposed modification includes Route 2 operate from Inman Park station via Moreland Ave. (currently served by Route 6-Emory) Freedom Parkway and North Avenue, North Avenue City of Atlanta, 2 Ponce De Leon Avenue Ralph McGill Blvd (currently served by Route 16-Noble), continuing via Blvd,and North Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • I-20 East Corridor Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA)
    I-20 East Locally Preferred Alternative Summary Report I-20 East Locally Preferred Alternative Summary Report Contents Tables The Adopted LPA 1 Table 1: Reasons for Selection of LPA 3 Refinements to the Recommended LPA 1 Table 2: Goals and Objectives 8 Proposed LPA Operations 4 Table 3: Tier 1Alternatives 8 Adoption of the LPA 4 Table 4: Tier 1 Screening Results 10 Project Description and Background 6 Table 5: Tier 2 Alternatives 11 FTA Project Development Process 6 Table 6: Cost and Performance Comparison of Tier 2 Alternatives 13 Purpose and Need 7 Table 7: Assumptions 13 Goals and Objectives 8 Table 8: Tier 2 Evaluation Matrix 14 Alternatives Evaluation Framework 8 Table 9: Public Involvement 15 Tier 1 Screening 8 Tier 2 Screening 11 Figures Stakeholder and Public Involvement 15 Moving Forward: Challenges and Opportunities to Implementing the LPA 16 Figure 1: Adopted LPA (HRT3) 1 Figure 2: Map of the Adopted LPA – HRT3 2 Figure 3: LPA Operation in MARTA System 4 Figure 4: System Integration Map 5 Figure 5: Study Area 6 Figure 6: Timeline of Previous Studies 6 Figure 7: FTA Project Development Process 7 Figure 8: The Alternatives Analysis Process 8 Figure 9: Tier 1 Alternatives 9 Figure 10: Transit Technologies Considered 11 Figure 11: Tier 2 Alternatives 12 1 I-20 East Locally Preferred Alternative Summary Report Following a two-tiered Detailed Corridor Analysis (DCA), which evaluated a FIGURE 1: ADOPTED LPA (HRT3) variety of transit alignments and modes, the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Heavy Rail Transit (HRT) Authority (MARTA) I-20 East Transit Initiative has selected and refined a Locally Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Preferred Alternative (LPA).
    [Show full text]
  • Overview Map
    King of Pops yoga at Historic Fourth Ward Skatepark field // L EARN // E NGAGE // V OLUNTEER // D ONATE // OVERVIEW MAP Published October 2016 Overview Map 22 MILES OF TRANSIT, GREEENSPACE & TRAILS The Atlanta BeltLine is a dynamic NORTHSIDE and transformative project. MAP 4 Through the development of a new transit system, multi-use trails, greenspace, and affordable workforce housing along a 22- EASTSIDE mile loop of historic rail lines MAP 5 that encircle the urban core, the Atlanta BeltLine will better connect our neighborhoods, improve our travel and mobility, spur economic development, and elevate the overall quality of life in WESTSIDE MAP 3 the city. Atlanta BeltLine Corridor PATH Trails - existing and proposed SOUTHEAST Completed Atlanta BeltLine Trails MAP 1 Interim Hiking Trails Atlanta BeltLine Trail Alignment Future Connector Trails Trails Under Construction Parks/Greenspace - existing and proposed SOUTHWEST Colleges and Universities MAP 2 Schools Waterways MARTA Rail System Art on the Atlanta BeltLine - Continuing Exhibition Points of Interest Transit Stations (proposed) Atlanta Streetcar Route Streetcar Stop / MARTA Connection Art meets functionality on the Eastside Trail. 2 Photo credit: Christopher T. Martin Map 1 // Southeast INMAN PARK STATION TO I-75/I-85 The Atlanta BeltLine will connect historic homes, lofts, and mixed- use developments through southeast Atlanta. Spur trails will provide easier access to more places, including Grant Park and Zoo Atlanta, while Maynard Jackson High School and the New Schools of Carver— two of approximately 20 public schools within a 1/2 mile of the Atlanta BeltLine—will benefit from additional travel options for students and staff. All documents to determine how the modern streetcar will navigate Hulsey Yard will be submitted to the Federal Transit Administration by the end of 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Emerald Corridor Foundation by the Urban Land Institute’S Center for Leadership May 15, 2017 Mtap Team Table of Contents
