Multi - Modal Passenger Terminal Project Final Bus and Rail Complete

MULTI - MODAL PASSENGER
TERMI NAL PROJECT

TECHNI CAL MEMORANDUM:
Bus and Rail Operational Requirements Bus and Rail Operational Requirements Bus and Rail Operational Requirements Bus and Rail Operational Requirements

Prepared for:
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority

Prepared by:
AECOM/JJG Joint Venture
Atlanta, GA

November 2010

General Planning Consultant Services RFP P5413
Contract No. 200703566
Work Order No. 2010-01

Georgia Department of Transportation Project Identification No.: 770311

Page Intentionally Left Blank

This technical memorandum is based on publicly available information and is for informational purposes
only. The document presents current requirements of potential operators and future needs of an
integrated MMPT facility that will include freight rail, passenger rail, bus operations, and vehicles for hire.
The requirements for these transit modes are considered along with pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile
access and circulation. Using previous studies and plans and information gathered through consultation
with various stakeholders, this memorandum updates operational requirements for the various
transportation modes envisioned at the MMPT and provides context for future planning and
implementation activities. Since the current project is in the early planning stages, many project elements
are undefined at this time. Consequently, operational requirements for the integration of potential transit
modes at the MMPT are addressed in a conceptual manner. Detailed engineering and design of
platforms and track configurations have not been conducted and will be required in subsequent phases of
project implementation.

Draft Technical Memorandum
Bus and Rail Operational Requirements
Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project 0-2 November 2010
0.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
0.1 Overview
The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA), in cooperation with the
Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT), City of Atlanta, Georgia Regional
Transportation Authority (GRTA), Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC), and Atlanta
Downtown Improvement District (ADID) have initiated conceptual planning and design
activities to advance the implementation of the of the Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal
(MMPT) in Downtown Atlanta, Georgia. The MMPT project aligns with the regions vision
to enhance the existing and future transportation systems by creating a transportation
hub that provides connections to existing MARTA heavy rail service; planned passenger
rail operations; planned streetcar operations; intercity, local, and express bus operations;
and new private development that would stimulate economic growth around the site.
These planning and design activities will support the procurement of a Master Developer
to oversee final design, construction, and management of MMPT.
The purpose of this technical memorandum is to document the current requirements of
potential operators and future needs of an integrated MMPT facility that will include
freight rail, passenger rail, bus operations, and vehicles for hire. The requirements for
these transit modes are considered along with pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile
access and circulation.
The MMPT study area, known as the Gulch, extends roughly from Peachtree Street on
the east, Marietta Street on the north, Centennial Olympic Park Drive on the west, and
Trinity Avenue and Peters Street on the south and includes the Five Points MARTA rail
station. While these boundaries provide a framework for the development process, the
ultimate MMPT location and layout will be an output of the Master Developers planning
process. Using information gathered through consultation with various stakeholders, this
memorandum updates operational requirements for the various transportation modes
envisioned at the MMPT and provides context for future planning and implementation
activities.
0.2 Background
Planning for the proposed MMPT began in the early 1990s. The proposed project is
included in several previous planning studies and reports. Current planning reports such
as the Green Line Plan (Downtown Atlantas green space and development vision plan),
Connect Atlanta (City of Atlantas Comprehensive Transportation Plan), Concept 3
(Atlanta regions long-range transit plan), and the Georgia Interim State Rail Plan all
support the development of the MMPT.
In February 2002, the Georgia Rail Passenger Program led by GDOT adopted Concept
6 as the preferred design and requirements for the MMPT. Concept 6 set forth a plan to
house commuter and intercity passenger rail, regional commuter and intercity buses,
direct pedestrian connections to the Five Points and Dome/GWCC/Philips Arena/CNN
Center MARTA rail stations, and additional roadways. Concept 6 also encouraged
overbuild development.
GDOT is preparing to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to procure a Master
Developer to oversee the implementation of the MMPT. In January 2010, MARTA
agreed to assist GDOT by leading a technical committee to update the requirements
identified for the MMPT. The technical committee includes representation from GDOT,
City of Atlanta, MARTA, ARC, GRTA, and ADID. The technical committee has led the
effort to further refine the operational functionality of the MMPT and develop an
implementation plan for transit facility improvements.
0.3 Operational Requirements and Recommendations
0.3.1 Freight Rail
Norfolk Southern Railway (NS) and Chessie Seaboard X Transportation (CSX) are the
major freight operators in the MMPT study area. NS currently operates 27 to 42 trains
per day on their tracks through the study area. CSX operates 26 to 40 trains per day
within the study area. CSX separates their rail traffic into three segments:
Western Leg - 15 to 20 trains per day
Spring Track (Southern Leg) - 6 to 10 trains per day
Eastern Leg - 5 to 10 trains per day
Figure 2-1 provides the location of each segment. CSX has trackage rights on NS rail
lines to operate through the area.
The National Rail Freight Infrastructure Capacity and Investment Study prepared for the
Association of American Railroads by Cambridge Systematics in September 2007
projected freight to increase by 85 percent in the horizon year 2035
1
. This conservative
projection could be accommodated by an increase in train volumes or train lengths. NS
has requested a 100-foot horizontal clearance from the centerline of their current rail
alignment to provide for future freight rail growth, not including passenger train
operations and associated ROW. As implementation of the MMPT progresses, this
clearance requirement will need to be negotiated with NS as failure to reduce or
eliminate it will severely limit passenger rail operations within the proposed study area.
Both railroads currently have roadway access to their respective tracks within the MMPT
study area. They would like to maintain this access in the future to facilitate ongoing
maintenance, inspection, and security operations.
NS and CSX state that there are no bypass or alternative rail routes for freight
operations within the study area. This increases the need for rail improvements along
the Western Trunk, which is the section of railroad between Howell Junction on the north
and the Spring Track on the south, also shown in Figure 2-1. The Western Trunk Freight
Relief Options Memorandum published in 2009 suggests improvements such as grade
separation and rerouting at Howell Junction to reduce freight trains along the Western
Trunk to accommodate passenger rail service.
0.3.2 Passenger Rail
Passenger rail incorporates commuter and intercity rail, streetcar and regional light rail.
Primary drivers for passenger rail station infrastructure needs are short- and long-term

1
It should be noted that this analysis occurred before the economic downturn in 2007.
operations for both commuter and intercity rail. In this case, intercity refers to Amtrak
and high speed rail (HSR).
The proposed MMPT is planned as a hub and potential catalyst for future streetcar and
regional light rail modes. While the operational requirements of these potential
connections are addressed in a conceptual manner in this technical memorandum,
detailed engineering and design of platforms and track configurations has not been
conducted. Subsequent engineering and design efforts will need to consider future
demand and the relative flexibility of integrating these modes into an urban context
through the sharing of roadway rights-of-ways (ROWs).
Several previous planning efforts have examined passenger rail options at the proposed
MMPT. The Commuter Rail Plan Update published in 2007 provided ridership forecasts
to support seven commuter rail lines with eight weekday trains assumed for each route.
Potential passenger rail ridership is summarized in Table 0-1.
Table 0-1: Summary of Passenger Rail Ridership
Route
Current Ridership Future Ridership (2030)
Amtrak (2010) Amtrak High Speed Rail Commuter Rail
NYC - New Orleans 112,364 N/A
Atlanta - Chattanooga 7,200 - 11,200
Atlanta Griffin - Macon 1,700 2,200
Atlanta - Athens 3,000 3,700
Atlanta - Bremen 1,600 2,200
Atlanta - Canton 2,300 3,400
Atlanta - Madison 3,200 4,700
Atlanta- Senoia 1,200 1,700
Atlanta - Gainesville 1,200 2,500
Source: Amtrak, AECOM, Commuter Rail Plan Update 2007
The December 2008 Final Technical Report prepared by the Transit Planning Board also
provided ridership forecasts to support five commuter rail lines as part of the Concept 3.
The proposed rail lines included:
Athens to Atlanta, all-day service
Griffin to Atlanta, all-day service
Senoia to Atlanta, peak-period service
Bremen to Atlanta, peak-period service
Gainesville to Atlanta, peak-period service

The Decatur Belt Abandonment Technical Review Committee Findings Report,
March 2009, presented the summary of planned commuter rail routing to the MMPT shown
in
Table 0-2.

Table 0-2: Summary of Potential Passenger Rail Volumes Through MMPT
Route
Current Daily
Volume Future Daily Volume
Amtrak Amtrak Commuter Rail
NYC - New Orleans 2 2
Chicago - Miami - 2
Atlanta Charlotte/NYP - 4 - 12
Atlanta
Columbia/Savannah - 2 - 8
Atlanta
Macon/Jacksonville - 4 - 8
Atlanta Birmingham - 2 - 8
Atlanta - Chattanooga - 2 -10 -
Atlanta - Griffin - Macon - - 12
Atlanta - Athens - - 12
Atlanta - Bremen - - 12
Atlanta - Canton - - 12
Atlanta - Madison - - 12
Atlanta- Senoia - - 12
Atlanta - Gainesville - - 12
Source: Decatur Belt Abandonment Technical Review Committee Findings
Report 2009; Amtrak Strategic Partnerships

While initially planned for peak hour operation, it is likely that commuter rail will grow to
all-day service; therefore, track design must ensure efficient operations for through, as
well as terminating service. Depending on future routing, some trains may stop at the
station adjacent the MARTA Gold Line and continue through Atlanta, bypassing the
MMPT. Alternatively, some trains could pass the Northeast station and stop at the
MMPT or stop at both stations.
The Amtrak Crescent route services New York, Atlanta, and New Orleans daily. Service
expansion is envisioned within a 5- to 10-year timeframe. In this case, an extension of
the Southeast HSR / Northeast Corridor service via Richmond, Raleigh, and Charlotte to
Atlanta, Macon, and Jacksonville has been identified. In the long term, continued
development of the aforementioned service would occur as well as potential new service
between Atlanta and points west, northwest, and southeast. Amtrak anticipates this
service to grow to approximately 8-10 trains per day by 2020 and 12-16 by 2025.
High speed ground transportation (HSGT) between Atlanta and Chattanooga, which
includes steel-wheeled and Maglev technologies, is currently in the planning phase; a
Tier I Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is being prepared under the lead of GDOT
and TDOT to assess the potential environmental impacts within the planned corridor. It
is envisioned that this service could operate between 4-8 trains per day and eventually
extend as far north as Chicago and south to Jacksonville.
Identified track needs for Amtrak, HSR, and commuter rail result in a 10-track MMPT.
However, further operational analysis is required to determine effective track utilization
and verify the number of tracks needed. The Master Developer will be required to
undertake additional studies and negotiations in order to achieve an optimized design
solution that is acceptable to all rail stakeholders as well as locations of other proposed
intermodal passenger nodes, such as the Southern Crescent Transit Center and
Northeast Multi-Modal Station. Section 3.6 displays snapshots of the passenger rail
configurations, while Section 9.0 MMPT Alternatives provides a comprehensive
discussion of the passenger rail configurations.
There are locations in the MMPT study area where fully or partially enclosed freight rail
rights-of-way are proposed in close proximity to fully or partially enclosed passenger rail
operations. Passenger rail civil, structural and ventilation design considerations for
normal, congested and emergency operations scenarios should be coordinated and
integrated into the developments above and adjacent to the rail facilities.
0.3.3 Bus Operations
Potential bus services for the proposed MMPT include:
local bus services operated by MARTA;
commuter express bus services operated by MARTA;
Xpress services operated by GRTA;
Cobb Community Transit (CCT);
Gwinnett County Transit (GCT);
intercity bus services operated by Greyhound, Southeastern Stages; and possibly
other intercity bus service operators in the future.
Approximately 14,300 boardings on an average weekday are currently estimated for the
MMPT. Ridership estimates include data from the current Greyhound Atlanta Terminal
operations and 25 percent of the entire GRTA Xpress service. None of the stakeholders
interviewed have projections for 2015 and 2030 except for MARTA, which provides
ridership data ten years out.
Based on current ridership and stakeholder input, future intercity bus operations at the
MMPT would require 23 bus bays. Express bus operations would require 11 bus bays.
Based on the 15 current local MARTA bus routes that terminate or pass through the
MMPT study area, 9 to 12 bus bays would be needed to accommodate current routes
and future service growth. This also includes a bay for MARTA Mobility. In addition, a
growth factor of 25 percent was anticipated for intercity and express bus services.
Collectively, the number of bus bays required at the proposed MMPT facility is 30 deep
sawtooth bus bays for the intercity services, 14 shallow sawtooth bus bays for the
commuter express services, and 9 to 12 shallow sawtooth bus bays for local MARTA
services. This allows for approximately 53 to 56 bus bays at the proposed MMPT facility.
Table 0-3 provides a summary of current and future bus bay needs at the proposed
MMPT.
Table 0-3: Summary of Bus Bay Requirements
Operator Current Needs Future Needs (25% increase for
Intercity and Express)**
Sawtooth
Bus Bay
Ready
Bus Bay
Total
Sawtooth
Bus Bay
Ready
Bus Bay
Total
Intercity Bus (Deep Sawtooth) 17 6 23 22 8 30
Express Bus (Shallow Sawtooth) 9 2 11 12 2 14
Local Bus (Shallow Sawtooth)* 9 to 12 9 to 12 9 to 12 9 to 12
TOTAL 43 to 46 bays 53 to 56 bays
*Four bus bays to allow for articulated buses and one reserved for MARTA Mobility
** Future needs correspond to build-out year 2030
Source: AECOM
The 30 intercity bus bays should allow for the possibility of double-decker buses utilizing
the proposed MMPT facility in the future, and approximately four of the 9 to 12 shallow
sawtooth bus bays that will be utilized by local MARTA services should accommodate
60-foot articulated buses. Comprehensive layouts of bus operations are included in
Section 9.0.
Bus facility civil, structural and ventilation design considerations for normal, congested
and emergency operations scenarios must address diesel and compressed natural gas
(CNG) fueled buses, as well as gasoline fueled vehicles where admitted. The fire-life
safety elements, including the ventilation plant spaces and necessary intakes and
discharges required to manage normal, congested and emergency operations
scenarios, should be coordinated and integrated into the developments above and
adjacent to the bus facilities.
0.3.4 Vehicles for Hire
A well-marked, visible taxicab queue area should be located curbside at the proposed
MMPT facility. The taxicab queue should be marked with No Parking, Taxicab Stand
and Tow Away Zone signage on the curb. The taxicab waiting and queuing area should
be well lit and monitored with security cameras.
There is also a potential need for dedicated curb area for shuttles and car sharing
vehicles that is clearly marked. A bullpen for car rental agencies should also be
considered to support the MMPTs potential to serve as a minor car rental hub for central
Atlanta. Space for at least 30 rental cars in a parking facility would appear to be an
appropriate starting point. Table 0-4 provides a summary of current vehicles for hire
requirements. The MMPT Alternatives in Section 9.0 depicts taxi/shuttle designated curb
space and taxi/car rental queuing areas.
Table 0-4: Summary of Potential Vehicles for Hire Requirements
Stakeholder/Operator Queuing / Curb
Parking
Bullpen / Long-
Term Parking
Employee Parking
Taxicab (Checker Cab) 10 to 15 15 to 20 n/a
Car Rental (Enterprise) n/a 30 10
Shuttle (Atlanta Link) 4 n/a n/a
Car Sharing (Zipcar) 2 n/a n/a
*This table only includes requirements from stakeholders that completed a survey and/or interviewed,
additional responses may change potential requirements.
Source: Listed Stakeholders
0.4 Facility Spatial Requirements
Facility spatial requirements are based on information gathered from stakeholders,
transit ridership projections and consultant experience designing comparable facilities.
These estimates are not the result of a detailed engineering or market analysis. Table
0-5 provides a breakdown of the MMPT square footage requirements. Included are the
gross building spaces, spaces required for loading and unloading of patrons, site
circulation for transit operations and parking spaces. This does not include all site
amenities such as landscape and retainage areas, central and distributed mechanical
and electrical plant requirements, other retail that is not inclusive of requested
stakeholder retail, and site improvements, such as additional roadway and track work.
Section 9.0 MMPT Alternatives presents configurations of the main terminal integrated
with each transit mode.

