When Andre Dickens was elected mayor in November 2021, I was filled with optimism and hope for the future of Atlanta.
Here was a leader who ran on running an ethical government, building affordable housing and implementing rail transit on the Beltline.
After eight years of the contentious administration of Mayor Kasim Reed and the four years of a mostly absentee Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, the prospect of Mayor Andre Dickens gave me hope for our future in creating a vibrant and equitable city.
Today, I feel betrayed. And I’m not alone.
From the time he was on the Atlanta City Council, Dickens has been one of the strongest advocates for rail on the Eastside Beltline trail from Krog Street to Ponce City Market. Over his three years as mayor, Dickens has repeatedly reaffirmed his commitment to Beltline rail.
But over the past year or so, Dickens’ messages have become mushy.
Finally, on March 13, the Dickens administration unveiled its report, “The Group Project: A Transportation System for All,” at a presentation to the MARTA board.
The bottom line.
If this plan is eventually adopted by MARTA and the Atlanta City Council, it will mean no rail on the Beltline anytime soon. Instead, it could include a hodge-podge of various disconnected transit modes, such as driverless pods and bus rapid transit.
It doesn’t have to be this way.
The number one project on the More MARTA list was the rail on the Eastside Trail. More than 30 percent of the final design and engineering work — an investment of more than $15 million — has already been completed. It is the most shovel-ready rail transit project in the whole Atlanta region — one that could open during Dickens’ second term.
But the Dickens administration is proposing a convoluted, disjointed transit plan that would put the brakes on rail along the Beltline Eastside Trail. Instead, it is proposing Beltline rail on a southside portion of the Beltline where no engineering and design work has been done — a process that takes years.
How long would it take to build that line?
“We won’t know the full answer until we get into the design phase,” said Courtney English, chief policy officer and senior advisor to Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens. “We have got to really dig into it.”
It makes no sense.
Both the City of Atlanta and the region are far behind in building out a robust regional rail transit system to serve our current population of 6.1 million with the estimated addition of 1.8 million residents by 2050.
We think traffic is bad now. Just wait.
In recent years, the fastest-growing part of our region has been the City of Atlanta. That has put a strain on our housing inventory — especially when considering affordability — and our transportation infrastructure.
The Dickens administration has done an admirable job focusing on housing affordability and its goal of preserving or adding 20,000 units by 2020.
At the Atlanta Regional Housing Forum meeting on March 13 — just hours before making the presentation to MARTA — Dickens announced that already 11,000 units have been delivered or are under construction.
“We are generally impatient at the city,” said English, referring to housing affordability. “I think you’ll see us deploy that sense of urgency towards transit.”
Really?
The most immediate rail project — one that already has local funding, one that has strong ridership projections and one that could be implemented in the next three to four years — is the Eastside Trail. Why would the city put that project on the back burner when that corridor already has the development density of housing and jobs to support rail transit?
Until last week, the plan was to extend the Atlanta Streetcar to the Eastside Beltline Trail and then extend the rail line to Ponce City Market.
English said the focus will now be to extend and fix the Streetcar to the Beltline, but not on the Beltline. I agree the Streetcar should be a priority.
As I’ve written before, the Atlanta Streetcar was supposed to be part of a network of light rail lines across the city. It has been unfair to judge the success of the Streetcar based on the current route when it was supposed to be part of a larger system.
Connecting it rail on the Beltline would be an important step in that direction — as would connecting the Streetcar to Atlanta’s Westside, which is part of the City’s new proposal. But again, no engineering or design work has been done on a possible Westside extension.
In an interview in December, Dickens said fixing MARTA and making sure the city would be able to finally implement some of its More MARTA projects was going to be a top priority in 2025 for the Atlanta Committee for Progress.
“We just have got to get going,” Dickens said, referring to MARTA’s lack of progress.
I couldn’t agree more. We need MARTA to be an efficient agency that is intent on expanding transit in Atlanta.
That’s why it’s crucial to build rail on the Beltline’s Eastside Trail, something we can do right away. Let’s build the best system we can — with tracks on a green rail bed, with no overhead lines, with no concrete barrier — adopting best practices and the latest technology from around the world.
