Transportation challenges

Sea change at Georgia DOT

With a shrinking budget and work force, the Georgia Department of Transportation battles an image problem over past projects, political appointments and minority contracting. But it’s fighting to adapt. Engineers are putting out the message that GDOT is trying to be more nimble when addressing traffic problems. We provide excerpts from a recent editorial board meeting with department leaders. Also, a conservative transportation expert details metro problems with the T-SPLOST defeat.

Commenting is open below Glen Bottoms’ column.

By Tom Sabulis

Like many businesses in recent years, the Georgia Department of Transportation has had to reduce its work force. “We’re down from some 5,700 to 5,800 employees a couple years ago to about 4,400 today,” Commissioner Keith Golden says. The 22 percent cut leaves the GDOT having to reinvent itself just to deliver basic services, from highway and transportation planning to mowing the grass. Golden, chief engineer Gerald Ross and engineering division director Russell McMurry recently talked about the challenges their department faces. Some topics they touched on (speaker’s name in parenthesis):

Communication with public: (Golden) “I think the most important thing for us as we move forward is trying to tell the public what we are doing, where we’re trying to make changes, and what that level of service is going to look like as we go to reduced funds. Our federal program is somewhat flat and our state motor fuel is somewhat flat in terms of our collection and revenue.

Overcoming perceptions: (Golden) “One of the more frustrating [things is that] GDOT does not pick the projects for the majority of the state. In metro Atlanta, it’s the Atlanta Regional Commission that does the planning. We have a seat at the table but, at the end of the day, the regional commission picks the projects. We certainly have influence to help shape those. But, generally speaking, when you talk about metro Atlanta, we’re one piece of the planning puzzle. And yet many times the public’s perceptions is that GDOT is picking these projects.

Faster fixes: (Ross) “We started something called Quick Congestion Projects around metro Atlanta. We took a little pot of money and went out and found areas [where] we could do quick [fixes], like adding lanes to ramps. I think that was a big sea change for the department, looking at how to get things done quickly, effectively and try to keep costs down. I live in Henry County and we have one right now on Jonesboro Road. Most people probably wouldn’t realize what we’re doing, but we just took the shoulder out, added a right turn lane and we’re going to reduce congestion by over 80 percent. It probably didn’t cost us $250,000. It would be nice for people to know that we’re at least trying to look at that.”

Engineering innovation: (McMurry) We’re engineers, we try to fix things. Five years ago, we would [have tried to] redesign that [Jonesboro Road] interchange,” instead of doing the small quick fix. “We look at things now a lot more as innovation, because we have to do our best with less. ”

Opening the Georgia 400 shoulder — “flex lane” — to traffic during rush hour: (Golden) “That drew a lot of attention, taking advantage of that asset during the time you need it. That’s probably one of the things you’re going to see us continuously have to do with the amount of funding and revenue that are coming our way.”

Diverging diamond interchanges: (McMurry) There’s so many more opportunities along those lines, to use innovative things that are relatively cost-effective. You’re not building these mega-projects any more. That’s really where we’re headed as a department now; every state is doing the same. Innovation is really the key going forward to improve mobility.

Down the road: (Golden) “Our challenge is going to be making sure we’re taking care of our core functions. We’ve got to mow the grass, pick up tires, keep rest areas and welcome centers clean. We’ve got look at things that make sense to contract [out]. We just contracted out our I-95 maintenance. We’re looking at a reduced work force, so what do you do? What a lot of people don’t realize is, we don’t have a trash pickup crew. We don’t have a ditch-cleaning crew. We don’t have a grass-mowing crew; they’re all the same people. And as those numbers contract, something’s got to give. The trash goes a little longer before it gets picked up, the grass grows a little bit longer before it gets cut.”

By Glen Bottoms

As conservatives, we believe in low taxes, limited government, friendly business environments and policies that foster economic development. But unlike many conservatives, we believe in public transportation, especially rail transit.

We think conservatives have ample reasons to support transit, from economic prosperity, to national security concerns (transit reduces reliance on foreign oil over the long term), to securing mobility that sparks economic development and attracts investment to regions like Atlanta.