Table 0-5: Building Program Summary (Including Platforms)
Item
Estimated Space Required (gross
sf including growth factor)
MMPT Management and Operations 15,200
Passenger Rail 291,500
Commuter Express and Local Bus 121,300
Intercity Bus 78,600
Vehicles for Hire 34,700
Regional Light Rail and Streetcar 41,800
Subtotal 583,100
Parking Structure and Loading Area 47,000
Total Building 630,100
Source: AECOM
0.5 Transit Mode Integration and Site Access
Primary transfers from MMPT services will be to MARTA rail, other local and regional
buses, and future light rail and streetcar services. Commuter rail passengers unwilling to
walk to their ultimate destination will make the majority of transfers. Depending on the
final platform configuration, arriving MMPT passengers may walk up to 2,100 feet from
the ends of platforms to access the Five Points or Dome/GWCC/Philips Arena/CNN
Center MARTA rail stations. Passengers may transfer to buses or future light rail and
streetcar transit with either direct access or a short walk from platforms.
Transfers between modes and general connections of the MMPT to its surroundings in
downtown Atlanta are important factors in terminal location decisions. A walkshed
analysis was performed on the three comprehensive MMPT Alternatives included in this
technical memorandum. The three different alternatives considered have similar
walkshed potential over and around the study area, although they are likely to appear
differently to potential MMPT users in terms of convenience and utility. The historic
preference for a Forsyth Street location adjacent to the Five Points MARTA rail station
may conflict with the needs and preferences of the agencies providing intercity
passenger rail service. In exploring a potential location of the MMPT closer to rail
platforms further west, the implications for pedestrian movement and integration with the
downtown fabric are examined. The primary station locations feature similar entrance
locations to the main terminal facility. However, the location of any direct platform access
greatly expands the pedestrian reach by allowing passengers to particular destinations,
especially the CNN/Georgia Dome/Philips Arena complex north of the study area, to
reach these locations directly without needing to pass through the main terminal facility.
In brief, no one location avoids the competing challenges of rail operations, modal
transfer potential, and downtown connectivity. Section 7.2 details intermodal transfers
and Section 7.3 provides walkshed diagrams of the three alternatives.
0.6 Passenger Distribution
The need to access the levels above the track level, both the lower and upper levels, in a
safe and convenient manner will also likely guide the MMPTs location. Track-level
platforms do not need to be directly below a street-level terminal entrance, but they
should be close to encourage seamless connection to and from the MMPT rail platforms.
Although the track to upper-level connection must meet ADA requirements, it must also
provide a reasonable sense of security, comfort, and proximity.
A Forsyth Street location is presented in multiple plans and studies. Its adjacency to
MARTA and its central location in downtown Atlanta are positive characteristics, but
connections between this site and the location of rail operators would require a long
distance and potentially complicated structures to allow walking between the two. This
suggests that a western location such as along Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive should be
considered. However, a western location does not reach the same number or types of
destinations. A Forsyth Street location directly connects to the Five Points MARTA rail
station and allows easier distribution to several points of interests such as the Atlanta
business district, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (HJAIA), Georgia
Institute of Technology, and the Atlanta University Center. A further west location is
proximate to Philips Arena and the Georgia World Congress Center (GWCC). Even with
the Dome/GWCC/Philips Arena/CNN Center MARTA rail station connection, significant
expansion of the street network and pedestrian facilities is likely required to reduce
walking distances to comfortable levels for a western location closer to freight rail ROW.
0.7 Comprehensive MMPT Alternatives
Three comprehensive MMPT alternatives are proposed. Consideration for freight rail,
passenger rail, bus operations, light rail and streetcar services, a terminal facility,
overbuild, and access points are integrated in a three-level complex: a track level, lower
level, and upper level. The MMPT alternatives presented are conceptual and not the
result of detailed engineering and design. Future engineering and design efforts will
require extensive coordination with the appropriate federal, state and local agencies, as
well as potential MMPT operators and other stakeholders.
MMPT Alternative A is a consolidated complex at the northwest corner of Spring Street
and Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive promoting short walking distances between transit
modes. This alternative allows for the phased development of the Green Line Plan. The
downside is the loss of a direct connection and the distance away from the Five Points
MARTA rail station in comparison to Alternatives B and C. Figure 9-1 through Figure 9-3
provide diagrams of MMPT Alternative A.
The main terminal for MMPT Alternative B is located north of the extension to Alabama
Street with access points from Forsyth Street heading westward to Centennial Olympic
Park Drive. The intercity bus operations and the express and local bus operations are
separated. In Alternatives A and C these bus operations are stacked. Also, in Alternative
B all the passenger rail platforms are parallel except for the Madison line platform option,
to create an ease of patron movement. Figure 9-4 through Figure 9-6 provides diagrams
of MMPT Alternative B.
Similar to Alternative B, the main terminal for MMPT Alternative C is located north of the
extension to Alabama Street with access points from Forsyth Street heading westward to
Centennial Olympic Park Drive. However, MMPT Alternative C suggests a separation of
the waiting areas with a main terminal connecting passenger rail and bus operations.
The distance between the commuter rail and the local bus boarding area is the furthest
in comparison to Alternatives A and B. Figure 9-7 through Figure 9-9 provides diagrams
of MMPT Alternative C. Section 9.0 presents details on the three alternatives.
0.8 Next Steps
The operational requirements outlined in this technical memorandum will assist in the
following next steps:
Further clarify the current and future needs of stakeholders and potential operators
through discussions with the MMPT Technical Committee
Support the development of minimum standards, design criteria and concept
drawings for the MMPT facility. This includes such items as, overbuild, platforms,
bus bays, bus shelters, signage, pedestrian enhancements, street grid, tunnel and
facilities ventilation, ventilation system plant, ventilation shaft and intake/discharge
requirements, other fire-life safety elements, possible signalization to facilitate bus
access and passenger transfers between modes.
Prepare order of magnitude cost projections for the MMPT
Develop a phased implementation plan for the MMPT
The majority of next steps should be conducted as part of the Phase 1 scope of work of
the selected Master Developer using inputs from this technical memorandum.

Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project November 2010


Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project i November 2010
Table of Contents
0.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. 0-2
0.1 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................ 0-2
0.2 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................... 0-2
0.3 OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................... 0-3
0.3.1 Freight Rail ................................................................................................. 0-3
0.3.2 Passenger Rail ........................................................................................... 0-3
0.3.3 Bus Operations ........................................................................................... 0-7
0.3.4 Vehicles for Hire ......................................................................................... 0-9
0.4 FACILITY SPATIAL REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................0-10
0.5 TRANSIT MODE INTEGRATION AND SITE ACCESS .........................................0-10
0.6 PASSENGER DISTRIBUTION ...............................................................................0-11
0.7 COMPREHENSIVE MMPT ALTERNATIVES ........................................................0-11
0.8 NEXT STEPS ...........................................................................................................0-12
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 STUDY AREA AND BACKGROUND ....................................................................... 1-1
1.2 METHODOLOGY AND DATA .................................................................................. 1-3
2.0 FREIGHT RAIL REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................. 2-1
2.1 VEHICLE DESIGN .................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 VOLUME FOR 2015 AND 2030 ................................................................................ 2-1
2.3 TRACK REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................ 2-2
2.4 IMPROVEMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS TO TRACKS ........................................ 2-2
2.5 FIRE LIFE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS .................................................................... 2-3
2.6 SUMMARY OF FREIGHT RAIL NEEDS .................................................................. 2-5
3.0 PASSENGER RAIL REQUIREMENTS .......................................................................................... 3-2
3.1 VEHICLE DESIGN .................................................................................................... 3-3
3.1.1 Commuter Rail ........................................................................................... 3-3
3.1.2 Amtrak ........................................................................................................ 3-7
3.1.3 Streetcar and Regional Light Rail .............................................................. 3-8
3.2 RIDERSHIP AND PLATFORM CAPACITY .............................................................. 3-8
3.2.1 Commuter Rail ........................................................................................... 3-8
3.2.2 Amtrak ......................................................................................................3-11
3.3 TRACK REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................................3-12
3.3.1 Commuter Rail .........................................................................................3-12
3.3.2 Amtrak and High Speed Ground Transportation .....................................3-12
3.3.3 Streetcar and Light Rail ............................................................................3-14
Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project ii November 2010
3.4 IMPROVEMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS TO TRACKS ......................................3-14
3.5 FIRE LIFE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................3-17
3.6 DIAGRAMS OF PASSENGER RAIL TRACKS AND PLATFORM AREA ............3-17
3.7 SUMMARY OF PASSENGER RAIL NEEDS .........................................................3-19
4.0 BUS REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 VEHICLE DESIGN .................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1.1 Local Bus Service ....................................................................................... 4-1
4.1.2 Express Bus Service .................................................................................. 4-1
4.1.3 Intercity Bus Service ................................................................................... 4-2
4.2 RIDERSHIP AND BOARDING AREA CAPACITY ................................................... 4-2
4.3 BUS BAY REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................... 4-3
4.3.1 Intercity Bus Service ................................................................................... 4-4
4.3.2 Local and Express Bus Service ................................................................. 4-4
4.3.3 Dynamic Bus Berth Assignment ................................................................ 4-6
4.3.4 MMPT Bus Berth Comparison ................................................................... 4-6
4.4 STAGING, STORAGE, AND LAYOVER REQUIREMENTS .................................... 4-7
4.6 DIAGRAMS OF BUS BAYS AND BOARDING AREA ............................................. 4-8
4.7 SUMMARY OF BUS NEEDS ..................................................................................4-14
5.0 VEHICLES FOR HIRE REQUIREMENTS...................................................................................... 5-1
5.1 PATRON USAGE AND VEHICLE CAPACITY ......................................................... 5-1
5.2 DESIGNATED BULLPEN / QUEUING AREA / CURB AREA ................................. 5-1
5.2.1 Taxicab Services ........................................................................................ 5-1
5.2.2 Shuttle Services ......................................................................................... 5-2
5.2.3 Car Rental Agencies .................................................................................. 5-3
5.2.4 Car Sharing Services ................................................................................. 5-3
5.4 ACCESS POINTS ...................................................................................................... 5-4
5.5 SURVEY OF VEHICLES FOR HIRE FACILITIES AT OTHER NATIONAL
TRANSPORTATION HUBS ...................................................................................... 5-5
5.5.1 Boston, Massachusetts South Station .................................................... 5-5
5.5.2 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 30
th
Street Station ....................................... 5-5
5.5.3 Washington, D.C. Union Station ............................................................. 5-6
5.5.4 Los Angeles, California Union Station .................................................... 5-7
5.6 SUMMARY OF VEHICLES FOR HIRE NEED ......................................................... 5-7
6.0 FACILITY AND SUPPORT AREA REQUIREMENTS .................................................................. 6-2
6.1 DESIGN PARAMETERS ........................................................................................... 6-2
Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project iii November 2010
6.1.1 Terminal Spatial Requirements ................................................................. 6-2
6.1.2 Sustainability and Energy Efficiency Goals ............................................... 6-2
6.1.3 Architectural and Fire Life Safety Integration ............................................ 6-3
6.2 PUBLIC AMENITIES ................................................................................................. 6-3
6.2.1 Patron Areas: Waiting areas, Restrooms, and Support Spaces ............... 6-3
6.2.2 Ticketing / Fare Collection Areas and Procedures .................................... 6-4
6.2.3 Office / Meeting Space ............................................................................... 6-4
6.2.4 Retail Space ............................................................................................... 6-5
6.2.5 Maintenance and Miscellaneous Support Areas ....................................... 6-5
6.2.6 Security ....................................................................................................... 6-6
6.3 PARKING NEEDS / TRUCK LOADING AREA ........................................................ 6-6
6.3.1 Patron and Employee Vehicle Parking ...................................................... 6-7
6.3.2 Service Vehicle Parking ............................................................................. 6-8
6.3.3 Bicycle Storage .......................................................................................... 6-8
6.3.4 Truck Loading Area Requirements ............................................................ 6-8
6.3.5 General Enclosed Vehicle Facility Requirements ..................................... 6-8
6.4 TRANSIT COMPONENT SPATIAL REQUIREMENTS............................................ 6-9
6.4.1 Passenger Rail ........................................................................................... 6-9
6.4.2 Commuter Express and Local Bus ..........................................................6-11
6.4.3 Intercity Bus ..............................................................................................6-12
6.4.4 Vehicles for Hire .......................................................................................6-15
6.4.5 Regional Light Rail and Streetcar ............................................................6-15
6.5 SUMMARY OF SPATIAL REQUIREMENTS .........................................................6-16
7.0 TRANSIT MODE INTEGRATION AND SITE ACCESS ................................................................ 7-1
7.1 TRANSFERS BETWEEN TRANSIT MODES .......................................................... 7-1
7.2 CIRCULATION OF PASSENGERS BETWEEN TRANSIT MODES ....................... 7-1
7.3 MMPT ACCESS FOR PEDESTRIANS, BICYCLISTS, AND AUTOMOBILES .....7-14
7.3.1 Pedestrians...............................................................................................7-14
7.3.2 Bicyclists ...................................................................................................7-18
7.3.3 Automobiles ..............................................................................................7-18
7.3.4 Fire Life Safety Considerations ................................................................7-19
7.3.5 Train-Tunnel Interaction Considerations .................................................7-19
7.4 TRANSIT MODE INTEGRATION AND SITE ACCESS SUMMARY .....................7-19
8.0 PASSENGER DISTRIBUTION ........................................................................................................ 8-1
8.1 DISTRIBUTION OF PASSENGERS FROM TRACK LEVEL TO UPPER LEVELS . 8-
1
8.1.1 Open Access Platforms and Ingress / Egress Points ................................ 8-4
8.2 DISTRIBUTION OF PASSENGERS FROM LOCATION WALKSHEDS TO OTHER
POINTS OF INTEREST ............................................................................................. 8-4
8.2.1 Distribution to Points of Interest Downtown ............................................... 8-4
Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project iv November 2010
8.2.2 Distribution to Points of Interest Elsewhere in Atlanta ............................... 8-4
8.3 PASSENGER DISTRIBUTION SUMMARY ............................................................. 8-5
9.0 COMPREHENSIVE MMPT ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................... 9-1
9.1.1 MMPT Alternative A ................................................................................... 9-1
9.1.2 MMPT Alternative B ................................................................................... 9-7
9.1.3 MMPT Alternative C .................................................................................9-12
10.0 NEXT STEPS................................................................................................................................... 10-1