And while that is being built, we can start designing and engineering other projects so we can keep expanding our transit network. That includes the four MARTA infill stations, Beltline rail on the Southside trail, the west extension of the streetcar as well as several bus rapid transit projects.
Much of my conversation with English centered on the issue of equity and fairness.
“Everything we do should be with an eye on creating healthy, whole neighborhoods that are safe, clean, connected, have access to green space and to educational opportunities and where people can work their way up the economic ladder so they can live choice-filled lives,” English said.
The Chicago-based Center for Neighborhood Technology said the notion of affordability must include both housing and transportation costs. The two are inextricably linked.
Dickens ran for mayor on a platform of both housing and transit. Now he needs to lead on implementing both as quickly as possible.
Building Beltline rail on the Eastside Trail would improve equity and affordability by giving people more options to get around without a car and providing access to jobs and lifestyle destinations.
Note to readers:
Over the past five decades, I have had the privilege of covering every mayoral administration, from Maynard Jackson to our current mayor.
In the past month we’ve seen Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin receive accolades from the National Center for Civil and Human Rights for a project she shepherded along with acquiring a collection of Martin Luther King Jr.’s papers, the Westside Park, now renamed in her honor, the Beltline and the vision for an Emerald Necklace.
At a recent Trust for Public Land event on the Beltline and the Emerald Necklace, Franklin said: “My advice is to go for the big audacious idea.” She described the Beltline as “a big, complicated project” that paid off. “Atlanta does well with big initiatives,” she said. “We should corral around the big opportunities we have.”
Yes, Mayor Dickens, making Atlanta the best place to raise a child is a laudable goal and vision. But developing a city not dependent on cars and building out quality rail transit as quickly as possible is crucial to that goal.
Maria, I love you, but you’re flat out wrong about this one. The bottom line is that there are more drawbacks to the Streetcar Extension East than there are benefits.
Experts have consistently found the transit loop to be a problematic endeavor, going back to Catherine Ross’ 2005 Transit Feasibility White Paper. But Beltline rail became a symbol among many good people for the city’s commitment for transit, so there was no room to evaluate it on its actual merits. Report after report found serious problems with Beltline rail only for the deus ex machina of public comment and political pressure to tilt the conclusions.
Then, a winding path took us to a situation where the first segment (and currently only funded one) makes the least sense of all: It primarily would serve wealthy eastside neighborhoods while crowding out any possibility to relieve the already dangerous congestion of bikes, scooters, pedestrians, dogs, children, etc. on the popular Eastside Trail. (BR proponents will claim that there’s enough money to complete other segments, but that’s just not the case: In the current environment, More MARTA will be lucky to come up with enough money to complete its Tier 1 priorities — let alone the $3 billion or so it would take to complete the loop.) I’m skeptical of the cost-benefit for streetcars in today’s funding environment, but at least there are decent arguments for the viability and equity of the Streetcar Extension West and the South Beltline segment.
BR opponents act as if this is a choice for something else over transit. That allows them to paint those who aren’t dogmatic about a single project as “anti-transit.” It’s the definition of a special interest trumping the public interest.
Think about it though: We’re talking about More MARTA money that MUST go tot the most viable, most needed, most equitable projects — many of which will do the Beltline and the dream of a human-scaled city more good by bringing people TO the Beltline. This includes the infill stations and the Hollowell-North BRT, which would have no chance for funding if MARTA moved ahead with the SCE.
You’re right that we must go forward. But moving forward always requires accepting reality. In Minneapolis, for 25 years, advocates wanted to build a streetcar alongside the Midtown Greenway, a project with similarities to the Beltline. It was a more viable (and less ambitious) concept than the Beltline loop in that it would have traveled along an established commuter route and there was a more generous right of way. But last year — facing up to the fact that “the idea is dead” — the Midtown Greenway Coalition declared “let’s move on” and urged advocates to begin work on a fresh vision. https://midtowngreenway.org/projects-and-programs/transit-advocacy/midtown-greenway-street-car/
That’s what needs to happen on the Eastside Trail, and for transit in Atlanta generally. We need to think about what truly enhances the most popular stretch of the Beltline and how to extend that as other portions become more popular. And we need to prioritize transit that actually works for people — and to stop banging our heads against the wall for a symbol rather than a viable transit solution.