Last month, Atlanta turned down an historic opportunity to begin to escape from the maw of deadening, job-killing congestion. It was apparently too much to ask the majority of Atlantans to set aside distrust of politicians and Georgia DOT to spend taxpayer monies wisely (not that they wanted to spend it in the first place). With the referendum, they had the opportunity to send a message. They also may have peeked at the price tags of many projects and concluded they may be a tad overpriced. If so, they were right.

We sympathize with the dilemma the Atlanta region faces. Massive government spending on highways while providing minimal support for public transportation has produced a predictable maelstrom of congestion. The future of Atlanta looks grim.

Perhaps the solution is to look at the Atlanta region for what it really is, a fractionalized electorate with disparate attitudes, goals and aspirations. The outer tier of counties apparently want no part of downtown Atlanta and would prefer to isolate themselves fiscally and, apparently, transportation-wise. To their credit, the inner suburbs and urban core of Atlanta are seeking solutions that would bolster the attractiveness of urban living and capitalize on trends that show a significant surge back to the central city.

However, each depends on the other. One part of the region cannot unilaterally pursue a separate strategy simply because they currently don’t have the resources to do so. Failing any attempt to reform the current system and establish viable revenue streams to fund transit and highways, should we allow these separate counties and localities to pursue their own solutions? This may be the practical solution — one our conservative philosophy would embrace — but from a regional standpoint, this would need some clarifying measures to retain a regional focus. After all, this is a region with all the synergistic and symbiotic relationships that go along with it.

The real issue here is reform of governance. Antiquated governmental structures are major impediments to progress. The challenge is to provide the ability of the state to embrace and absorb change, to empower and move the region toward a truly balanced transportation system. Unfortunately, I see no hint of that happening. That said, we would recommend smaller initiatives at lower jurisdictional levels. In our minds, problems should always be addressed at the most local level possible. In the Atlanta context, a coordinating council could be formed, comprised of key political and civic leaders from across the region, which would recommend nonbinding options to localities. The advisory council would encourage outcomes compatible with regional focus and provide input to funding agencies (Georgia DOT, Atlanta Regional Commission, etc.) regarding the efficacy of projects pursued by localities. This would require some innovative thinking (backed by political muscle) to have any chance of succeeding.

Thomas Jefferson certainly had it right when he said, “Institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.”

Take heed of these words. Your future well being surely depends on it.

Glen Bottoms is executive director of the American Conservative Center for Public Transportation in Arlington, Va.

22 comments Add your comment

Chip

August 27th, 2012
8:45 pm

Ah, excuse me, Mr. Bottoms… not only did we (the taxpayers) have an opportunity to send a message, as you state… we DID SEND A MESSAGE!

Duh!

jj

August 27th, 2012
9:54 pm

The Atlanta Regional Commission is a farce. Eliminate it now.. Let the DOT strategic engineers and private sector planners sit down a fix it.

And please abolish the SRTA. We don’t need HOT (lexus) lanes or the GA 400 toll, which should have never been extended by the SRTA.

Bernie

August 27th, 2012
10:08 pm

Enter your comments here

Bernie

August 27th, 2012
10:16 pm

Tom, next time try a using something different from the term “Golden”. It exacts memories of Ann Romney’s reference to Mitt. An ooky feeling it provides to the readers. Now that we have heard from the conservative side on this issue over and over here. Why not let us here from the other side. Like Rep.Vincent Fort and/or John Evans. They both were responsible for a higher turn out of African Americans
voting NO to the T-Splost. The many African-Americans have a voice and a interest in the transportation needs as well. We pay a lot into it and get the least access to services and road expansion, many will tell you that, if anyone is interested. We would appreciate the AJC editorial board of NOT providing the usual suspects of current and former Atlanta officials to convey our concerns or interest.

SAWB

August 28th, 2012
12:01 am

I think we heard from Vinnie (The Tax Man) Fort he wants more transit and lower taxes. Now, I am not sure in what fantasy world that is actually possible, but I think Vinnie is too smitten with his vision of a liberal nirvana to focus on some basic accounting rules. Funny, that seems to remind me of someone else, but who could it be?