    Bankhead MARTA Station mTAP Prepared for the Emerald Corridor Foundation by the Urban Land Institute’s Center for Leadership May 15, 2017 mTAP Team Table of Contents Nicole McGhee Hall, CPSM 1. mTAP Overview .................................3 Principal Nickel Works Consulting, LLC 2. Neighborhood Overview ....................4 Heather Hubble, RA, AIA, LEED AP Assistant Director of Architecture 3. Study Area Overview .........................10 Tunnell-Spangler-Walsh & Associates 4. Previous Redevelopment Plans .........13 Wole Oyenuga CEO Sims Real Estate Group 5. Recommendations ............................15 Janae Sinclair Development Manager Fuqua Development, LP Coleman Wood Communications Professional Jackson Spalding 2 1. mTAP Overview Purpose of mTAP will be catalytic to community redevelop- ment and improve pedestrian connectivity After decades of disinvestment, Atlanta’s within the area. Westside neighborhoods are on the verge of a renaissance. Much of the recent Process focus has been on the neighborhoods in the shadow of the new Mercedes-Benz Research Stadium. Not to be overlooked, the neigh- • Environmental borhoods to the northwest of Vine City and • Transit English Avenue are seeing their own civic • Zoning investment, albeit oat a slower pace. • Vested development • Demographics Less than a mile from the Bankhead • Previous studies MARTA Transit Station three important • neighborhood infrastructure projects are in the planning stages. Site Visits • Pedestrian trends 1. The Proctor Creek Greenway: a 7.5- • State of study area mile multi-use trail and green corridor • Site survey • Neighborhood tours 2. Westside Reservoir Park: A 300-acre park that will include the conversion Stakeholder Interviews of the former Bellwood Quarry into a • MARTA reservoir. • City of Atlanta 3. Atlanta Beltline: The 22-mile multi-use • Atlanta Beltline trail that is transforming intown neigh- • Non-profits borhoods throughout Atlanta.
    [Show full text]
  • Bankhead Marta Station Transit Area Lci Study
    CITY OF ATLANTA January 5, 2006 BBANKHEADANKHEAD MARTAMARTA STATIONSTATION TTRANSITRANSIT AAREAREA LCILCI SSTUDYTUDY Prepared for the CITY OF ATLANTA, Bureau of Planning by HDR, INC. TUNNELL-SPANGLER-WALSH & ASSOCIATES MARKETEK, INC. DOVETAIL CONSULTING Shirley Franklin Mayor, City of Atlanta Atlanta City Council Lisa Borders President of Council Carla Smith Debi Starnes Ivory Lee Young Jr Cleta Winslow Natalyn Mosby Archibong Anne Fauver Howard Shook Clair Muller Felicia A. Moore C.T. Martin Jim Maddox Joyce Sheperd Ceasar C. Mitchell Mary Norwood H. Lamar Willis Department of Planning & Community Develompent James Shelby, Acting Commissioner Bureau of Planning Beverly Dockeray-Ojo, Director City Manager Bryan Kerlin BBANKHEADANKHEAD MARTAMARTA STATIONSTATION TTRANSITRANSIT AAREAREA LCILCI SSTUDYTUDY Table of Contents Section 1: Inventory and Analysis 1.1 Overview 1:1 1.2 Policies and Projects 1:4 1.3 Land Use 1:7 1.4 Transportation 1:15 1.5 Urban Design & Historic Resources 1:28 1.6 Infrastructure & Facilities 1:33 1.7 Markets & Housing 1:37 Section 2: Visioning 2.1 Methodology & Process 2:1 2.2 Community Visioning 2:7 2.3 Goals and Objectives 2:13 Section 3: Recommendations 3.1 Overview 3:1 3.2 General Recommendations 3:3 3.3 Markets & Housing Recommendations 3:4 3.4 Land Use Recommendations 3:7 3.5 Transportation Recommendations 3:10 3.6 Urban Design Recommendations 3:17 3.7 Infrastructure & Facilities Recommendations 3:18 Section 4: Implementation 4.1 Action Program 4:1 4.2 Land Use and Zoning Changes 4:12 4.3 Employment & Population
    [Show full text]