Should have known from the tone of your reply that your name would be linked to the BAT grift
“Tone”, “grift”?
Ad hominem, much?
“BR proponents will claim that there’s enough money to complete other segments, but that’s just not the case”
Come on, that’s a defeatist attitude that will result in nothing ever happening. We have passed TSPLOST funding before. More MARTA. Bonds. The current federal austerity won’t last forever. When there is room for success, funding will follow. We have an opportunity to start now, and we will figure out how to make the rest happen. But if we fail to act now, it will JUST get more expensive because of disingenuous arguments like this.
Let’s get the BAT baloney out of the way and make this happen.
“Experts have consistently found the transit loop to be a problematic endeavor, going back to Catherine Ross’ 2005 Transit Feasibility White Paper. ”
From the white paper:
The BeltLine proposal as a concept envisions a circumferential transit service
around the central city core. Based on development potential and market
feasibility, it seems likely that the eastern and perhaps southeastern portion of
this belt would provide the best potential for transit ridership. The other
segments will not likely generate as significant a level of trips.
“only for the deus ex machina of public comment and political pressure to tilt the conclusions”
Extremely rich coming from a person associated with an organization astroturfing for Portman Holdings and a bunch of wealthy business owners. Heaven forbid the uppity “public” get a say.
Ms. Saporta writes that she feels betrayed. Interesting, it is probably the same sense of betrayal that the City of Atlanta voters felt when MARTA arbitrarily reduced the More MARTA project list from 70 items to 17. The focus on the Streetcar East extension was never about transit equity and fairness but just an attempt to appease the “rail at any cost” proponents. Mayor Dickens has brought some rational analysis to transit spending. Good on him.
How’s that? His plan is to move beltline south and the murphy infill station forward first, that’s much more expensive than streetcar east
“The focus on the Streetcar East extension was never about transit equity and fairness but just an attempt to appease the “rail at any cost” proponents. Mayor Dickens has brought some rational analysis to transit spending.”
Spot on! 1 of the 39 comments (to date) include any referenced to the money that would be spent on this project. the last estimate I saw was $250m to build. We know that number is vastly understated now – and no reference to the annual investment and expense to keep this free ride (pun intended) going. (And we are not evening talking about Marta’s general ridership decline and spotty service, yet.) At best, light rail on the trail is a tourist gimmick. If rail actually travelled TO (not “near”) healthcare, schools or high density office locations, this would be a different discussion – and maybe one worth having.
Also, it would be refreshing for the “vision” boards of the rail to be more realistic – there is zero chance that the rail would include nicely manicured grass buffers and rail beds. Please replace with more accurate concreate barriers and concrete rail beds.
It’s frustrating to see your NIMBY group try to co-opt language like “wealthy eastside neighborhoods” to make yourselves sound benevolent. At the end of the day, you want the Eastside Beltline to remain an exclusive real estate asset for you at the expense of everyone else in the city. This new “plan” from the Mayor’s office is just a distraction from the real desire of killing transit expansion and ensuring that the wealth divide remains intact. I would respect your group more if you were upfront about your real intentions.
Well said, Ken. We already have more motorized traffic than the Beltline can handle. Heavy electric bicycles will mow you down if you don’t jump out of the way. Any extra path should be devoted to improving safety.
I agree with Ms. Saporta’s argument and find the ‘transit only serves the wealthy’ argument to be detached from reality. In fact, it’s the waiters and waitresses, cooks and bartenders, baristas, custodians, security officers, and other working Atlantans who rely on public transit to get to their jobs, often to serve the advantaged.
A single cherry-picked example from Minnesota is not persuasive. Beyond that, the traffic congestion is already so bad in the Ponce City Market and Midtown Plaza area that it’s approaching a dangerous level.
This is how the “number one priority” transit project is being treated: Mayor Dickens’ strategy is to punt on first down, second down, and third down. It appears his plan is ultimately to run out the clock.
