Parallel Connector is a risky transportation priority
When I interviewed Republican gubernatorial candidate John Oxendine about his transportation plans back in September, his support for a tunneled connector between Georgia 400 and I-675 sounded a bit quixotic. Such a highway would pass through some of Atlanta’s most desirable neighborhoods, and even as a tunnel there would be some disruption in these residential areas (e.g., tunnels of that length have to have vents that go above ground). It would draw enormous opposition.
Yet the AJC’s Ariel Hart reports that the Department of Transportation has the “parallel Connector,” as the alternative to the merged interstates 75 and 85 is known, on a list of potential projects. The reason? As DOT board member David Doss puts it, the parallel Connector “moves the needle the most on congestion mitigation and mobility.”
Doss may be right, and I think new roads will have to be part of any comprehensive transportation plan in metro Atlanta, along with some targeted new mass transit options. But at this point I’d say a western bypass and maybe a northern one (just don’t say Northern Arc) are more feasible and could probably make a sufficient dent in Atlanta’s traffic problems by diverting cars and trucks that have no reason to pass through Atlanta in the first place. Political capital for new transportation projects — not to mention money — will be at enough of a premium without creating the backlash that a parallel Connector would create.
Am I right?
***
Find me on Facebook.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2012 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
28 comments Add your comment
Hillbilly Deluxe
December 9th, 2009
1:20 pm
I’m not understanding this. What is the Parallel Connector and where will it go?
The Northern ARC wasn’t really about traffic; it was a developmental highway. Remember who owned the land where the major interchanges would be. It would have brought more sprawl and made the problem worse instead of better in my opinion.
George
December 9th, 2009
1:33 pm
Completely and totally insane. Wake up GA. Rail, rail, rail, rail and lots of it. Model–urbanized Western Europe and Asia. It works. $3.7 billion dollars for rail transit, comprehensive, thoughtful, the future. No gas $$$. DOT would build this connector over the dead bodies of Atlanta neighborhoods. I can see actual riots over this one. Our state “leadership” is no leadership! Too busy with affairs, personal problems and trying to find a way to make themselves and their buddies rich with every endeavor.
AeroNautica0909
December 9th, 2009
1:35 pm
Honestly, what we really need is mass transit. When will people realize that mass transit will be the only viable answer we have to congestion? I do not agree with the Parallel Connector, nor do I agree with continuing to implement ways that are only a bandaid to the actual issue.
Sure, another bypass, NOT just for the Westside and the Northside, but also for the Southside and the Eastside may help as in keeping trucks away from Atlanta except if they absolutely MUST come through. However, even with another bypass that only continues the sprawl pattern we currently have right now.
The only way to achieve less congestion, cleaner air, revitalized inner communities such as neigborhoods in Atlanta and the most inner suburbs, healthier people, and being better stewards of our limited resources is to implement mass transit. Any other way would be to the detriment of all of the people in the Greater Atlanta area- physically, mentally, and economically.
Kyle Wingfield
December 9th, 2009
1:44 pm
Sorry, Mr. Deluxe. I think it’s explained better in the articles I linked to, but basically the parallel connector would be a continuation of Georgia 400 southward until it meets I-675 (which spurs off I-75 around Stockbridge) at I-285 (east of the airport). The idea would be for it to run underground at least until it reached downtown/I-20, and then possibly run above ground from there to the perimeter.
Hillbilly Deluxe
December 9th, 2009
1:53 pm
Kyle, thanks for the explanation. My comprehension skills are a little foggy today I guess.
jm
December 9th, 2009
2:33 pm
I agree with several previous posts. We need mass transit to get the cars off the road. State help for Norfolk Southern and CSX to improve intermodal velocity and capacity, and then our highways can be used for local freight and by those who either insist on driving a car or don’t have access to mass transit. You simply cannot build enough roads to handle the existing commuters plus new residents that we plan and hope to have that will move to the Atlanta MSA.
