Will a light rail line proposed for Cobb Parkway alleviate traffic congestion? How much will light rail really cost? If Cobb Parkway light rail "has merit," why are there so many potential problems, as noted in my prior guest column ("Connectivity key for funding Cobb light rail," June 10 MDJ)?

A recent MDJ editorial cited some of the same problems, and declared the current light rail proposal to be dead on arrival. I'll just say that unless the proposal is completely reconceptualized, the cost will be zero, because in its current form, it will not qualify for funding, and therefore it cannot get built.

Meanwhile, a reconceptualized plan to build 14 miles of "mall-to-mall light rail,"? plus additional unknown miles to build connecting rail to MARTA, along a so-far unidentified route, plus some type of "circulator" in order to achieve the ridership that the proposal is based on,?plus updated studies to generate non-obsolete, accurate data, is likely to cost at least $5 billion to $7 billion or more. That price tag may be a problem, too.

Using correct formulas, and without the circulators and the MARTA connection, the current proposal would be unlikely to achieve even a third of its proposed ridership. But, if this concept can somehow get funded and built, will it help reduce existing traffic congestion? No. In fact, the current proposal is likely to make traffic flow worse on Cobb Parkway, unless expensive changes are made, adding even more billions to the cost. And it won't improve traffic flow on I-75 either.

Transportation professionals tell us that suburban transit can effectively accomplish one of two possible purposes, but not both. Suburban transit can be designed to provide a time-effective alternative for suburban commuters, or it can be designed to promote the redevelopment of the transit corridor. It cannot effectively do both.

So, we don't currently have a viable, affordable plan, and even if we build it, it won't help alleviate existing traffic congestion. What is the part that has merit?

First, just because the proposal isn't what I recommend, does not mean it is without merit. The primary objective of the Cobb Parkway light rail proposal is to redevelop Cobb Parkway. The station locations will define where redevelopment occurs. A stated objective is to also redevelop Franklin Road. In order for this proposal to help redevelop Franklin Road, the route will have to travel on Franklin Road and a couple of transit stations will have to be added on Franklin Road.

Redevelopment is not my objective, but it is not unreasonable to have that objective. But, it is important to understand that the current "Cobb mall-to-mall" proposal will not provide a time-effective alternative for commuters to get from north Cobb or Marietta to downtown Atlanta or Perimeter Center. It will not alleviate existing traffic congestion.

One challenge for any transit system is that even if you can get it up and running, it is expensive to operate and maintain. It requires some sort of ongoing subsidy. Fulton and DeKalb pay an additional penny tax to support MARTA. Clayton County just shut down its transit system because it could not afford to keep it running.

But the Cobb Parkway transit proposal has a unique potential built-in self-funding mechanism. If this proposal is successful - and that is a huge "if" - then high-density mixed-use redevelopment would occur around all of the transit stations. An existing property might pay taxes based on a $1 million valuation. If that property were to be redeveloped so that it had a $100 million valuation, the redeveloped property might generate 100 times more tax revenues. The property owner will have received the benefit of redeveloping the property and is presumably making a much larger profit off the property as a result of the redevelopment. The property owner would pay the increased taxes as a result and as a byproduct of the transit. That would not be an increase in anybody's tax rate. It would be increased taxes on a property because the valuation of the redeveloped property was higher. That's the theory. I am not convinced that reality will match the theory.

Anyway, as I said in the previous article, if the increased taxes on the redeveloped properties were dedicated to paying for the operation and maintenance of the light rail, this self-funding mechanism could eliminate the need to extract new taxes from other taxpayers to subsidize the transit. That is likely the real reason why some commissioners are so excited about this concept.

I would prefer to pursue a more affordable transit concept that provides a time-effective alternative for regional commuters - but that is a subject for a future article.



Ron Sifen of Vinings is former president of the Vinings Homeowners Association and former president of the Cobb Civic Coalition.