It is unfortunate that those who say they are keen on sustainability in transportation continue to insist that our mode choices are limited to a strict binary choice of either cars or transit. Thanks to the micromobility revolution that hit not long before COVID, we now have a third option that includes e-bikes, scooters, and other personal mobility devices— including powered wheelchairs and seated scooters for those with mobility impairments.
The benefits of this third option should be obvious. Paris, which already has one of the most extensive transit networks in the world, is further setting itself apart by investing in bike infrastructure on a massive scale. As a result, people are foregoing use of the Metro for short trips in favor of bike rides on paths and streets where cars are few to nonexistent. Dutch cities have long been shifting their focus from short-haul transit to bike facilities that are so far beyond what we have in Atlanta that most people reading this would probably go into shock if they experienced them.
With the demise of the Beltline streetcar, we now have the opportunity to finally embrace this third leg of the mobility triad with a parallel path to separate those on wheels from those on foot (aka the “Wheels & Heels” concept). This improvement in capacity, safety, and efficiency will be the beginning of a true micromobility network that would branch out from the hub formed by the Beltline, effectively realizing the vision recently put forward by the Trust for Public Land to spread the benefits of the Beltline throughout the city and surrounding region.
I outlined just such a plan for building a parallel path on this very site in 2019. I urge the author of this column to re-read it and let go of this rail scheme from the previous century.
Let’s go forward, not cling to the past.
– “This rail scheme of the previous century” — rail is being used effectively and efficiently today (in the 21st century) in Paris and around the world, including in the United States.
– Not all people can ride bikes; that includes people with disabilities as well as the elderly.
As I stated, micromobility infrastructure serves those of all abilities, not just those on bikes.
You could save yourself a lot of time by just saying you want the Beltline to remain a park. No need to beat around the bush so much!
Paris has reclaimed vehicle lanes to create the micomobility lanes, not replaced a planned transit line with a multiuse trail. Are you in favor of reducing vehicles lanes and creating protected micromobility lanes to increase a safe network of wheels and heels for people to make short tirps?
Yes, of course.
@ Kevin Posey What a great comment! Where’s the “Love” Button!
You don’t see Paris closing their metro any time soon— in fact they made huge capital improvements in advance of the Olympics.
Build a second path, meant for bikes, and you build the infrastructure for rail later. You can lay down rubber tracks where the rails will go, and meanwhile prevent accidents while allowing cyclists to become commuters
I agree 100% with what you’re saying. Great article that lays out the issue clearly. Also the Mayor’s new plan still shows the eastside beltline extension as part of phase II, so if we’re still planning to do it, just do it now when the plans are ready and the money is lined up. No need to wait, we’ve all waited long enough for transit progress.
wtf is “BAT”?
Nothing wrong with redirecting funding to south and west side neighborhoods. These areas have been neglected and underfunded for over 50 years due to demographics.
The Beltline rail proponents refuse to recognize the lack of economic sustainability once it’s built. Who will pay for annual operating deficits in the tens of millions of dollars? Go find a private entity to build and operate BRT. Betcha can’t. Would be great if yall can prove me wrong.
Their idea is to farm out the so-called transit operations (a fleet of autonomous pods) to a speculative private company that doesn’t have any operational projects of this scale anywhere in the world.
I imagine their expectation is that MARTA money would subsidize the operating costs, only with no citizen or government oversight. It’s a lose-lose where taxpayers still get stuck holding the bag but have nothing to show for it when the company folds.
The answer is simple: build a bike/scooter/wheeled lane parallel to the existing lane. This will keep pedestrians safe, and allow riders to move safely and at faster speeds if/as desired. The current Beltline usage is a crazy and dangerous mix of pedestrians and bikes and scooters and more.
You say rail will be faster? Then obviously it will need to be fenced for safety — and the rail line will become a divider. This will greatly affect the usage and economics of the Beltline. No one speaks of this, but building a wall down the Beltline will be a disaster.