Sally Flocks
December 9th, 2009
4:14 pm
Implementing transportation projects that make Atlanta a place where more people want to live — such the Beltline, sidewalks, and bike lanes — will do more to relieve congestion than building a tunnel. People who live near their job don’t need to drive as much as folks in the suburbs. The goal of transportation is access to destinations. Ever sat in the back seat of a car and asked: “Are we there yet?” Access can be achieved through proximity as well as mobility. If mobility were the true goal of transportation, we could solve our transportation problems by putting a merry go round on every corner.
sam
December 9th, 2009
4:18 pm
get over it, this problem will never be fixed. there’s just too many damn people in atlanta
WonderWendie
December 9th, 2009
4:39 pm
here’s the link to the study:
http://www.dot.state.ga.us/informationcenter/p3/Pages/default.aspx
Comparing the map on the downloadable PDF on that site and comparing it to Google maps, it looks like the above ground section would pass through a largely unpopulated and/or industrail area of land starting somewhere between Custer and Confederate Avenues and Moreland Avenue and head diagonally over to I-675. In this area I think are places like the landfill by the Starlight Drive Inn, the abandoned Prison Farm and Moreland Shopping Plaza.
So if this plan does get pushed through, I wonder what their even future plans would be to connect it up to Langford Parkway? (With its construction ending at Lakewood Avenue.) That’s where things would get really fun as it would go straight through the Lakewood Heights/Lakewood and other neighborhoods and under/over/around/thru Southbend Park. These neighborhoods are not as well organized as some of the other neighborhoods in the other Atlanta NPU’s like Cabbagetown or Grant Park or Reynoldstown and they would really get the shaft.
dewstarpath
December 9th, 2009
5:07 pm
- WonderWendie –
I’m quite familiar with the area you’re talking about,
and I can tell you there’s been a lot of change
in terms of gentrification, especially in Grant Park.
The Lakewood area may not be as prone to “getting
the shaft” as it once might have been.
dewstarpath
December 9th, 2009
5:07 pm
- I also agree with sam (4:18 pm).
Cutty
December 9th, 2009
5:09 pm
So run this tunnel underground to appease the Morningside, VA Highlands crowd, but screw the less-affluent south of 20 and run the highway right in the front yards? Wow.
Funny how the same people who are so opposed to their tax dollars being used for mass transit are lined up in the MARTA parking lots on game day. While I foot the bill as a resident of Fulton Co.
marke
December 9th, 2009
5:56 pm
The tunnel idea is not practical and would be incredibly disruptive to neighborhoods and expensive, i.e., the Boston Big Dig. We need to add light rail which at first could run parallel to the existing freeways to make them a little less expensive and then expand them.
However, we can’t get away from the need for better freeways. We need to build the outer perimeter, all of it, including the northern arc. This should have been at least been planned and engineered several years ago. This would take alot of thru traffic out of Atlanta and
I-285. This road would also provide a very much needed east-west artery across the northside.
As far as alleviating congestion on the Downtown Connector, complete the original plan for I-75 and I-85 (they were merged to save money). Reroute I-75 along the route of Northside Drive and Ashby Street, running parallel to the current Connector and the South Expressway. This new I-75 can merge where I-75 and I-85 split near the airport. This new
route for I-75 primarily runs through industrial areas, not residential.
reality
December 9th, 2009
8:48 pm
2% of trips use transit and we need more of it? We desperately need better freeway/tollroads INSIDE 285 and better arterial roads to serve the 98% who cannot or will not use mass transit. While Kyle is clearly right the tunnel will use a lot of political capital and I am skeptical as to its financial feasibility, it needs to be seriously looked at. Building only outside 285 will encourage people to move outside 285.
The “force them out of their cars mentality” over the last 15-20 years has resulted in more traffic, more sprawl, more pollution and less mass transit use as jobs and people move to the suburbs to get out of the unbearable traffic. Yes, its true you can’t build yourself out of congestion in a growing city, but you can “not build” into horrible congestion. Atlanta is not the first city to prove this.