APPENDIX A: List of Stakeholders .......................................................................................... A-1
APPENDIX B: Governing Codes and Standards ................................................................... B-1
APPENDIX C: Definition of Terms ........................................................................................... C-1
APPENDIX D: NS Property and Track Owned ........................................................................ D-1
APPENDIX E: Facility Component Program ........................................................................... E-1

Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project v November 2010
List of Tables
Table 0-1: Summary of Bus Bay Requirements ................................................................................. 0-9
Table 0-2: Summary of Potential Vehicles for Hire Requirements .................................................... 0-9
Table 0-3: Building Program Summary (Including Platforms) .........................................................0-10
Table 2-1: Freight Rail Vehicle Dimensions ....................................................................................... 2-1
Table 3-1: Summary of Intercity and Commuter Rail Design Requirements .................................... 3-3
Table 3-2: Commuter Rail Vehicle Dimensions ................................................................................. 3-6
Table 3-3: Vehicle Capacity by Type and Train Consist .................................................................... 3-7
Table 3-4: Amtrak Vehicle Types and Dimensions ............................................................................ 3-7
Table 3-5: Streetcar and Light Rail Vehicle Dimensions and Characteristics ................................... 3-8
Table 3-6: Commuter Rail Ridership Estimates for 2030 ................................................................3-11
Table 4-1: Existing Ridership at or near the MMPT Study Area ........................................................ 4-3
Table 4-2: Existing Commuter Express Routes in MMPT Study Area .............................................. 4-5
Table 4-3: MMPT Bus Berth Comparison .......................................................................................... 4-7
Table 4-4: Summary of Bus Bay Requirements ...............................................................................4-14
Table 5-1: Summary of Potential Vehicles for Hire Requirements .................................................... 5-8
Table 6-1: Waiting Areas Program ..................................................................................................... 6-4
Table 6-2: Ticketing / Fare Collection Areas and Passenger Services Program .............................. 6-4
Table 6-3: Office / Meeting Space Program ....................................................................................... 6-5
Table 6-4: Retail Space Program ....................................................................................................... 6-5
Table 6-5: Maintenance and Miscellaneous Support Areas Program ............................................... 6-6
Table 6-6: Security Area Program ...................................................................................................... 6-6
Table 6-7: Estimated Space Needs for MMPT Parking ..................................................................... 6-7
Table 6-8: Estimated Space Needs for MMPT Bicycle Station.......................................................... 6-8
Table 6-9: SPI-1 Downtown Loading Table ....................................................................................... 6-8
Table 6-10: Passenger Rail Program Summary ..............................................................................6-11
Table 6-11: Commuter Express and Local Bus Program Summary................................................6-12
Table 6-12: Intercity Bus Program Summary ...................................................................................6-15
Table 6-13: Vehicles for Hire Program Summary ............................................................................6-15
Table 6-14: Regional Light Rail and Streetcar Program Summary .................................................6-16
Table 6-15: Building Program Summary (Including Platforms) .......................................................6-16
Table 6-16: Total Building Program Comparison .............................................................................6-17
Table 7-1: Alternative A Intermodal Transfers for MMPT Passengers .............................................. 7-2
Table 7-2: Alternative B Intermodal Transfers for MMPT Passengers .............................................. 7-6
Table 7-3: Alternative C Intermodal Transfers for MMPT Passengers ............................................7-10
Table 8-1: Passenger Frequent Destination ...................................................................................... 8-3
Table 9-1: MMPT Alternatives Comparison ....................................................................................... 9-1
Table 1: Low-Level Platform Dimension Summary ............................................................................... 4
Table 2: High-Level Platform Dimension Summary .............................................................................. 4
Table 3: Amtrak Medium and Large Minimum Station Requirements .................................................. 6
Table 4: Amtrak Platform Length Guidelines ........................................................................................ 7
Table 5: Amtrak Platform Width Guidelines .......................................................................................... 8
Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project vi November 2010
List of Figures
Figure 1-1: Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Study Area .................................................................. 1-2
Figure 2-1: Western Trunk .................................................................................................................. 2-4
Figure 3-1: Commuter Rail Vehicle Dimensions ................................................................................ 3-6
Figure 3-2: Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor Study Alternative MMPT Rail Configuration .......3-13
Figure 3-3: Potential Regional LRT and Streetcar Alignments ........................................................3-16
Figure 3-4: Passenger Rail Alternative A .........................................................................................3-18
Figure 3-5: Passenger Rail Alternative B .........................................................................................3-18
Figure 3-6: Passenger Rail Alternative C .........................................................................................3-19
Figure 4-1: Bus Layout Alternative A ................................................................................................4-10
Figure 4-2: Bus Layout Alternative B ................................................................................................4-11
Figure 4-3: Bus Layout Alternative C ................................................................................................4-12
Figure 4-4: Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor Study Alternative MMPT Bus Layouts ................4-13
Figure 5-1: South Station Aerial View ................................................................................................ 5-5
Figure 5-2: 30
th
Street Station Aerial View ......................................................................................... 5-6
Figure 5-3: DC Union Station Aerial View .......................................................................................... 5-7
Figure 5-4: LA Union Station Aerial View ........................................................................................... 5-7
Figure 6-1: Passenger Rail Adjacency Diagram ..............................................................................6-10
Figure 6-2: Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Station Waiting Area .............................6-11
Figure 6-3: Intercity Bus Adjacency Diagram ...................................................................................6-13
Figure 7-1: Alternative A Walkshed ..................................................................................................7-15
Figure 7-2: Alternative B Walkshed ..................................................................................................7-16
Figure 7-3: Alternative C Walkshed..................................................................................................7-17
Figure 8-1: Walkshed Locations and Points of Interest ..................................................................... 8-2
Figure 9-1: MMPT Alternative A Track Level ..................................................................................... 9-4
Figure 9-2: MMPT Alternative A Lower Level ..................................................................................... 9-5
Figure 9-3: MMPT Alternative A Upper Level..................................................................................... 9-6
Figure 9-4: MMPT Alternative B Track Level ..................................................................................... 9-9
Figure 9-5: MMPT Alternative B Lower Level ...................................................................................9-10
Figure 9-6: MMPT Alternative B Upper Level...................................................................................9-11
Figure 9-7: MMPT Alternative C Track Level ...................................................................................9-13
Figure 9-8: MMPT Alternative C Lower Level ..................................................................................9-14
Figure 9-9: MMPT Alternative C Upper Level ..................................................................................9-15
Figure 1: Greyhound Bus Slip Layout and Turning Dimensions ......................................................... 10
Figure 2: Commuter / Express Bus Boarding Layout and Turning Guidelines ................................... 12

Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project vii November 2010
List of Acronyms

AREMA American Railway Engineering and
Maintenance Association
ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and
Air Conditioning Engineers
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
ARC Atlanta Regional Commission
BRT Bus Rapid Transit
CAP Central Atlanta Progress
CNG Compressed Natural Gas
CSX Chessie Seaboard X Transportation
CCT Cobb Community Transit
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FTE Full Time Equivalent
GDOT Georgia Department of Transportation
GRTA Georgia Regional Transportation Authority
GCT Gwinnett County Transit
HJAIA Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport
HSGT High Speed Ground Transportation
HSR High Speed Rail
HVAC Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning
LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design
LOS Level of Service
MARTA Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority
MMPT Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal
NFPA National Fire Protection Association
NS Norfolk Southern Railways
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PIDS Passenger Information Display System
P3 Public Private Partnership
RFP Request for Proposals
SPI Special Public Interest
GWCC The Georgia World Congress Center Authority
TOD Transit Oriented Development
TDOT Tennessee Department of Transportation
USGBC United States Green Building Council

1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA), in cooperation with the
Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT), City of Atlanta, Georgia Regional
Transportation Authority (GRTA), Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC), and Atlanta
Downtown Improvement District (ADID) have initiated conceptual planning and design
activities to advance the implementation of the Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal (MMPT)
in Downtown Atlanta, Georgia. The MMPT project aligns with the regions vision to
enhance the existing and future transportation systems by creating a transportation hub
that provides connections to existing MARTA heavy rail service; planned passenger rail
operations; planned streetcar operations; intercity, local and express bus operations;
and new private development that would stimulate economic growth around the site.
These planning and design activities will support the procurement of a Master Developer
to oversee final design, construction, and management of MMPT.
The purpose of this technical memorandum is to document the current requirements of
potential operators and future needs of an integrated MMPT facility that will include
freight rail, passenger rail, bus operations, and vehicles for hire. The requirements for
these transportation modes are considered along with pedestrian, bicycle, and
automobile access and circulation.
The MMPT study area, known as the Gulch, extends roughly from Peachtree Street on
the east, Marietta Street on the north, Centennial Olympic Park Drive on the west, and
Trinity Avenue and Peters Street on the south and includes the Five Points MARTA rail
station. Figure 1-1 presents a map of the study area. While these boundaries provide a
framework for the development process, the ultimate MMPT location and layout will be
an output of the Master Developers planning process. Using information gathered
through consultation with various stakeholders, this memorandum updates operational
requirements for the various transportation modes envisioned at the MMPT and provides
context for future planning and implementation activities.
1.1 Study Area and Background
Most of the Gulch consists of parking lots and decks used by the downtown government
and business districts, patrons of Philips Arena and the CNN Center, and fans of the
Atlanta Falcons football team utilizing the Georgia Dome. The original principal
passenger rail terminal, called Terminal Station, was situated almost in the center of the
study area. Currently the Richard B. Russell Federal building sits on the original site.
The purpose of the MMPT is to create a transportation hub in downtown Atlanta that
accommodates existing and future intercity, express and local bus services while
providing spaces for taxicab, shuttle, and car-sharing operations. In addition, the MMPT
must also have the capacity to accommodate future commuter rail, high speed rail
(HSR), light rail, and streetcar services. The Five Points MARTA rail station in the
northeast corner of the study area is an important connection to the local heavy rail
transit system. With connections to MARTA rail service, the MMPT can also serve and
improve trips to Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (HJAIA). In the
southwest corner, freight rail presently operates directly west of the vacant former
Norfolk Southern (NS) headquarters (Southern Railways Buildings).
Figure 1-1: Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Study Area