E-bikes (and other EV devices like scooters) really change the game. They allow people to get from their door, to a thoroughfare like the Beltline, then eventually to their final destination. This is exactly why HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of people in Europe use them to get around. And why Atlanta has been subsidizing purchases of e-bikes.
Building the “wheeled lane” is faster and cheaper than rail, and can always be replaced by rail in the future if need be.
The endless posturing and debate is absurd. Build a bike lane.
“You say rail will be faster? Then obviously it will need to be fenced for safety”
Do we fence sidewalks along roads for safety?
“Building the “wheeled lane” is faster and cheaper than rail, and can always be replaced by rail in the future if need be.”
That’s already been done, see the existing beltline trail. Rail is the next step.
We don’t allow bikes on sidewalks, as it is too dangerous for pedestrians. But somehow it’s no problem on the existing Beltline?!?
My comment about the wall/fence comes from the proponents of the rail, who have stated that there will be “crossing points” (or words to that effect) so that people can *cross* the rail at designated points.
If you think that the current mix of walkers, bikes, scooters, and more is OK then you need to get out on the Beltline. Heck, even the rendering showing the light rail shows the unsafe mix.
By the way, I feel sorry for the name you were presumably born with. Unless, of course, you are simply hiding yourself.
We have multiple trails all around the metro with combined pedestrian and bike usage. You may want to open your eyes and look around, a lot has changed since 1826 John.
Yes, while bikes are banned from our sidewalks, it is true that bikes and pedestrians share various trails. The problems come as the foot and wheeled traffic increase to a point where it isn’t safe and doesn’t work well. The Beltline is enjoying heavy use– which is great, but the pedestrian/bike mix is way out of control.
Building a parallel lane for wheeled users will make things much better for walkers and riders alike. The need is obvious, and it can be built in short order. This will provide immediate benefit, with much less expense, quicker implementation , and reduced risk.
Other major world-class cities have increasingly embraced bikes, especially given the effectiveness and efficiency of e-bikes. I think Atlanta’s effort to subsidize e-bike purchases is a step in the right direction. Improving bike lanes, and bike parking, would be a big help.
Bikes can take you door-to-door. With sufficient density, light rail can be a big help — but most users will still have to (1) get from point A to the rail, and then (2) get from the rail to point B. With an e-bike, you go from A to B on the e-bike. That’s why HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of people in Europe rely on bikes.
The transit question should not be limited to cars and rail.
Last summer, I cycled into Amsterdam and was most impressed with their underground bike garage that holds some 10,000 bikes. Their *decision* to promote bikes results in a way of life that makes for efficient transit, less pollution, less traffic and congestion, healthier lifestyle, and a better way of life. Our *decision* to focus on cars is simply a decision. Not a good one (IMO), but the one that has been promoted for decades.
I contend that e-bikes are a game-changer. How about we try a simple bike lane with e-bikes first. Pretty quick, pretty cheap, and can always be discarded for rail if it turns out no one likes the bike lane. But I bet a bike lane will be very popular.
What you have perhaps failed to consider is the way that some of the walking and cycling congestion on the beltline path would be alleviated by those users opting to ride the light rail if it were built. Having a reliable and comfortable ride available allows more transportation freedom. You wouldn’t be choosing between prioritizing cycling and prioritizing transit; you’d be getting benefits to both! Also consider the benefit to businesses along the beltline to have a weather-resistant means of mobility for their clientele. Some people are happy to ride their bike in the rain while many others would much prefer to board a dry tram.
Thank you for this Maria. Every point you made is spot on. Unfortunately our current mayor isn’t listening and I’ve given up hope that he will see the light. Sure hope we get some strong candidates in the upcoming mayor’s race – someone with a spine who doesn’t bow to a small group of rich benefactors would be welcome.
Totally agree with your analysis, Maria. Hard to imagine a corridor more suited for the streetcar than the Eastside trail – density, mixed use, advanced design, available ROW – to say nothing of the long-standing commitment to actually doing it. The very earliest comparative modeling of new transit corridors in the early 2000s forecast that the Eastside corridor would be the most productive of any proposed new line – meaning it would bring in the most new riders to the transit system – and that was before we realized the astonishing changes that have happened there. The comments about the danger of transit operating near the pedestrian path are nonsense – many examples of safe and convenient urban multimodal operations exist.