Road Scholar

August 28th, 2012
8:49 am

jj: ARC is a requirement of Federal Law! The recent transportation bill gives the Metro Planning Org more authority than in the past; ARC only controlled 2-3 funding areas while GDOT controlled a lot more funds and programs. Now it has shifted. Better communication and trust is needed.

SAWB: “..Fort he wants more transit and lower taxes..”

Sounds like trickle down, doesn’t it? Fort will never be satisfied…with anything!

Why doesn’t GDOT do a series of charts showing the gas tax revenue as it has existed, and then show it in respect to the effects of inflation. What has been the affect over time? Include average construction costs so we can see the erosion of buying power from the present, unadjusted for inflation state gas tax.

Why doesn’t GDOT examine and propose the shift of Federal gas tax dollars directly to the states. Interstate, defense highways, interstate commerce and research and development would be the only expenditures for a reduced, reallocated federal gas tax.

GDOT has a traffic signal improvement program that examines operations and updates signals and their interconnection. Where are the before and after reports demonstrating the changes in congestion, time savings, and improved operating costs? One was done for P’tree in Buckhead after the first phase of the P’tree improvements quantifying time and costs savings. What corridors have been improved, results and what future corridors will be improved with just adjusting signals and their hardware? At 6am in Buckhead, I still get stopped at intersections with a red light when NO traffic is using the side street….why? The light behind Phipps at the parking deck entrance is the poster child! A gate is across the parking deck, but yet the light changes with no traffic! How about flashing it when no/low traffic is using it?

Finally the state house needs to positively affect transit and the needed funding. Anything else right now will do nothing to help develop transit in the metro area.

BHG

August 28th, 2012
8:54 am

Want a “quick fix” that doesn’t require pouring an ounce of concrete? How about synchronizing some traffic lights? It sometimes takes me up to 30 minutes to drive the 3 miles along GA-120 from my house to my office, because every light has huge back-ups. Reprogramming the lights to aid traffic flow rather than impede it would have a huge, immediate impact, and would be considerably less expensive that all these make-a-lane projects.

I’ve considered biking it, but there are some sections of the route that have no sidewalks, and I’m not nearly suicidal enough to take a bicycle on that road.

CPJ

August 28th, 2012
9:45 am

I actaully agree with Glen Bottoms’ assessment. The TSPLOST was a bad idea because the decision to solve the regions transportation issue SHOULD lie with the leaders we elected to solve these problems. This starts with the governor, legistature and down to the local level. Instead, our state leaders punted the decision to the electorate who isn’t as well informed voted NO. Understandable. My point being we should expect our political leader to LEAD on these critical issues and make tough decisions. Passing the decision making buck to the voters on the TSPLOST was spineless.

Chris Sanchez

August 28th, 2012
10:16 am

With increasing pressure on their budgets, our friends from GDOT FINALLY see the importance of trying some different approaches to managing their responsibilities. Welcome to Kitchen Table Economics 101 gentlemen! Families in Georgia have been doing this for a long long time. My family welcome you to the reality the rest of us who do not have the benefit of the public purse live daily.

Mr. Bottoms:

So let me understand your position: residents in the metro Atlanta are “may have peeked at the price tags of many projects and concluded they may be a tad overpriced. If so, they were right.” REALLY? Perhaps that is why we clearly sent a message to our elected officials that they need to go back to work on our transportation issue. Please keep in mind we are well aware that transit will not improve traffic congestion as so eloquently stated by Christopher Leinberger. Transit investment is for economic development according to Mr. Leinberger.

We were voting on traffic relief and decided that not only was the project list a hot mess as some of us say in the South, it also allocated over 50% of the funds raised to something that will not improve traffic congestion. We sent a clear message Mr. Bottoms and that message was NO!