Source: AECOM
Construction of the MMPT is also an opportunity for redevelopment in the Gulch area.
The proposed passenger terminal and associated development can provide a transition
from the Georgia Dome/Centennial Olympic Park area to Underground Atlanta and the
government district. Landscaping, sidewalk, and local street access improvements will
enhance the experience of patrons, pedestrians, bicyclists, and automobile drivers within
the study area.
Planning for the proposed MMPT began in the early 1990s. The proposed project is
included in several previous planning studies and reports. Current planning reports such
as the Green Line Plan (Downtown Atlantas green space and development vision plan),
Connect Atlanta (City of Atlantas Comprehensive Transportation Plan), Concept 3
(Atlanta regions long-range transit plan), and the Georgia Interim State Rail Plan all
support the development of the MMPT.
In February 2002, the Georgia Rail Passenger Program led by GDOT adopted Concept
6 as the preferred design and requirements for the MMPT. Concept 6 set forth a plan to
house commuter and intercity passenger rail, regional commuter and intercity buses,
direct pedestrian connections to the Five Points and Dome/GWCC/Philips Arena/CNN
Center MARTA rail stations, and additional roadways. Concept 6 also encouraged
overbuild development.
GDOT is preparing to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to procure a Master
Developer to oversee the implementation of the MMPT. In January 2010, MARTA
agreed to assist GDOT by leading a technical committee to update the requirements
identified for the MMPT. The technical committee includes representation from GDOT,
City of Atlanta, MARTA, ARC, GRTA, and ADID. The technical committee has led the
effort to further refine the operational functionality of the MMPT and develop an
implementation plan for the transit facility improvements.
1.2 Methodology and Data
Many studies and reports focused on or referenced the MMPT by either providing
detailed program requirements or conceptual plans. The following documents were
considered for this technical analysis:
Southeast High Speed Rail (HSR) Corridor Study Alternate MMPT Configuration
Report (Georgia Rail Consultants, July 2009)
Downtown Xpress Bus Circulation MOA (City of Atlanta, MARTA and GRTA, May
2009)
Decatur Belt Abandonment Technical Review Committee Findings Report (Decatur
Belt Advisory Committee, March 2009)
Western Trunk Freight Relief Options Memorandum (Transit Implementation Board,
February 2009)
Transit Planning Board Final Concept 3 Technical Report (Transit Planning Board,
January 2009)
Georgia Interim State Rail Plan (Georgia Department of Transportation Intermodal
Programs Division, 2009)
Imagine Downtown Encore Update: Envisioning Central Atlantas Future (Central
Atlanta Progress, 2009)
Five Points Area Bus Transfer Center Concept and Operating Plan Report (URS
Corporation, March 2008)
The Green Line Plan (Central Atlanta Progress, January 2008)
Commuter Rail Plan Update (R.L. Banks & Associates, Inc., December 2007)
Georgia Rail Passenger Program: Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Concept Design
Report (Georgia Rail Consultants, February 2002)
Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Master Plan and Site Concept (Heery International,
May 1994)
Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Program of Requirements (Heery International,
April 1994)
Atlanta Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Feasibility Study (Atlanta Regional
Commission, April 1992)
In addition to previous plans and studies, this technical memorandum is supplemented
by information gathered from transportation operators through interviews and surveys.
These transportation stakeholders are listed in Appendix A.
2.0 FREIGHT RAIL REQUIREMENTS
In addition to the parking decks and lots characterizing the MMPT study area, freight rail
operations and property are defining elements. Any transportation investment or
economic development within the MMPT study area will have to consider NS and CSX
operations. The north-south orientation of freight rail movements drives the passenger
rail alignment, which is an anchor in the proposed MMPT. Private development must
plan around freight clearance requirements and right-of-way (ROW) limitations. As a
result, NS and CSX will be major stakeholders in the development of the MMPT.
2.1 Vehicle Design
Most railroads require a minimum vertical clearance of 23 feet for any new construction.
Currently the largest car using the national freight rail network is a double-stack
container car that requires a minimum vertical clearance of 21 feet. This additional
clearance allows for dynamic loading, future surfacing of track, and consideration for any
new car technology that might increase car height. The American Railway Engineering
and Maintenance Association (AREMA) standards require construction of a crash wall
where pier or obstructions are present within 25 feet of a railroad centerline. Current
freight rail vehicle dimensions are presented in Table 2-1.
Table 2-1: Freight Rail Vehicle Dimensions

Operator

Standard Box Car High Box Car Auto Box Car

Height Width Length Height Width Length Height Width Length
CSX
50 feet 10'-11" 9'-6" 50'-7" 13'-0" 9'-6" 50'-6"
60 feet 10'-10" 9'-4" 60'-9" 13'-0" 9'-6" 60'-9"
86 feet 13'-0" 9'-6" 86'-6"
Norfolk Southern
(max dimensions
shown)
50 feet 10'-11" 9'-7" 52'-6" 13'-2" 9'-6" 50'-6"
60 feet 10'-12" 9'-6" 60'-9" 13'-2" 9'-6" 60'-9" 13'-2" 9'-2" 60'-9"
86 feet 12'9" 9-'2" 86'-6" 12'9" 9-'2" 86'-6"
Source: Norfolk Southern and CSX
2.2 Volume for 2015 and 2030
NS and CSX provided current freight volumes for their respective ROWs. NS currently
operates 27 to 42 trains per day on their tracks through the study area. CSX separated
their rail traffic into three segments:
Western Leg - 15 to 20 trains per day
Spring Track (Southern Leg) - 6 to 10 trains per day
Eastern Leg 5 to 10 trains per day
CSX trains per day within the study area totaled 26 to 40 trains. Figure 2-1 provides the
location of each segment. CSX has trackage rights on NS rail lines to operate through
the area. These trackage rights agreements are proprietary information. The scheduled
usage for these tracks is 7 days per week, 365 days per year. Train lengths vary by train
and type of commodity being transported.
The National Rail Freight Infrastructure Capacity and Investment Study prepared for the
Association of American Railroads by Cambridge Systematics in September 2007
utilized data and information provided by the Class I railroads including NS and CSX.
The study projects that freight rail growth over the next 30 years (2005 to 2035) will
increase by 85 percent. This projected growth could take place in the form of train
volumes or train lengths. Note that these projections were made prior to the recent
economic downturn (2007-2009) and use a projection year of 2035, which is slightly
beyond the MMPTs proposed build-out year of 2030.
2.3 Track Requirements
The train movements of both NS and CSX are all through movements with no customers
or switching operations located within the study area. The tracks are cleared for double-
stack container rail traffic. Both NS and CSX transport commodities classified as
hazardous through the study area. Timetable speed is 30 miles per hour (mph) with the
typical speed of approximately 25 mph. There are no current plans to electrify any
tracks, but that option should not be ruled out or eliminated for future rail operations.
Electrification would not require a height clearance greater than that for freight. A key
design issue is whether all track in the terminal would be accessible by freight.
Assuming that the Circle wye would have to accommodate freight service, structures
over the track would require minimum vertical clearance for freight, which would meet
electrification needs.
Both NS and CSX state that there are no bypass or alternative rail routes for freight
operations within the study area. Hence, there is a need for improvements of tracks
leading to the MMPT study area to manage the addition of passenger rail within the
same corridor.
NS believes that sufficient ROW is owned and controlled by the railroad to provide for
future capacity improvements to meet freight rail growth projections. Both railroads
require roadway access to tracks and signals for maintenance, inspection, and security
operations.
Generally, current standard track centers are 15 feet. This dimension can increase
significantly if operations are proposed that affect existing freight rail operations. Most
high-level platforms for passenger rail require a horizontal clearance of 5 feet 6 inches.
This horizontal clearance poses a restriction to freight rail operations. The railroads
generally object to this clearance and any specialized track work that provides for this
close a clearance.
2.4 Improvements and Modifications to Tracks
While both NS and CSX provided information and data indicating their current rail
operations through the project area, neither railroad provided insight into any proposed
improvements or modifications planned to their rail operations. Both railroads have
announced and are planning significant corridor improvements on their rail network, but
those announcements did not encompass the MMPT study area.
However, there have been discussions amongst several transportation stakeholders in
the Atlanta region on how to relieve freight traffic along the Western Trunk with the
addition of passenger rail in the same corridor. The Western Trunk is defined as the
section of railroad between Howell Junction to the north and the Spring Track to the
south, as shown in Figure 2-1. The Western Trunk Freight Relief Options Memorandum
published in 2009 explores improvements such as grade separation and rerouting at
Howell Junction to reduce freight trains along the Western Trunk to accommodate
passenger rail service. In addition, the tracks underneath Philips Arena, which were
active when the facilities were built, are now out of service and will require reconstruction
to increase freight and passenger rail capacity. Figure 2-1 indicates that the ROW is still
in existence somewhat, but currently inactive.
NS has indicated that their surplus property in the project area is currently available for
sale. Appendix D and the Property Ownership and Estimated Value Technical
Memorandum published in October 2010 provide details on property owned by NS. It is
possible that a third-party developer could acquire this surplus railroad property project
and pursue development that does not conform to the proposed usage for the MMPT.
It is anticipated that once the entire development area is refined and approved, NS and
CSX will be better positioned to determine specific impacts to their operations and to
identify improvements that could potentially mitigate or avoid such impacts. NS currently
requests a 100-foot horizontal clearance from the centerline of their existing rail
alignment to provide for future freight rail growth. These requirements would preclude
any passenger train operations and associated ROW and clearance requirements. A
100-foot clearance requirement from the existing freight rail tracks within the study area
would severely hinder the inclusion of other transit modes and related facilities such as
passenger rail operations. The Master Developer will need to negotiate these critical
clearance requirements with both NS and CSX based on specific design proposals.
2.5 Fire Life Safety Requirements
Generally, freight railroads do not have requirements for ventilation in tunnel sections
due to the absence of any passengers; however, consideration must be given to protect
tunnels and property from freight tunnel fires due to high design fire heat release rate for
goods in freight train vehicles. The proximity of freight and passenger operations to
each other and the adjacent development, particularly in partially or fully enclosed
sections, will require evaluation of the normal, congested and emergency design
scenarios.
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 130 includes fire-life safety considerations
where passenger operations are affected by freight operations. The American Society
of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Handbook 2007
Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Applications, Chapter 13 covers
ventilation requirements for enclosed vehicular facilities. Criteria for normal operations
will need to be developed for emissions concentrations considering both Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
regulations. Criteria for emergency operations, such as Design Fire Heat Release Rate,
tenability limits and other fire-life safety related items will need to be developed.
The development above and adjacent to freight track will need to coordinate any
required ventilation plant and related intakes and discharges, as well as air intakes for
the development. Beyond pollutant concentrations and EPA limits, odor will also have to
be considered for the adjacent developments intakes.

Figure 2-1: Western Trunk

Source: AECOM
These are heavy-duty industrial-grade ventilation and control systems dealing with
adverse exposures on a day-to-day basis, while being available at any instant to address
fire-life safety requirements of an emergency nature. The Fire Protection approach will
require coordination with the ventilation and smoke management approach.
These requirements would need to be addressed by the Master Developer on a design
specific level, particularly (but not limited to) where freight and passenger rail lines share
ROW through station platforms or other enclosed areas. Adjacent and overbuild
development structural and architectural design criteria will also need to address noise
and vibration transmission.
2.6 Summary of Freight Rail Needs
Information regarding current and future rail operations and potential requirements of
both NS and CSX were based on information gathered through stakeholder surveys.
However, without further detail regarding proposed passenger operations including the
location of any required track, it will be difficult for either NS or CSX to provide any
meaningful information or criteria for consideration. It is important to continue
consultation with NS and CSX during the project development process and present the
entire developmental concept to both freight rail operators for concurrence in order to
maintain support for the project. The recommended course of action, in the context of
the current development process, may be a series of interim agreements as criteria are
established or operations identified that would allow for the construction of the MMPT.
3.0 PASSENGER RAIL REQUIREMENTS
Passenger rail facilities and design requirements for the MMPT are described in this
section. Passenger rail incorporates commuter and intercity rail, streetcar and regional
light rail. For facilities and station footprints described in this section of the report, unless
specifically identified, intercity rail includes Amtrak and HSR.
In 2009, the Decatur Belt Abandonment Technical Review Committee examined the
potential for phasing access of Amtraks passenger rail service to the MMPT to expedite
upgrades to Amtraks current service, which is limited at its current Peachtree Station.
To evaluate the opportunity for Amtrak to move its existing station to an improved
location for operations with MARTA access that could also serve some of its future
needs as well as commuter rail, the Technical Review Committee assessed potential
station sites at the Lenox, Brookhaven and Doraville MARTA stations. The Technical
Review Committee concluded that a new intermodal station for existing Amtrak service
and future service additions is feasible at all three existing MARTA stations along
MARTAs northeast line and that the same location could also have potential to serve
some commuter rail services consistent with the adopted regional transit plan as shown
in Concept 3. However, the purpose of this technical memorandum is to address options
to accommodate commuter and intercity (conventional and high speed) trains at a
downtown MMPT terminal. Options include accommodating Amtrak, even though future
routing of Amtrak services may not operate at the proposed MMPT.
High speed ground transportation (HSGT) between Atlanta and Chattanooga, which
includes steel-wheeled and Maglev technologies, is currently in the planning phase; a
Tier I Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is being prepared under the lead of GDOT
and the Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) to assess the potential
environmental impacts within the planned corridor. It is envisioned that this service will
eventually extend as far north as Chicago and south to Jacksonville.
As indicated in the Decatur Belt Abandonment Technical Review Committee Findings
Report, Amtrak and HSGT service should considered in a comprehensive cost-benefit
analysis of having all future passenger rail services converge at the MMPT. A more
detailed cost/benefit analysis should be conducted once more data is available on
ridership projections for other passenger rail systems.
Future streetcar and regional light rail modes such as the Atlanta Streetcar along
Peachtree Street and bus rapid transit (BRT) along the I-20 corridor are also envisioned
to serve the MMPT. These typically would access the facility along roadway ROW,
commingled either with traffic or in exclusive transit-only lanes. Streetcar and regional
light rail are electrically powered, typically operating with a pantograph and an overhead
wire as the power source. Regional light rail may also include electric, diesel, dual-mode
vehicles. While these modes are envisioned as future links, they are not critical for the
conceptual design of platforms and track configuration at the MMPT; however,
operational requirements for access to, and intermodal connections at the MMPT are
addressed.
Table 3-1 provides intercity and commuter rail design attributes because of their
significant affect on the footprint of the proposed MMPT development. A summary of
elements such as the guideway type, operating speeds, power source, platform lengths,
and examples of intercity and commuter rail technologies are presented.
Each mode of passenger rail is discussed as it relates to vehicle design, ridership and
platform capacity, and track requirements and improvements in the following sections.
The passenger rail modes are grouped under each category to facilitate an overall
understanding of passenger rail needs.
Table 3-1: Summary of Intercity and Commuter Rail Design Requirements
Intercity Commuter
Conventional High Speed Maglev
Locomotive
Hauled
DMU
FRA-compliant
DMU
not FRA-
compliant
EMU Maglev
Guideway Track
Special Guideway
Crossings Signals/Gates
Grade Separated Only
Operating
Speed
< 110 mph
110 - 250 mph
> 250 mph
Technology
Rating
Proven
Limited Use
Power Diesel
Diesel/Electric
Electric
Power
Source
Fuel
Catenary
Power Rail
Guideway
Platforms Typical Length up to 1600 ft 700 to 1400 ft
250 to 500 ft
(3 - 6 sections)
up to 1100 ft up to 600 ft up to 300 ft up to 1000 ft
Examples Active
Amtrak
VIA (Canada)
TGV (France)
AVE (Spain)
ICE (Germany)
Chicago RTA
Maryland MARC
LA Metrolink
Wilsonville
(Tri-Met)
River Line
(NJ Transit)
Metra Electric
Deux Montagnes
M&E Lines
Shanghai Airport
Closed
Birmingham (UK)
Berlin M-Bahn