Once again – Atlanta starts something big – and then stops. Remember, we have yet to have even built the full of the ORIGINAL referendum MARTA system. Terrible decision – we are unlikely to see new transit for many years.
100% agree, Maria. It’s frustrating that “equity” is the reason so often given when nothing could be less equitable to ALL Atlantans than delaying any beltline rail project by at least 5 years. In 5 years, traffic will be worse, income and wealth inequality will presumably be worse, and all the folks who have to commute to service jobs on the eastside trail will be worse off.
Atlantans who rely on transit want to visit the eastside trail just as much as anyone else. The wealthy folks who live there want to keep it exclusively for them.
And another thing: Ken claimed in the first comment that adding rail would not help the eastside trail congestion. So what does he want to do? He wants to build another lane! How has that worked on I-75, Ken? How has it worked on I-85? How has it worked on every highway in the country? Giving people alternatives to walking and biking is the only way to reduce the number of walkers and bikers.
Lastly, I’ve yet to hear a single valid argument about how folks with mobility issues are supposed to ride bikes and scooters. How is someone going to sit in a stupid pod with a wheelchair? Rail checks every box for equity, mobility, and number of people it can transport. That’s why it works all over the world including in Charlotte! Wake up, people. You’d think with the number of BAT folks I’ve debated that I would’ve heard a good argument by now, but alas. I still hold out hope that they can come up with something.
They don’t have any cogent arguments because it was never actually about feasible alternatives, it was just about protecting their property values. And they got what they wanted at the expense of the rest of the city.
Watch – see how hard BAT advocates for anything now that the rail can has been kicked down the road. My bet is they get real quiet.
I think you totally miss the point about “adding another lane”. This is not the case of adding a 5th lane to an interstate, which is clearly the wrong solution. The second lane on the Beltline serves to separate walkers from wheeled users. This makes things safe for both classes of users (on foot, and wheeled).
The current mix of LOTS of bikes mixed with LOTS of walkers is kinda crazy.
Thanks for telling it like it is. Completely agree with this. I voted for him to be the transit mayor. I feel betrayed.
The mayor made the right decision. The streetcar proposal is a hugely expensive project that would do nothing to alleviate traffic congestion but that would degrade the Beltline itself. That’s an outcome to avoid at any cost.
The streetcar project is a bargain compared with costs of implementing transit from scratch elsewhere. Estimated total costs were $230M. For comparison the clifton corridor project (which is now just another bus line) is estimated to be $900M (and would be $2B+ as light rail)
There’s an obvious point missing from these conversations that suggests to me that few commentators currently commute by walking or biking: the days when the commuter cannot walk/bike! The anti-rail folks are obsessed with micro mobility, but whether it’s a disabled person on a motorized wheelchair or an able-bodied person in a pod, rain alone will make that a very unpleasant experience. Except in rare instances, we commuters still gotta commute in the rain…
For example, I live in O4W and bike to my government job downtown. On days of bad weather (cold, rain, etc) I cannot bike. There are no covered bike racks anywhere near my office. It rains quite a bit down here. Why should those of us without cars not be able to get around except using uber/lyft or carpooling? In our own small way, we help reduce congestion by doing everything we can not to drive. Light rail would support commuters and tourists alike; it would relieve some pressure on the already-busy east side trail; and it would show the city’s determination to building transit with dedicated ROW.
Next, it would be great if the anti-rail folks helped advocate a proper mixed mobility grid in the city. We have a pretty sad disconnected bundle of protected bike lanes…plans for complete streets / shared streets remain behind and still don’t amount to substantial North/South/East/West corridors that would truly enable micro mobility.
Lastly, what’s with prioritizing light rail that goes TO the beltline? Sounds like a recipe for more crowding on the trail itself, which seems to be one of the main arguments of the anti-rail folks. Eastside rail would at least have dedicated ROW from ponce to Krog. That would be an important proof of concept to demonstrate that light rail is especially effective when not stuck in mixed road traffic.
Thank you for this comment!