When the people of metro Atlanta are presented with a project list that can be completed within the time period proposed AND will actually address traffic congestion, the passage of the funding mechanism will not be an issue. We don’t have a problem investing in infrastructure Mr. Bottoms. We have a problem being boondoggled by our government.

tsabulis

August 28th, 2012
10:30 am

BHG, not sure how “easy” it is to synchronize traffic lights. My limited understanding is that it’s a bit more expensive than you might think, concerning software, new equipment, etc. (One of the local fixes for the city of Atlanta in the T-SPLOST was synchronizing the lights on 10th and 14th streets.)

middleground

August 28th, 2012
11:11 am

Dear Fellow Georgia taxpayers: Yes there has been less gas tax money, but a large amount of our current taxes are going to repay debt that Gov. Perdue put on us in the name of moving forward. He spent our future on his agenda. Now we have to figure out how to live on what we have. The developers are so use to us funding their roads to riches that they will not take no more tax money for an answer? The press never reports on the loss of matching funds and costs of this debt. People do not understand and are not informed.

Mike Lowry

August 28th, 2012
11:55 am

Regarding the “new” GDOT, imagine a single swimmer trying to turn the Queen Mary around. GDOT is still a highly politicized organization and will remain so until there is a major structural overhaul, with a change to an elected board.

As for “getting the message out to the public”, go on the GDOT web site and try to find the cost assumptions made for the GA400/I-285 project.

As for innovation, look for any trials of new technologies, a la the Google car, or any real innovations in E-W artery design or innovations in maintaining continuous-flow over major intersections.

The author’s bias is given away by the following:

“…The outer tier of counties apparently want no part of downtown Atlanta and would prefer to isolate themselves fiscally and, apparently, transportation-wise. To their credit, the inner suburbs and urban core of Atlanta are seeking solutions that would bolster the attractiveness of urban living and capitalize on trends that show a significant surge back to the central city.”

Do you think this is what is really happening? This is a completely hub-and-spoke, Atlanta-centric perspective. We haven’t had an “urban core” since 1975. We are a network of clusters. Perimeter Center, Cumberland, Windward and Duluth all have greater square footage of office space than downtown Atlanta. GDOT, Kasim Reed, ARC, et al, will all be off-center until they realize this and start planning for better inter-cluster transportation.

Dumb and Dumber

August 28th, 2012
12:11 pm

I would hope this is obvious, but synchronizing traffic lights will not relieve congestion on the Interstates; and with so many cities/counties having jurisdiction over the same road as they pass through — its virtually impossible to get them to coordinate.

Suggest that you enjoy your car!

Head in the Sand

August 28th, 2012
12:49 pm

In 200 years, does anyone really think we won’t have extensive transit in Atlanta? The question becomes, when do we start? Also, I just love to hear when conservatives say they are for limited gov’t…what about legislating morality (sunday alcohol sales, abortions, gambling), the failed money pit called the war on drugs, starting wars with other countries, etc.? It’s more like “limited gov’t except when I disagree with you”. Solve this hypocrisy, and this independent (and many others) would probably vote Republican. Until then, it’s the other ticket by default…

Sean Smith

August 28th, 2012
12:54 pm

If the Georgia DOT wants to improve their image they need to embark on a program to make it impossible to get on an interstate going the wrong way and cause head on collisions. Put the spiky strips that car rental companies use on the exit ramps so people CANT get on the wrong way. This is beyond insanity that this keeps happening.

Road Scholar

August 28th, 2012
1:43 pm

CPJ: The projects in the Tsplost in Atlanta CAME from elected officials! It was picked by the commission of elected officials set up after the local/county governments submitted their lists usually after a county commission approval!

Head in the Sand

August 28th, 2012
1:55 pm

Sean Smith: We can’t nerf the world. Wrong-way drivers are a very small minority, and often they are drunk as well, which explains why they can’t follow signing and basic driving skills are lost. How does one get on an interstate and not notice they are driving on the left side, all signs are backwards, the HOV lane is the right, etc.? I’m sorry, but I don’t think this is a good expenditure of our tax dollars. I don’t believe ANY DOT in the world does this, so I’m assuming you have a low opinion of the entire transportation industry.