Source: AECOM
3.1 Vehicle Design
The MMPT will need to accommodate a wide variety of rail vehicle types. This section
outlines design requirements for the vehicles providing commuter, intercity, streetcar,
and light rail service.
3.1.1 Commuter Rail
Several commuter rail vehicle types can be utilized. The vehicle types identified for
service should meet ridership demand, and allow cost-efficient and attractive levels of
service. The vehicles considered in the Georgia Commuter Rail Plan were standard
locomotive-hauled passenger coaches of approximately 85 feet in length and 10 feet in
width. Past MMPT station sketches included 300-foot platforms for commuter rail; that
would accommodate three passenger cars (255 feet) and the locomotive.
The majority of commuter rail systems in North America operate passenger coaches
with a locomotive capable of push-pull operation. In cases where the locomotive pushes
the train from the rear, an operator cab is provided in the lead passenger car.
Diesel multiple units (DMU) - A DMU is a diesel-powered, self-propelled passenger
railcar that can respond to local or remote commands. Only FRA compliant diesel
multiple units (DMU) systems are permitted on freight rail corridors. This is due to the
Federal Railway Administration setting higher coupling strength requirements than
European regulators, effectively prohibiting the use of lighter weight European-style
inter-city rail DMUs on U.S. main line railways. Several rail operators use DMUs meeting
FRA requirements in Colorado, Florida, and Oregon.

Emission from the diesel engines are required to comply with the 40 CFR 89 Tier 4
levels. EPA Tier 4 standards require that emissions of PM and NOx be further reduced
by about 90%. Such emission reductions can be achieved through the use of control
technologies similar to those required by the 2007-2010 standards for highway engines.
When compared to locomotive-hauled vehicles:

Emissions for DMU service are directly related to train length; and
For all train lengths, DMUs have lower emission levels than locomotive-hauled
equipment.

Alternative propulsion for commuter rail include self-propelled electric multiple units
(EMU) as operated in Chicago (Metra Electric), New York, Connecticut (Metro North and
Long Island), and New Jersey. New Jersey Transit and Metro North also operate
commuter rail trains with electric and dual-mode (electric/diesel) locomotive-hauled
coaches (Dual-Mode LHC). Dimensions of commuter rail vehicles currently in service
are listed in
Table 3-2 and illustrated in Figure 3-1.
The dimensions and operating characteristics of these vehicles are not essentially
different from commuter vehicles currently in operation. For example, the basic concept
vehicle for FRA compliant DMU and EMU platforms from Siemens meet all applicable
requirements of US Regulations for Tier 1 passenger rail vehicles; vehicle dimensions
are governed by Amtrak clearance limits (85 feet long, 10 feet wide).
To increase passenger capacity per train while maintaining a maximum train consist, or
the number of rail cars that form a unit, both bi-level and gallery cars are used. Bi-level
passenger cars provide seating on two separate floors; each floor has a central aisle.
Gallery cars include a single row of seats and an aisle on each side of the upper level,
the lower level includes a single, central aisle. Gallery cars allow a conductor to check
fares on both levels from the lower-level central aisle. Bi-level can provide the greatest
increase in passenger capacity and therefore are the most common type of multi-level
vehicle. The majority of gallery cars in North American operate in the Chicago region.
Table 3-2: Commuter Rail Vehicle Dimensions

Single-Level Passenger Car Multi-Level Passenger Car Engine
Height Width Length Height Width Length Height Width Length
Electric Multiple
Units (EMU)
Montreal - Deux Montagnes Chicago - Metra Electric (Gallery)
NA
14-6 10-6 85-4 15-11 10-6 85-0
Diesel Multiple
Units (DMU)
Colorado - Railcar (proposed) Colorado - Railcar (proposed)
14-7 10-6 85-0 19-8 10-6 89-0
Diesel Locomotive
-hauled Coach
(LHC)
New Jersey - Comet V Car Vancouver - Bombardier (Bi-level) New Mexico acceptance phase
12-8 10-8 85-0 15-11 9-10 85-0 15-11 10-8.75 70-0
Electric/Diesel
(Dual Mode) LHC
NA
Connecticut - Metro North
14-6 10-6 69-0
Source: AECOM
Figure 3-1: Commuter Rail Vehicle Dimensions

Source: AECOM
Commuter rail vehicle passenger capacities vary. Table 3-3 displays seated capacity for
single and bi-level vehicle types that would be appropriate for an Atlanta region
commuter rail network. The following table assumes push-pull operation with diesel-
electric locomotives, similar to those operated in the Seattle and Los Angeles regions
and in New Mexico.
Table 3-3: Vehicle Capacity by Type and Train Consist
Vehicle Type (2x2 seating) Capacity(Car/Cab)
Capacity per Train Consist
2 car 3 car 4 car 5 car
Single-level 96/90 186 282 378 474
Bi-level 151/141 292 443 594 745
Source: AECOM
3.1.2 Amtrak
Dual-Mode LHC trains service the majority of the Amtrak network. However, the busiest
and highest ridership intercity passenger rail corridor, the Northeast Corridor between
Washington, DC, New York, and Boston, is electrified and electric locomotives propel
the majority of trains. This includes the high speed Acela service that replaced the initial
high speed Metroliner EMUs, which were inaugurated in the 1960s. While it is unlikely
that electrification will be required for HSGT service through the Atlanta MMPT, design
should not preclude electrification.
High speed rail technologies are operational in other locations throughout the world,
including France (TGV) Germany (ICE), Spain (Talgo), and Japan (Shinkansen). These
high speed lines are completely grade-separated on exclusive rights-of-way. However,
the Acela is commingled with freight.
Amtrak passenger cars are typically 85 feet in length and approximately 10 feet 6 inches
wide. Configurations include single and bi-level cars. The bi-level Superliner vehicles
operate primarily on long distance trains within the western Amtrak network. Superliner
vehicle height precludes its operation through many tunnels in the eastern section of the
Amtrak network. Table 3-4 provides typical Amtrak vehicle dimensions.
Table 3-4: Amtrak Vehicle Types and Dimensions
Vehicle Type Utilization Length Width Height
Amfleet II Coach Current 854 106 128
Viewliner Sleeper Current 850 106 140
Heritage Baggage Current 850 106 137
P42 Passenger Locomotive Current 690 100 148
Bi-level Coach Future 850 103 162
F59 Passenger Locomotive Future 582 108 160
Acela Coach HSR TBD 875 104 1310
Acela Power Car HSR TBD 697 105 142
Source: Amtrak

Trains for intercity service vary between as few as four to fourteen passenger and
auxiliary cars. Shorter trains of four to eight cars are more typical for busier corridors with
several trains per day. Long distance trains often comprise ten or more cars; this is
particularly true for western trains originating or terminating in Chicago and the Crescent
Corridor between the northeast and New Orleans, which operates through Atlanta.
3.1.3 Streetcar and Regional Light Rail
Streetcar and light rail vehicles have been identified for the Atlanta BeltLine and the
Atlanta Streetcar projects. These projects are elements of a broader surface rail network
envisioned in the Connect Atlanta Plan and in Concept 3. Table 3-5 summarizes
characteristics for typical streetcar and light rail vehicles.
Table 3-5: Streetcar and Light Rail Vehicle Dimensions and Characteristics
Characteristics Minneapolis Light Rail Portland Streetcar Salt Lake Light Rail (new)
Dimensions 94 x 8.75 66 x 8.07 81.4 x 8.7
Gradient 5% 9% 7%
Minimum curve 82 60 82
Maximum speed 55 mph 42 mph 65 mph
Low floor share 70% 50% 68%
Seated passengers 66 30 60
Standing passengers 180 87 149
Total Passengers 246 117 209
Source: AECOM

For MMPT station interface, it is prudent that design criteria not preclude either streetcar
or light rail. In this case, light rail design criteria would prevail as these can
accommodate operation by both modes.
3.2 Ridership and Platform Capacity
3.2.1 Commuter Rail
Ridership forecasts for a seven-line commuter rail system was estimated based on
catchment areas around station site, work trip origin, destination, and journey-to-work
information from ARC, and an assumed capture rate of commuter rail for work trips.
Ridership findings were published in the Commuter Rail Plan Update report developed
by R.L. Banks and Associates in 2009. The capture rate was defined based on
alignment, travel time, congestion, and access. The overarching concept was that the
commuter rail line would have to provide a distinct advantage in terms of trip time and
cost as compared to a personal vehicle. In addition, the analysis assumed three inbound
and outbound peak period trips, one midday round trip, free transfer to MARTA rail and
buses, free parking at stations, and a graduated distance-based fare structure. Ridership
estimates were developed by line for 2030 and are displayed in
Table 3-6. Eight weekday trains were assumed for each commuter rail route.
Table 3-6 shows a range of 149 to 581 passengers per train. The larger value would
require a four-car train, assuming bi-level cars, and a 500-foot platform. If single-level
cars were used, a six-car train and a 600-foot platform would be required.
Table 3-6: Commuter Rail Ridership Estimates for 2030
Line
Distance
[miles]
Time
[min]
2030 Boardings Average Riders per Train
Low High Low High
Athens 73.6 105 3,000 3,700 376 464
Bremen 52.0 85 1,600 2,200 198 275
Canton 43.0 74 2,300 3,400 290 426
Gainesville 53.0 77 1,200 2,500 155 306
Macon 103.9 130 1,700 2,200 218 269
Madison 68.0 87 3,200 4,700 400 581
Senoia 38.0 54 1,200 1,700 149 210
Source: Commuter Rail Plan Update 2007

The December 2008 Final Technical Report prepared by the Transit Planning Board
(Concept 3) also provided ridership forecasts; five commuter rail lines were proposed as
part of the Concept 3:
Athens to Atlanta, all-day service
Griffin to Atlanta, all-day service
Senoia to Atlanta, peak-period service
Bremen to Atlanta, peak-period service
Gainesville to Atlanta, peak-period service

According to Concept 3, these proposed commuter rail lines provided medium- to high-
capacity radial transit service to and from the Downtown and Midtown travel markets. All-
day rail service was proposed on the Athens and Griffin lines because of higher
demands (including reverse peak direction demands) within these corridors. The Griffin
and Athens lines could be interlined to provide a one-seat (non-transfer) ride between
the two corridors. The three peak-period lines could also be through-routed to the
Southern Crescent Transportation Center to provide service to the Airport via a proposed
Airport-Southern Crescent transit connection.