Al Bundy
December 10th, 2009
9:19 am
@Marke- Yeah, let’s run a new 75 right through the Atlanta University Center, which by my estimates, has been there since 1867. Run it straight through Bobby Dodd stadium as well.
Al Bundy
December 10th, 2009
9:22 am
@ Reality- What ‘force them out of their cars mentality’? By my accounts, Georgians have built nothing but roads the last 25 years. The last leg of 400 was built inside the perimeter since I moved here, and how has that turned out? Try to take 85 and 400 from 10th Street to Holcomb Bridge Rd on a Friday. Building nothing but more roads has us in the situation we’re in now. MARTA hasn’t expanded much in decades, with the exception of going to Chamblee and Doraville.
Mark
December 10th, 2009
10:16 am
I don’t know much, but I know that the residents of Morningside, etc. will not allow a tunnel to be burrowed under their neighborhood. There are a lot of powerful people in these intown neighborhoods. They will be even more motivated because they actually chose to live intown and don’t contribute to the traffic problem that this tunnel purportedly addresses. Plus, this impacts even more powerful neighborhoods like Ansley Park, who would likely get involved. This thing will go nowhere.
reality
December 10th, 2009
3:24 pm
Atlanta hasn’t built roads since the early 90s. They haven’t added much to mass transit either, but not due to lack of trying. They have spent millions on plans to expand Marta in just about every direction (look at their web site), but none have made sense. Of course part of the problem is that Marta doesn’t include Cobb or Gwinnet where extensions might work.
Actually Marke has an idea very similar to one I had. Merging the two roads was Atlanta’s biggest transportation mistake. A new I-85 could run north of Atlantic Station through sparsely developed and decaying industrial areas of West Atlanta, to the west of the Atlanta university center, using the west side of Ft McPherson (which is being abandoned) and the already existing Lakewood Freeway to 285 where it will go down and meet the existing 85.
rdh
December 10th, 2009
3:26 pm
People keep saying” what we really need is mass transit”… “what we really need is light rail”… etc.
Folks, mass transit has not and does not work in Atlanta. If I want to go from Ashford Dunwoody Road to Chamblee Dunwoody road, I have to do it by way of Down town. If I want to go from the Doraville Marta station to the Perimeter/Ashford Dunwoody Marta station, I have to go by way of Downtown. If I am at Georgia Tech and want to go to Buckhead or Northlake Mall, I can expect an hour bus ride to go 5 miles, and an hour bus ride to get back.
Marta simply does not work, so the only people who use it are those that have no other choice, or those that have a convenient-enough route. If we had a subway system on a grid, it might work. but as long as I have to go into Atlanta to go from Doraville to Roswell to Marietta, then you can forget it.
The only way to get people out of their cars is to make the ride more enjoyable than a car or at least almost as quick as a car. As of right now , Marta is neither.
Scott
December 10th, 2009
4:19 pm
rdh…MARTA does not work because A. it is grossly under funded, B. has no state support (ties in with A), and C is restricted to Dekalb, Fulton, City of Atlanta. There have been proposals to address every one of the trips you listed…but without money, they are only plans. One of the things that is so irritating about this tunnel…how much money will they flush down the toilet “studying” this proposal that I bet anyone is going nowhere. That money would be better spent letting MARTA do the things they need to do!
marke
December 10th, 2009
5:23 pm
Sorry Al Bundy,
My idea for a parallel freeway to the connector should not be built on the site of the Tech Stadium or the AU Center. It should be built in an area that is less residential. This idea is much more practical and cost effective than a several mile tunnel linking GA 400 and I-675.
JohnD
December 10th, 2009
7:58 pm
Y’all understand that cars still emit exhaust pollutants even underground? That means the tunnel will have to be vented (that means up, not down) right into the neighborhoods above.
I know you Georgians are scientifically challenged, but would you want a pipe in your neighborhood spurting ozone, CO, benzene, etc and the rest of the toxics from a bunch of yahoos?
I bet you wouldn’t.