Let’s be clear: the micro mobility argument is a straw man argument — meant to distort and distract. It’s not ever been in good faith. The most laughable line of argument may be that we should abandon rail’s old technology (ie that of the 20th century) in favor of bicycles and scooters, both of which were invented in the 19th century.
Meanwhile, the ‘divert money’ class-warfare argument from the Mayor’s office is also a distraction.
Here’s the wonderful truth: Rail serves the working class, full stop. But we need to act now! The PCM and Midtown Plaza area is a transit desert; the issue is close to becoming an emergency. Being ‘too good for Marta’ is its own fallacy, whereby millionaires or hundred thousand-aires think they’re billionaires.
Let’s come together and make this happen! Our city’s workers deserve better transit options today—not tomorrow or next year.
Rail on the Beltline starting with the Eastside Trail as it currently being presented has a long list of question marks –Absolutely NO believable facts on how this might drive down traffic congestion – absolutely NO believable Data on Ridership – — Cost: we are a small tax base city with no support from the state – we are a total ” Blue City” so the Trump folks are not going to lift a finger to aid this project – it’s pretty much 100% your tax dollars – cash better spent on actually connecting folks to Marta’s existing rail & developing the ” Express Bus” services planned by Marta.
– This scarcity mindset is what is keeping Atlanta from progressing as it should, namely for the working class
– We instead have an almost unlimited budget for sports arenas, for entertainment sites, and for police and police training complexes
– There have been numerous studies on ridership and traffic congestion, not only regarding the proposed Beltline rail but also for rail generally, here and globally
I’ve spent my entire career advising major transit agencies across the country on the financial and strategic development of new transit and TOD assets. It is long past time for advocates and politicians to yield to the reality that Beltline rail is a solution looking for a problem. Ridership – the only possible justification for today’s eye-watering rail/streetcar/trolley costs – is simply not there along this corridor. It is an inherently flawed concept and would be a disastrous misapplication of our very limited share of the very limited pool of transit funding this country, state, region, and city generates.
I concede that Atlanta’s vision- and transit-starved citizens have previously endorsed the Beltline concept with their votes (and property owners with their TAD support), but I contend that there has been no other option. The Beltline has has sucked the oxygen out of the transit conversation for 20 years now. What a tragedy. It is Beltline Rail Now, Maria, and all of these otherwise savvy and well-meaning champions of Beltline rail that are stuck looking backward (to legacy votes, unsubstantiated visions of equity, etc.). The deflection and name-calling that follows scrutiny of the question of ridership is the tell.
If you are prepared to answer “yes” to the question “Shall we sacrifice every known principle of transit success in pursuit of the near-term optics of successful follow-through?”, then you are an obstacle to long-term prosperity in this city. If you don’t believe that the abject failure of the downtown streetcar should inform your view of the wisdom of Beltline rail, then you do not understand how profoundly that project has paralyzed progress and armed transit opponents. Stop clinging to the misguided notion that to be a transit champion in Atlanta you need to support Beltline rail. Support good transit, oppose bad transit. Use More MARTA funds to solve real problems.
All of the following can be true at the same time: you love this City, you are inspired by Ryan Gravel, you would open your wallet for abundant transit, and you don’t want a single transit dollar spent inside the Beltline corridor.
As a candidate for Mayor of Atlanta, I respect the ambitions of previous administrations, but I believe Atlanta cannot afford to delay bold, connected, and shovel-ready solutions—especially when they’re already in motion. The Eastside Beltline rail was promised, funded, and designed. It remains the most transit-ready project in our city—and walking away from it not only undercuts public trust, it delays the urgent progress Atlantans deserve. My campaign is grounded in action, not aspiration. That’s why I am committed to building Homes First Atlanta, launching a $50M community budgeting initiative, and accelerating zero-fare MARTA expansion that serves the working families who rely on reliable transit to reach jobs, schools, and opportunity. I believe transit should unite—not fragment—our city. And in my administration, we won’t trade in big promises for small pilot projects. We will build what we said we’d build. The Beltline rail must move forward—because equity, connectivity, and affordability depend on it.