3.2.2 Amtrak
Amtrak daily boardings and alightings for the Crescent train were 96,453 for Fiscal Year
2009 (October 2008 September 2009). Of these passengers, approximately 1.6
percent, or 1,531 requested ADA accessible accommodation.
This ridership is low when compared to facilities like the Port Authority Bus Terminal in
New York City, which boards 200,000 passengers per day. Although the projected
ridership for other planned passenger transportation systems is unknown, the increased
intermodal connections provided at the MMPT will likely increase Amtrak ridership.
Service expansion is envisioned within a five- to ten-year timeframe. In this case, an
extension of the Southeast HSR / Northeast Corridor service via Richmond, Raleigh, and
Charlotte to Atlanta, Macon, and Jacksonville has been identified. In the long term,
continued development of the aforementioned service would occur as well as potential
new service between Atlanta and points west, northwest, and southeast. Approximately
8 to 10 daily trains are anticipated by 2020 and 12 to 16 by 2025. These estimates were
based on the States Commuter Rail Plan Update published in 2007.
Amtrak Crescent service typically operates with ten cars and two engines. This would
require a platform length of approximately 1,000 feet. Future HSGT trains, if comparable
to Acela service in the Northeast Corridor, would comprise fixed train sets of semi-
permanent passenger cars with power cars at each end. Acela train consists include six
passenger car and two power cars and are approximately 666 feet long, but 700 feet is
the preferred length.
3.3 Track Requirements
3.3.1 Commuter Rail
The Georgia Rail Passenger Program report identified seven commuter rail routes
radiating from downtown Atlanta. These extended to Bremen, Canton, Gainesville,
Athens, Madison, Macon, and Senoia. This study assumed six daily trips to a downtown
Atlanta terminal and six trips from the terminal to each line for a total of 84 daily arrivals
and departures.
In addition to commuter rail service, the report identified longer-distance service to
Augusta, Columbus, Albany, and Jacksonville
2
. Trains to the latter two destinations
would operate via Macon. Three trips to and from Atlanta for each intercity route was
assumed, resulting in a total of 30 daily arrivals and departures.
A total of 114 trips to and from the downtown Atlanta terminal were identified for both
commuter and intercity rail. Assuming that commuter rail trips arrive and depart during
peak periods and that intercity trains operate during off-peak periods, 14 to 21 commuter
rail trips would require at least two tracks, based on a turn time of five minutes, service
frequency of 20 to 30 minutes, and either a 2- or 3-hour peak period. Two tracks would
be required with either terminating or through service. Should turn time be consistently
greater than 5, but less than 9 minutes, three tracks would be required. This indicates
that a minimum four-track, two-platform configuration would be required for commuter
rail service. Based on expected ridership and assuming bi-level commuter trains, 600-
foot platforms would accommodate the highest anticipated demand in 2030. This total
must be jointly considered with that for Amtrak and HSGT and the track throat design to
determine track requirements.
3.3.2 Amtrak and High Speed Ground Transportation
Future expansion of Amtrak service and implementation of HSGT service may result in
12 daily trains by 2025. The future operating plan will define which trains will terminate,
turn, or continue through the MMPT. Based on the recommendations of the Southeast
High Speed Rail Corridor Study Alternative MMPT Configuration Report (Southeast HSR
Study), four to six tracks with center platforms would be required to accommodate future
Amtrak and HSGT services. The Southeast HSR Study identified the need for four high
speed rail tracks with two center platforms and two intercity rail tracks with a single
center platform. In addition, four intercity stub-end tracks, with center platforms, were
located behind the unoccupied former Norfolk Southern headquarters building. Figure
3-2 provides a diagram of the rail configuration from the Southeast HSR Study.

2
The Georgia Interim State Rail Plan also identified an intercity rail line from Valdosta to Atlanta.
The ongoing Atlanta to Chattanooga High Speed Ground Transportation (HSGT) Project
Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement identifies potential alignments within downtown
Atlanta. The alignments, currently proposed to be located in tunnel and oriented north-
south, includes a Downtown Atlanta Station in the vicinity of the existing
Dome/GWCC/Phillips Arena/CNN Center MARTA Rail Station. The project identifies two
potential high speed train technologies, which are capable of greater than 180 mph,
Maglev and Steel-Wheeled. Due to the high speed associated with this HSGT service, it
is envisioned that it will use an entirely exclusive guideway.
Considering the Atlanta to Chattanooga HSGT Projects requirement for an exclusive
guideway, and it being in a tunnel below the grade of existing rail lines and MMPT at this
point, sharing platforms with the rail systems currently proposed for the MMPT is not
possible. Thus, the Atlanta to Chattanooga HSGT Projects Downtown Atlanta Station
would have to connect to the proposed MMPT via pedestrian connections. These
connections would have to be made below grade in a tunnel, or at-grade using existing
and new pedestrian facilities. Vertical circulation measures would be required.
Figure 3-2: Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor Study Alternative MMPT Rail Configuration

Source: Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor Study Alternative MMPT Configuration Report, July 2009
3.3.3 Streetcar and Light Rail
ROW for streetcar and light rail alignments should be defined for streets adjacent to the
MMPT. While the Atlanta streetcar network concept and Concept 3 indicate operation
into and through downtown Atlanta, specific alignments have not yet been defined.
However, as preliminary MMPT sites include frontage along an extension of Alabama
Street and Russell Plaza, these new streets should be configured with sufficient ROW to
accommodate streetcar and light rail track and turn movements. Likely alignments that
would pass the MMPT include an extension of the north-south alignment of the Atlanta
Streetcar and a potential northwest-to-South DeKalb corridor. Conceptual streetcar/light
rail alignments are displayed in Figure 3-3.
3.4 Improvements and Modifications to Tracks
Potential modifications at the MMPT include relocation of the Circle wye to allow
implementation of commuter rail and Amtrak station, ladder and throat tracks. A primary
consideration for commuter rail operations is that the MMPT would be a through station
for many trips, rather than a terminal. In addition to the central MMPT, which would serve
trips destined to downtown Atlanta, two additional proposed commuter rail stations
would function as major regional multi-modal facilities. The Southern Crescent Transit
Center could potentially be located immediately east of HJAIA and a new northeast
facility could possibly be located adjacent to the MARTA rail line near Armour Drive.
These proposed stations are in the preliminary planning phase and currently there is no
guarantee of implementation.
However, the north-south orientation of tracks is appropriate, as trips from the north
could stop at the MMPT en route to a terminus at the proposed Southern Crescent
Transit Center that would serve HJAIA. Alternatively, commuter rail trips from the south
could continue north from the MMPT to a terminus at a potential Northeast Multi-Modal
Station or could interline with one of the commuter rail lines to the north.
While the north-south orientation is preferred, the ridership forecasts shown in
Table 3-6 displays significant passenger demand from the Madison corridor. The
Madison line would access the MMPT from the east, generally parallel to the MARTA
east-west local heavy rail line. The Madison line would have to pass through the Hulsey
Intermodal Facility, operated by CSX, but this line is only presented as a hypothetical or
optional route for consideration in the conceptual stages of the MMPT. To operate
through a north-south oriented MMPT, Madison line trains would have to turn south
along the Circle wye to stop at a north-south platform. Section 3.6 provides three
alternatives for the optional Madison line and the north-south orientation of track and
platform configurations. For the platform alignment shown in the Southeast HSR Study
and illustrated in Figure 3-2, a new track would be required from the Spring (southeast
wye) connection to the platform area to allow Madison trains access to the platforms
shown or to a new parallel platform.

Figure 3-3: Potential Regional LRT and Streetcar Alignments

Source: AECOM
Passenger railroads have requirements for ventilation in tunnel sections and stations.
The proximity of freight and passenger operations to each other and the adjacent
development, particularly in partially or fully enclosed sections, will require evaluation of
the normal, congested and emergency design scenarios.
NFPA 130 includes fire-life safety considerations to be made where passenger
operations are affected by freight operations. ASHRAE Handbook 2007 - HVAC
Applications, Chapter 13 covers ventilation requirements for enclosed vehicular facilities.
Amtrak EP4006 provides additional criteria for fire-life safety and normal operations
design. Criteria for normal operations will need to be developed for emissions
concentrations considering both OSHA and EPA regulations. Criteria for emergency
operations, such as Design Fire Heat Release Rate, tenability limits and other fire-life
safety related items will need to be developed for all of the rail transportation elements.
The development above and adjacent to all tracks will need to coordinate any required
ventilation plant and related intakes and discharges, as well as air intakes for the
development. Beyond pollutant concentrations and EPA limits, odor will also have to be
considered for the adjacent developments intakes.
specific level. Adjacent and overbuild development structural and architectural design
criteria will also need to address noise and vibration transmission.
3.6 Diagrams of Passenger Rail Tracks and Platform Area
Based on the recommendations of previous plans and studies, three alternatives have
been developed for track orientation at the MMPT. In general, tracks are oriented north-
south in the study area to accommodate the seven commuter rail routes as well as
Amtrak and HSR. The alternatives allow for a combination of four to six commuter rail
tracks and four to six intercity rail tracks. In this instance, intercity includes Amtrak and
HSR. Another design option for each alternative includes, in addition to the north-south
oriented tracks, an east-west platform and tracks option that would accommodate
commuter rail from the Madison corridor. These alternatives do not reflect the
requirement of the ongoing Atlanta to Chattanooga HSGT Project for entirely exclusive
guideway. Potential integration for this requirement should be addressed through more
detailed engineering and design. These requirements will need to be considered
Snapshots of the alternatives are below in Figure 3-4 through Figure 3-6 and a
comprehensive discussion of the passenger rail configurations is presented in Section
9.0 Comprehensive MMPT Alternatives.
Figure 3-4: Passenger Rail Alternative A

Source: AECOM
Figure 3-5: Passenger Rail Alternative B

Source: AECOM
Figure 3-6: Passenger Rail Alternative C

Source: AECOM
3.7 Summary of Passenger Rail Needs
Primary drivers for passenger rail station infrastructure needs are short- and long-term
operations plan for both commuter and intercity rail. In this case, intercity refers to
Amtrak and HSGT. Identified track needs for Amtrak, HSGT, and commuter rail result in
a 10-track MMPT with the option of an east-west platform and tracks. However, further
analysis must be completed to determine effective utilization and the number of tracks
necessary. The following are the minimum platform lengths for each passenger rail
service:
Commuter and Intercity Rail 600 feet
Amtrak 1000 feet (to accommodate the current Crescent corridor service)
High Speed Ground Transportation 700 feet
Streetcar 100 feet
Light Rail 200 feet
The majority of service at the MMPT will be commuter rail from the envisioned seven
lines. Correspondingly, ridership is the basis for identification of vehicle type, currently
conceived as bi-level commuter cars, which define platform dimensions. While initially
planned for peak hour operation, it is likely that commuter rail will grow to all-day service;
therefore, track design should ensure efficient operations for through as well as
terminating service. However, terminating trains do not need to remain at the proposed
MMPT; trains could return to their starting point or travel to another location. A detailed
long-term operating plan will clearly define track design and associated services. At this
stage, track design should be flexible due to the limited site space. Furthermore, the joint
commuter and intercity operating plan must be coordinated with freight operations as
well as locations of other proposed intermodal passenger nodes, such as the Southern
Crescent Transit Center and Northeast Multi-Modal Station.
Similar to commuter rail, intercity rail frequencies and routes must be defined in order to
determine the appropriate number, design, and orientation of tracks and platforms.
Baggage handling and train servicing requirements must also be incorporated into the
MMPT design. In addition, longer-term storage and servicing needs and facilities must
be determined for intercity and commuter rail.
Areas for maintenance facilities and service and storage tracks must be identified. On-
site maintenance at the proposed MMPT is not the intent due to the limited site space.
Maintenance and storage requirements must be met off-site possibly at other proposed
terminals such as the Southern Crescent Transit Center or at locations along commuter
rail lines. Midday storage areas for commuter rail terminating at the MMPT should be
located to immunize deadhead costs and impact to operations at the terminal throat, but
must be sized to accommodate fleet storage needs. Similarly, for the maintenance
facility, ultimate fleet size (current estimate of 154 cars and 51 locomotives based on the
number of commuter trains potentially to access the proposed MMPT) and anticipated
maintenance efforts will define the space requirements for a maintenance facility.



4.0 BUS REQUIREMENTS
There are several bus services anticipated to utilize the proposed MMPT. These include
local bus services operated by MARTA, commuter express bus services operated by
MARTA, GRTA (i.e., the Xpress service), CCT, and GCT, and intercity bus services
operated by Greyhound, Southeastern Stages, and possibly other intercity bus service
operators in the future.
While local MARTA bus routes will serve the MMPT as part of their role in providing
public transit service throughout central Atlanta, the commuter express and intercity bus
services will utilize the MMPT as their central Atlanta station. This will allow these
services to interchange passengers with the MARTA rail system (via the MMPTs
connection with a MARTA rail station).
This section discusses vehicle design, ridership and boarding area capacity, bus bay
requirements and the staging, storage and layover needs for bus service at the proposed
MMPT. Each of these categories is addressed with greater detail as it relates to the
requirements of the different types of bus services. It should be noted that the
information provided in this section of the report is based on available data and outreach
to the project stakeholders.
4.1 Vehicle Design
The MMPT will need to accommodate a wide variety of bus types. This section outlines
design requirements for the vehicles providing local, express, and intercity bus service.
4.1.1 Local Bus Service
The local MARTA services will most likely operate standard transit buses, which are 40
feet long (carrying capacity of approximately 40-seated passengers and about 20 to 25
standees). However, should MARTA decide to modify its local bus services, longer 60-
foot articulated buses (carrying capacity of approximately 60-seated passengers and
about 40 standees) may at one point in the future also serve the MMPT, as well as
shorter 30- or 35-foot buses (carrying capacity of approximately 33-seated passengers
and about 20 standees).
Should MARTA proceed with the development of the bus rapid transit (BRT) corridors
proposed as part of Concept 3, then it is possible that some of these BRT services will
utilize 60-foot articulated buses. Some buses utilized in BRT services have three doors
(as opposed to the more traditional two doors) on the curb (i.e., right hand) side of the
bus, to allow for a quicker boarding and alighting process and thus decrease the dwell
time at bus stops (i.e., the amount of time spent loading and unloading passengers).
In addition, modern low-floor buses will most likely form the basis of future MARTA bus
procurements, regardless of the length of the bus. Low-floor buses allow for easier
ingress and egress at bus stops and are easier for both senior citizens and the disabled
to use, as there are no steps to negotiate.
4.1.2 Express Bus Service
Currently, MARTAs commuter express services are operated using standard transit
buses, as described previously. The Xpress commuter service operated by GRTA

utilizes intercity motor coaches, which are 45 feet long and seat approximately 57
passengers each. However, these motor coaches are also equipped with a bicycle rack
on their front bumper, which effectively increases their length to almost 47 feet. Finally,
both CCT and GCT also utilize 45-foot long intercity motor coaches on their commuter
express routes, which seat approximately 57 passengers each.
4.1.3 Intercity Bus Service
Both Greyhound and Southeastern Stages utilize 45-foot long intercity motor coaches on
their routes serving the southeastern United States, including Atlanta. The seated
capacity of these vehicles ranges from 47 to 55 passengers on each bus. Future intercity
bus operations will likely utilize similar intercity motor coaches. In addition, it is possible
that intercity bus operators would utilize double-decker buses in the future; as such
vehicles are currently being utilized on intercity bus services in other parts of the nation.
The primary issue when considering the variety of bus types serving the MMPT is that
the needs of the local and commuter express services differ from the intercity service
providers, especially in terms of the length of time spent loading and unloading
passengers (i.e., the dwell time). These differences are primarily reflected in the
requirements for the bus bays, and will be discussed subsequently.
4.2 Ridership and Boarding Area Capacity
Unfortunately, none of the stakeholders surveyed for the preparation of this report,
except for MARTA, have prepared ridership projections for either 2015 or 2030. Should
the projections become available at a later date, they will be incorporated into the
analysis for the MMPT.
However, various stakeholders have provided current ridership data; this data is
summarized in Table 4-1. The ridership data provided in Table 4-1 is for the MMPT
study area, or, in the case of the intercity bus operators, for the current Atlanta terminal.
The sole exception is for the GRTA Xpress service, as the ridership data indicated
boardings along the entire route system and not solely within the MMPT study area.
Therefore, the GRTA Xpress service ridership was reduced by 75 percent, so that only
25 percent of GRTA Xpress service ridership was counted as representative of
boardings within the MMPT study area. Twenty-five percent of the total GRTA Xpress
service boardings are accounted for because about 50 percent of all GRTA boardings,
assuming trip symmetry, would account for the entire Atlanta central business district
and about half of those would account for the downtown or MMPT study area. Even
though midtown Atlanta may have a slightly greater ability to attract trips, in the future
this may be somewhat offset by the comfort of the proposed MMPT facility, the available
intermodal connections, and its ability to function as the primary downtown commuter
terminal.
It should be noted that the ridership data presented in Table 4-1 does not account for
boarding and alighting data on four of MARTAs bus routes (i.e., Routes 1, 11, 17 and
216). Therefore, the ridership total might increase to account for these MARTA bus
routes.
Assuming that some on-street local MARTA activity is moved into the MMPT facility and
that all express bus activity is also moved into the facility, a value near 14,000 boardings
per day is likely within the correct order of magnitude.