Chris Sanchez

August 28th, 2012
2:51 pm

@ Head in the Sand: ALL laws legislate morality. The question is whose morality is being supported in a given piece of legislation. I don’t know anyone regardless of political strip who thinks we need more drinking, gambling, and baby-killing in our society, do you? There are a few people who would completely outlaw all of the above (BTW…that wouldn’t hurt my feelings) and a few people who have no issue with abortion on demand, 24/7 gambling anywhere in the state, and lowering the drinking age to 18 again. I could go on.

We have serious disagreements over the direction of our country. That is hardly hypocrisy, it is reality. If you believe the direction our nation is heading under the current administration then you should vote to re-elect Mr. Obama. If you’re like me and are worse off than you were four years ago, perhaps you should consider Mr. Romney.

Head in the Sand

August 28th, 2012
4:13 pm

@ Chris: All laws do not legislate morality, although many do. Specifically, I am referring to things that regulate everyday life for citizens where there are no victims and freedoms are thrown in the trash can. The Sunday alcohol vote was a perfect example where freedom was being suppressed to appease the religious right. Prostitution, gay marriage, gambling and marijuana legalization are other areas where we are throwing freedom out the door to appease the religious right or those who like to dictate to others how life should be lived. I am not interested in most out of those items, but these should be personal decisions, not forced upon us by our gov’t. These should be regulated and taxed. My point is that by and large, conservatives are not for smaller gov’t in these areas and are therefore hypocritical in this regard. Most Democrats aren’t much better because they are too afraid to champion these freedoms as well. Attitudes like yours in my opinion are for less freedom and more gov’t intrusion into our personal lives. And nice try, but just because someone believes gambling, abortion and/or prostitution should be legal, it does not mean they wish to participate in those activities. For example, I have never had an abortion,or visited a prostitute, and I’ve very rarely gambled. Lastly, if McCain were president, you would very likely be in the same boat you are now. Presidents don’t usually have magic wands that can reverse recessions. None of the above should be a party-line issue; I believe these things should be part of our freedoms, “liberty for all” (not just those who agree with me). This is important enough to keep me from voting Republican. The economy will rebound, regardless of who wins in November.

On Topic: How’s about Plan B scrap the gas tax altogether, coordinate with the Feds to also scrap the federal gas tax and then go with a national plan that bases everything off of the number of miles you drive and the class/weight of your vehicle (with no truckers getting subsidized). Oh, and let the engineers plan our roads instead of policiticians. No referendumbs.

Road Scholar

August 28th, 2012
5:56 pm

Sean Smith: You can’t design around “stupid” esp when they are intoxicated. And Ga has a better brand of stupid! Just when you thought you had seen everything,….

My condolences to all that died or were hurt in those WW accidents.

Chris Sanchez

August 28th, 2012
6:43 pm

@Head in the Sand: I agree that engineers should be planning the roads. Unfortunately, any funding mechanism will have to go through a political process. Oddly enough people are rather stingy with the money they have earned. I have no doubt that a project list that can be completed within the allotted period of time (say ten years) and will actually address traffic congestion will have no problems with funding. Personally, I had no issue with the notion of a SPLOST for this purpose. My issue was dumping over half of the funding into transit which supporters own experts openly stated do nothing to address traffic congestion.

Reverie

August 29th, 2012
10:37 am

As a person that resides in the suburbs of Atlanta I find the suggestion that we think Atlanta should fend for itself a bit simplistic. Certainly the majority of folks I talk to think Atlanta’s priorities and those of the outlying areas are not lined up very well. There is a perception that any time we are willing to extend assistance to our friends ITP, there will be an expectation that it is a never ending supply. What gives me pause is that most if not all ITP projects (MARTA in particular) are not built and managed for long term success and will always be grown to outpace their abilities to pay for things. That really makes me reluctant to pitch in to what looks like a flawed system managed by people unwilling to fix what they have. The TSPLOST allocation for MARTA was destined to only fund maintenance. The idea that it requires a special tax in order to fund what should be paid for from within their conventional revenue structure sounds like a very bad idea.