This is an idiotic proposal from a right-wing pro-road group. Go ahead GOP, follow your worst instincts. Make Atlanta just as unlivable as the suburbs. Brilliant!
Intown Lib
December 11th, 2009
9:44 am
Kyle, you are right. I did not spend more money on my home so I could live intown and close to my job so that GDOT could come and plow a road through or under my backyard. If Republicans want to provoke a war (figuratively speaking) the intown neighborhoods are more than ready for it.
reality
December 11th, 2009
1:27 pm
I don’t think state support and funding are the problems with Marta. Dallas, Houston and Austin in Texas are doing major rail expansions (along with toll roads) and they just have a 1 cent sales tax and I’m not aware of any state funding. I’m sure lawmakers get more annoyed than I do about Atlanta constantly whining about the state not bailing it out. However, I will agree that not having Cobb and Gwinnet are certainly factors.
The biggest problems for Marta are ones the anti-road group have created. Even a bigger problem than the freeways, Atlanta has one of the nation’s worst arterial road systems which, like Marta, heads out from downtown instead of a grid. So buses can’t feed Marta well because they are horribly slow. Atlanta doesn’t seem to understand transportation systems management. Traffic lights seem timed to keep traffic from flowing. Left turn lanes in a few places would do wonders for traffic flow. The awful traffic and pollution from idling cars drives jobs and people to the suburbs which makes it even harder for Marta to serve. And they want to do light rail lines which will draw ridership and funds from the heavy rail which really is an asset.
JohnD
December 11th, 2009
4:14 pm
Texas does provide state funding for transit, but not very much. However even 1% of the state DOT funding is more than the 0% that GDOT provides. Texas also works to get federal grant money to its transit agencies — which does not happen in Georgia. However given GDOT’s massive accounting problems and inability to account for its federal grant dollars for roads, I’m not sure that’s a bad thing.
MARTA actually has a pretty good record of accounting for its federal grant funds — but you wouldn’t know that from reading the AJC or talking to Jill Chambers(R) who heads the MARTOC committee for the Georgia House.
I think the best MARTA can ever hope for is to get the GOP to let them use its sales tax revenues as they see fit. But since the Georgia GOP id dedicated to ensuring that transit fails in this state, that’s not likely.
https://www.txdot.gov/news/022-2009.htm
MattCW
December 12th, 2009
4:29 pm
Transit does and WILL work if it gets implemented. Each one of those Xpress buses from the outer areas takes at least 60 cars off the road, times 5 trips (from Conyers at least) equals 1200 cars no longer on the road. In contrast a single train car can take as many as 200 cars off the road, times a 4 car train is 800 people, times 5 trains (at the minimum) is 4,000 (thousand) people! Considerably less infrastructure would have to be put in place and much less money spent (if done correctly). For instance, the most expensive recent Commuter rail startup, Albuquerque’s RailRunner cost only around $800 million for the ENTIRE system at the time compared to the billions for a few highway miles. And trains are essentially giant rolling toll roads so it’s not like another million people can use them free like the highways. It’s time for Georgia to WAKE UP and realize that rail transit helps more than another lane down the highway.
SUBURBAN OVERLORD
December 13th, 2009
10:19 am
Kyle – There is a group of road and tunnel builders that are pimping this idea, originally hatched up by the Reason Foundation a couple of years ago. There is one DOT board member that drinks this Kool-Aid and bullies GDOT staff into putting every stupid idea the road builders come up with into GDOT plans.
This is almost the stupidest thing ever proposed, having a 0% change of ever happening. It would be one of the longest tunnels in the world going under the most road-hating liberal neighborhoods in the southeastern United States. It is a shame because there are a few other good projects in that list and this screws them all. Georgia’s road building “lobby” is just plain stupid and doesn’t understand you have to pick your battles and be strategic.
MC W
December 14th, 2009
2:39 pm
And there goes any possible vote I might have had for Oxendine…
Luckily, as has been said, this will never happen, at least not without attracting some negative national attention.