Table 4-1: Existing Ridership at or near the MMPT Study Area
Stakeholder/Operator
Existing Average Ridership at/near MMPT
Daily Boardings Daily Alightings
Intercity Operators
Greyhound 1,552 1,331
Southeastern Stages 137 147
Intercity Subtotal 1,689 1,478
Local and Express Service Operators
GRTA Xpress Service (25% of entire system) 1,105 no alighting data
Cobb Community Transit 2,130 no alighting data
Gwinnett County Transit 731 1,003
MARTA 8,667 5,851
Local/Express Subtotal 12,633 alighting data incomplete
TOTAL 14,322 alighting data incomplete
As can be seen in Table 4-1, approximately 14,300 boardings would likely take place on
an average weekday at the MMPT if the facility existed today. Alighting data is
incomplete, as the various operators do not always document it. However, assuming
some level of travel symmetry, the alighting and boarding counts are approximately 10 to
20 percent of each other.
However, it should be noted that the nature of passengers is very different when
comparing intercity bus travelers to riders of both local and express transit services.
Intercity bus passengers will require more amenities, will be at the MMPT for a longer
period, and will likely have luggage. These differences are described in detail in Section
6.0. Nonetheless, for this reason, Table 4-1 separates the existing ridership so that the
intercity passengers can be seen separately. Intercity passengers would constitute
approximately 1,700 boardings on an average day at the MMPT if the facility existed
today; the remaining 12,600 approximate daily boardings would be local and express
bus riders. These differences, and the differences in the passengers needs, will be
considered when designing the proposed facility.
Given the level of ridership data provided by the stakeholders, it would be premature to
estimate what ridership would be in 2015 and in 2030. Although some overall growth
assumptions could be made, the current ridership numbers nonetheless provide a
baseline for the size requirements of both the intercity and local/express boarding
areas at the proposed MMPT facility.
4.3 Bus Bay Requirements
Stakeholders have provided information regarding their needs in terms of bus bay
requirements for the proposed MMPT facility. In addition, prior reports and studies for
the MMPT study area have also calculated the number of bus bays that would be
required at the proposed facility. The number of bus bays depends, however, upon the
type of vehicle being berthed, as the needs for intercity and local/express bus operators
are different, and this is reflected in the type of bus bay that is most appropriate for each.
The proposals for the number of bus berths made in this section of the report should be
considered the number of bus berths needed in the final phase of the projects
development (i.e., in 2030). Furthermore, depending on the design selected and the bus

operating plans that are implemented, the bus berths could be constructed in phases at
the MMPT site as needed.
4.3.1 Intercity Bus Service
Given the longer dwell times required by intercity buses at the Atlanta terminal, these
vehicles can utilize deep sawtooth bus berths. These types of bus bays require that the
bus reverse out of the berth upon departure, thus making them inappropriate for local or
express bus services that have much shorter dwell times; however, by arranging intercity
bus bays as deep sawtooth berths, less space is utilized.
The intercity bus bays at the proposed MMPT facility should be able to handle the
standard intercity motor coach, which is 45 feet long. However, provision should also be
made so that there is sufficient overhead clearance at the location of the proposed
MMPT facility serving intercity buses to handle double-decker buses, as some intercity
carriers already utilize such buses in other parts of the nation.
In terms of the number of required intercity bus bays, prior studies have provided
numbers ranging from 20 to 34 intercity bus bays. The stakeholder input gathered as
part of the current study indicated that Greyhound anticipates needing 20 bus bays (i.e.,
15 bus bays for regular service and an additional 5 bus bays for ready buses, to
accommodate extra sections or standby buses during holiday surge periods, etc.) at the
MMPT. Although they did not explicitly indicate the number of required bus bays, it is
estimated that Southeastern Stages would also need approximately three bus bays (i.e.,
two for regular service and an additional ready bus bay) in addition to Greyhounds 20
bus bays. Thus far, this makes for 17 intercity bus bays as well as 6 set aside as ready
bus bays for a total of 23 intercity bus bays at the MMPT.
However, the number of intercity bus bays should also accommodate possible future
growth in the intercity bus market, not only in terms of growth from existing carriers
serving Atlanta (i.e., Greyhound and Southeastern Stages), but also from other carriers
that may possibly serve Atlanta in the future (e.g., Mega Bus, Bolt Bus, etc.). In order to
accommodate such future growth, an assumed increase of approximately 25 percent in
the number of bus bays can be factored in, thus providing approximately 30 deep
sawtooth intercity bus bays at the proposed MMPT facility (22 of which would be deep
sawtooth berths for passenger use, with an additional 8 serving as ready bus bays).
Note that the ready bus bays do not necessarily need to be contact berths; meaning,
they do not need to be directly accessible by passengers and thus they do not need to
be directly connected to the passenger circulation space. Rather, they can be provided
as bus bays that are on-site but not directly connected to the same passenger circulation
space as the 22 contact berths.
The 30 intercity bus bays at the MMPT would therefore also allow enough flexibility to
accommodate surge needs during holiday periods as well as allowing for some growth in
the intercity bus travel market.
4.3.2 Local and Express Bus Service
These public transportation services would require the use of shallow sawtooth bus
berths, which are bus bays that allow buses to operate through them without requiring a
reverse movement.

4.3.2.1 Commuter Express Bus Service
As previously mentioned, there are several commuter express service operators in the
study area: MARTAs express routes, the GRTA Xpress service, and commuter express
routes operated by CCT, and GCT. These bus routes are listed in Table 4-2.
Table 4-2: Existing Commuter Express Routes in MMPT Study Area
Stakeholder/Operator Commuter Express Routes
MARTA 186; 216 Lithonia Express
GRTA Xpress 400, 420, 422, 430, 440, 442, 450, 460, 475 and 490
Cobb Community Transit 10A, 10B, 47, 75, 100, 101, 470 and 480
Gwinnett County Transit 101, 102, 103 and 418
It is estimated that, taken together, these 24 commuter express bus routes would today
require approximately 11 shallow sawtooth bus bays at the proposed MMPT facility. The
study team has estimated that MARTA requires one bus bay for the 216 Lithonia
Express and one bus bay for Route 186, with an additional bus bay to allow for a ready
bus or for other unanticipated needs, for a total of three bus bays. GRTA has anticipated
that it will require a total of eight bus bays (i.e., seven for regular service and one for a
standby ready bus) for its Xpress service as well as for both GCT and CCT commuter
express services. This was determined by utilizing GRTAs estimation that approximately
20 buses will utilize the MMPT during the peak quarter hour of operation, and that the
maximum dwell time of any of the buses will be five minutes. Thus, 11 shallow sawtooth
bus bays for the commuter express services were calculated.
Note that it was also assumed that the commuter express services may need to operate
reverse commute services from central Atlanta to the suburbs. In order to
accommodate this possibility, it was assumed that commuter express buses would
operate the same in both the morning and afternoon peak periods. They would drop-off
and pick-up passengers at a bus bay, as opposed to dropping off passengers at a
common drop-off area and requiring that the buses reposition themselves within the
MMPT facility at a bus bay.
However, in a manner similar to the intercity bus services, the number of commuter
express bus bays should also accommodate possible future growth in the commuter
market and not solely accommodate current service levels. In order to accommodate
future growth, an assumed increase of approximately 25 percent in the number of bus
bays can be factored in, thus providing approximately 14 shallow sawtooth commuter
express bus bays at the proposed MMPT facility.
4.3.2.2 Local Bus Service
Several local MARTA bus routes operate to and through the study area; these 15 bus
routes are the 1, 3, 4, 9, 13, 16, 21, 42, 49, 55, 74, 97, 110, 113, and 155. Of these local
MARTA bus routes, 11 terminate in downtown Atlanta near the proposed MMPT site and
the remainder operate through the area. MARTA is currently in the process of reducing
bus routes system wide, but the above bus routes were active during the collection and
analysis of local bus data. In addition, any bus routes eliminated, which may include bus
routes within MMPT study area, also have the potential of being reinstated in the future.
The local MARTA bus routes will serve the proposed MMPT facility to provide for
intermodal connections with the various other public transportation services serving the

facility, thus allowing passengers using those services to travel around downtown
Atlanta.
Depending upon future growth and use of the local MARTA bus routes in the area, the
study team has estimated that MARTAs local buses will require approximately 9 to 12
shallow sawtooth bus bays at the proposed MMPT facility, including one for MARTA
Mobility vehicles. The exact number of required bus bays for MARTAs local bus routes
will depend upon several factors, including:
the extent to which certain local bus routes or proposed BRT services will enter the
proposed MMPT facility and utilize a shallow sawtooth bus bay, while others may
serve the MMPT on-street;
the growth factor (as yet undetermined) by which the number of MARTA local berths
may need to be increased in the future, and;
the extent to which some local MARTA routes will terminate, and take layover or
recovery time at the proposed MMPT, thus increasing their dwell time, while others
may simply operate through the MMPT facility (i.e., MARTAs future operating plan).
In addition, at least three (or as many as four) of the bus bays serving the local MARTA
bus routes should be designed to allow for the possible use of articulated buses in the
future; these buses are 60 feet long and would present different design needs for the
shallow sawtooth bus bays. In many transit systems, low floor 60-foot articulated buses
are utilized on BRT services; therefore, their possible use needs to be considered in the
design of the proposed MMPT facility.
4.3.3 Dynamic Bus Berth Assignment
There is the possibility of utilizing dynamic bus berth assignments at the proposed
MMPT facility. With this technology, bus berths are not assigned to any specific bus
route. Instead, buses would occupy any available bus berth and a robust passenger
information system would inform MMPT passengers of their bus berths location. Such a
system may allow for a reduction in the number of required bus berths at the MMPT.
However, there are also very significant drawbacks that need to be considered:
the intercity and local or express bus services would still need to be segregated, due
to their varying berth types (i.e., deep vs. shallow sawtooth), which are not
interchangeable;
operational and funding considerations (e.g., if private operators are asked to fund a
portion of the proposed facility, they would less likely be willing to share);
passengers would not know ahead of time which berth their bus route will utilize,
thus making the routine of the commute a bit more difficult (depending on the
ultimate layout of the facility), and;
the facility ventilation and fire-life safety design would have to accommodate the
most onerous requirement at each berth to allow for the desired flexibility.
4.3.4 MMPT Bus Berth Comparison
Finally, Table 4-3 provides a comparison of the proposed MMPT to other existing and
proposed transit facilities in the nation. Not all the transit facilities house intercity,

commuter express and local bus operations, but the number of proposed bus berths for
the MMPT are aligned with the bus berth capacity of the transit stations in Table 4-3.
Table 4-3: MMPT Bus Berth Comparison
Transit Facilities
Bus Operation
Intercity Commuter Express Local
Existing Facilities Number of Bus Berths
Jacksonville Rosa Parks
Transit Center
0 0 18
Boston South Station 29 0 0
Chicago Greyhound Terminal
24 (Primarily Greyhound
Only)
0 0
Proposed Facilities
Denver Union Station 0 18
4 (for circulator route
only)
San Francisco Transbay
Transit Center
Capacity for approximately 55 buses; split between 2 levels:
Ground Plaza to have capacity for 25 local and commuter express buses
Bus Deck to have 30 berths for intercity and commuter express buses (direct
access to Bay Bridge)
Proposed Atlanta MMPT 30 14 9 to 12
Source: AECOM
4.4 Staging, Storage, and Layover Requirements
These three requirements reflect different needs of both intercity and local or express
bus service operators.
Staging Staging occurs when buses pre-position themselves near the start of their first
revenue trip so that they can depart from their starting location on time. Other than the
ready bus berths that would be located on-site for some intercity and commuter
express applications, none of the stakeholders interviewed as part of the study process
indicated that they would utilize the proposed MMPT facility or an area near it for the
staging of a significant number of buses.
Storage None of the stakeholders interviewed as part of the study process would store
buses at or near the MMPT; all have maintenance and storage facilities located in other
parts of the Atlanta metropolitan area.
Layover Layover occurs when a route utilizes the MMPT as a turn-around location,
and the bus operator may utilize the recovery time to take a short break. This situation
will likely occur primarily with the local MARTA routes that terminate at the MMPT, as
well as with some of the commuter express bus routes that also utilize the facility as their
downtown terminal.
As was described in Section 4.3, several of the bus bays within the proposed MMPT
facility would be utilized for the layover of buses, or simply to store (on a short-term
basis) ready buses, to accommodate extra sections during holiday surge periods, and
for other unanticipated needs.

Passenger bus facilities have requirements for ventilation and other fire-life safety
considerations, but requirements are not well represented in Codes and Standards.
NFPA 502 includes fire-life safety considerations for Road Tunnels. While that Standard
excludes Bus Terminals from mandatory coverage, a prudent design will be informed by
elements of that standard. Similarly, while NFPA 130 applies to rail elements a prudent
design of a transportation facility will be informed by elements of that standard. The
American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)
Handbook 2007 - HVAC Applications, Chapter 13 covers ventilation requirements for
enclosed vehicular facilities.
Criteria for normal operations will need to be developed for emissions concentrations
considering both OSHA and EPA regulations. Criteria for emergency operations, such
as Design Fire Heat Release Rate, tenability limits and other fire-life safety related items
will need to be developed for all of the bus transportation and covered roadway
elements.
Additional emergency criteria, equipment and operating schemes will be required to
address Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fueled vehicles operating within the facility.
This will include gas sensors to detect CNG in the bus spaces, and specific ventilation
and other system responses to address incidents involving CNG.
The development above and adjacent to the bus transportation and covered roadway
elements will need to coordinate any required ventilation plant and related intakes and
discharges, as well as air intakes for the development. Beyond pollutant concentrations
and EPA limits, odor will also have to be considered for the adjacent developments
intakes.
4.6 Diagrams of Bus Bays and Boarding Area
The main access and egress points for the bus transit component will be determined by
optimal bus operations in combination with the rail component. Intercity, Express and
local bus operations can be located in different areas of the MMPT complex or stacked
for more consolidated bus operations. Snapshots of the bus layout alternatives are
below in Figure 4-1 through Figure 4-3 and a comprehensive discussion of bus
operation configurations is presented in Section 9.0 MMPT Alternatives.
The primary streets in downtown Atlanta that will be utilized to access the overall proposed
MMPT facilitys site are Forsyth, Alabama, Marietta, and Spring Streets, as well as Martin
Luther King, Jr. and Centennial Olympic Park Drives. The analysis of the impact of the
proposed MMPT facility on the capacity and ability of the downtown Atlanta street network to
handle the additional bus traffic is examined more thoroughly in the Multi-Modal Passenger
Terminal Project Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum dated October 2010. Current

traffic operations and intersection levels of service in the MMPT study area in the morning
and afternoon peak hours reflect no significant problems by the standards of a highly
developed urban area. With this in mind, the expected additional vehicle trips generated
from bus transit operating from the MMPT are able to fit within existing intersection capacity.
Depending on the configuration of MMPT facilities and streets, two major factors that may
differ from existing conditions should be noted:
Extension of Alabama Street. Alabama Street has been extended to the west of Forsyth
Street to intersect with Centennial Olympic Park Drive in each of the alternatives. In
Alternative A, it also intersects with Spring Street (it is grade-separated from Spring Street
in Alternatives B and C). Although Alabama Street operates as a bus-only facility today,
its extension and the access to developable property that creates may prompt
consideration of allowing regular vehicle circulation to use it as well. If this happens, the
intersection of Alabama and Forsyth Streets should be studied in more detail to
determine likely traffic operations impacts.
Location of Facility Entrances relative to intersections. Most of the driveway entrances to
MMPT facilities accommodating bus transportation are located away from street
intersections. They are typically far enough away that large-vehicle turning movements,
such as buses entering and exiting the MMPT facility, are not likely to create friction with
regular traffic operating in the street intersection. However, in one place this occurs in
close proximity to a planned intersection. In Alternative A, all buses enter the MMPT from
a driveway location immediately north of the intersection of Alabama Street and Spring
Street. As this intersection does not currently exist, traffic operations cannot be
compared to an existing intersection capacity. However, Spring Street is recommended
to be converted to two-way operations in the Connect Atlanta Plan, and these turns may
either affect oncoming (southbound) traffic, may create queuing in northbound traffic, or
both. Due to the close spacing of this entrance to the future intersection, there is an
opportunity to coordinate traffic signal control so that buses have special priority
southbound Spring Street traffic (if Spring Street is converted to two-way operations) is
stopped to the north of the driveway, preventing any potential blockage to this entry/exit
point for buses.


Figure 4-1: Bus Layout Alternative A

Source: AECOM

Figure 4-2: Bus Layout Alternative B

Source: AECOM

Figure 4-3: Bus Layout Alternative C

Source: AECOM

The Southeast HSR Study considered having the bus operations at Mitchell and Spring
Streets in the southwest corner behind the former NS headquarters. Even though this
alternative utilizes the vacant headquarters and is positioned adjacent to current freight
rail operations, the drawback is the distance away from the current commuter express
and local bus routes. The further north and east bus bays are located, the fewer
modifications to current commuter express and local bus alignments are required. Figure
4-4 displays the two-level bus operations layout from the Southeast HSR Study.
Figure 4-4: Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor Study Alternative MMPT Bus Layouts

Source: Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor Study Alternative MMPT Configuration Report, July 2009

4.7 Summary of Bus Needs
The most important criterion in terms of the needs of bus service at the proposed MMPT
is the scale of the facility, especially concerning the number of bus bays that are
anticipated and their characteristics. Collectively, the anticipated number of bus bays
required at the proposed MMPT facility is 30 deep sawtooth bus bays for the intercity
services, 14 shallow sawtooth bus bays for the commuter express services, and 9 to 12
shallow sawtooth bus bays for local MARTA services. This allows for approximately 53
to 56 bus bays at the proposed MMPT facility.
The 30 intercity bus bays should allow for the possibility of double-decker buses utilizing
the proposed MMPT facility in the future, and approximately 4 of the 9 to 12 shallow
sawtooth bus bays that will be utilized by local MARTA services should allow for their
use by 60-foot articulated buses. Table 4-4 provides a summary of current and future
bus bay needs at the proposed MMPT.
Table 4-4: Summary of Bus Bay Requirements
Operator Current Needs Future Needs (25% increase
for Intercity and Express)**
Sawtooth
Bus Bay
Ready
Bus Bay
Total
Sawtooth
Bus Bay
Ready
Bus Bay
Total
Intercity Bus (Deep Sawtooth) 17 6 23 22 8 30
Express Bus (Shallow Sawtooth) 9 2 11 12 2 14
Local Bus (Shallow Sawtooth)* 9 to 12 n/a 9 to 12 9 to 12 n/a 9 to 12
TOTAL 43 to 46 bays 53 to 56 bays
*Four bus bays to allow for articulated buses and one reserved for MARTA Mobility
** Future needs correspond to build-out year 2030
Source: AECOM
Ultimately, the future provision for buses at the MMPT site will be a result of negotiations
between relevant operators and the Master Developer. While providing a consolidated
terminal location for all types of bus services and operational requirements (including
short-term layovers) is a sound planning objective, it also takes valuable square footage
away from the sites developable area. In this context, there are a range of potential
outcomes that should be explored by both the Master Developer and the various bus
operators and authorities including but not limited to the following:
Options for off-site layover of low frequency services;
Consolidation of operations (shared use of bays) to the greatest extent possible;
Proposal merit or potentially compensation / subsidy for the provision of various
levels of bus capacity and service, and;
Mediation of negotiations on behalf of 3
rd
party bus operators.



5.0 VEHICLES FOR HIRE REQUIREMENTS
Taxicabs, shuttles, car rental agencies, and car or ride sharing services (such as Atlanta
Link) are transportation modes also being considered at the proposed MMPT. It is not
the intent to have a vehicles for hire operation as large as HJAIA, but to allow a smaller
scale operation to occur at the proposed MMPT.
5.1 Patron Usage and Vehicle Capacity
The City of Atlanta has approximately 1,600 taxicabs registered in operation. The
proposed MMPT facility will be a major intermodal transit center, as well as a hub for
intercity travel throughout the Atlanta metropolitan area. As such, taxicabs will gravitate
towards this facility, as there will be demand for their services. Shuttle services linked to
local hotels and tourist attractions may utilize the MMPT to pick up and drop off
customers. For example, Checker Cab utilizes about 200 taxicabs throughout the entire
City of Atlanta, with about 2,000 pick-ups per day. Checker Cab anticipates serving
approximately 3,000 pick-ups per day throughout the entire City of Atlanta in the 2015-
2030 time frame.
Car rental agencies may have a small operation, while maintaining their major car rental
hub at HJAIA. Most patrons will be commuters traveling to nearby work centers or
tourists with final destinations in walking distance or accessed by local transit. There is
also potential for car sharing services to use curb area or parking spaces at the
proposed MMPT.
Unfortunately, no comprehensive estimates of taxicab or vehicle for hire usage are
currently available for the planning horizon year 2030 at the proposed MMPT facility.
Should estimates become available at a later date, they will be incorporated into the
analysis for the MMPT.
5.2 Designated Bullpen / Queuing Area / Curb Area
5.2.1 Taxicab Services
The regulatory agency for taxicabs in the City of Atlanta has indicated that a well-
marked, visible taxicab queue area would need to be placed curbside at the proposed
and Tow Away Zone signage on the curb.
Other important issues to consider regarding taxicabs at the proposed MMPT facility are
as follows:
There is currently a facility at HJAIA similar in terms of its intercity function to the
proposed MMPT. The airport has 315 taxicab spaces in the queuing area and HJAIA
is preparing for an additional 206 spaces (including shuttle vans) for the new
Maynard Jackson International Terminal. Fifteen taxicabs are usually in the queue
before being dispatched to pick up airport passengers from designated taxicab
stands at the curbside of the terminal. A taxicab driver can wait between 3 to 5 hours
in the taxicab waiting area. There is no intent at this time to provide as many taxicab
spaces available at the HJAIA at the proposed MMPT. Planned stakeholder
interviews with taxicab operators will continue; however, Checker Cab has indicated
that a layover space for approximately 10 to 15 taxicabs would be necessary at the
MMPT. In addition to this queuing area, Checker Cab indicated that it would be
advantageous to provide approximately 15 parking spaces (or 20 parking spaces in
the long term) for taxicabs in a parking area separate from the curb front queuing
area. Future interviews with additional taxicab operators may clarify the potential
space needed.
The City of Atlantas taxicab industry functions as a closed system. In other words,
only 1,600 taxicabs legally can operate within the City. This is also referred to as a
medallion system where each taxicab company holds the rights to a certain
number of taxicab licenses. These licenses can transfer between owners creating a
trading value in the open market. Taxicab drivers lease the vehicles and licenses
from taxicab companies. Therefore, any taxicabs that service the MMPT will come
from the closed pool of taxicab operators.
Taxicabs outside of the City can drop off patrons in the City, but cannot pick up
patrons within the City. Patrons must use a licensed City of Atlanta taxicab.
Currently, there are no other major staging areas for taxicabs except at the HJAIA.
Small taxicab stands are required at hotels if they provide taxicab services, and
taxicab spaces are based on how many beds are within the hotel (i.e., one taxicab
space per 100 beds). Taxicab drivers prefer to pick up at the airport because they
are guaranteed a trip and higher price trips. Patrons are usually going a further
distance than pick-ups within Midtown or Downtown Atlanta, but taxicab drivers
servicing the MMPT can have guaranteed trips if a queuing system is implemented
similar to HJAIA. Checker Cab thus far has indicated that they anticipate about 50 to
100 vehicles per day servicing the MMPT, with this growing to 60 to 120 vehicles per
day by the 2030 time frame.
Only 20 percent of the taxicabs in the City have radios.
Taxicab Starters operate and contract with the airport to provide dispatch and
greeting services for patrons using the taxicabs at the airport.
No data is kept regarding the number of taxicabs that wait at MARTA rail stations or
hotels nor are there design criteria for taxicab stands and queuing areas.
Taxicab service in Atlanta is demand driven. Therefore, the taxicab stand at the
proposed MMPT facility must be highly visible. The taxicab waiting and queuing area
should be well lit and monitored with security cameras.
It is proposed that the stand for taxicabs and shuttle vans be located along the front
door curb front of the proposed MMPT facility. The curb length should be sufficient to
accommodate these vehicles as well as private vehicles engaging in picking up or
dropping off passengers. In addition, the taxicab queue area (or bullpen) should be
located away from the curb front, in an area within line of sight and easily accessible to
the curb front taxicab stand without needing to contend with other conflicting traffic.
5.2.2 Shuttle Services
The ground transportation operations at HJAIA indicated that Atlanta Link, a shuttle
operator currently providing services for airport patrons to Buckhead, downtown and
midtown Atlanta hotels, may utilize the proposed MMPT. They currently have 20 vehicles
in their fleet and pick-up and drop-off curb area for four shuttles have been included in
the estimated space requirements in Section 6.0. Additional consultation with shuttle
operators, such as Atlanta Link, is needed to clarify the potential curb area requirements
for shuttles.
5.2.3 Car Rental Agencies
During an interview with Enterprise Rent-a-Car, representatives provided the following
information on potential operational requirements:
Office space requirements would range between 1,000 and 2,000 square feet.
Parking spaces for a minimum of 15 to 30 rental cars and a maximum of 50 rental
cars in an adjacent parking facility would be required. Approximately 10 employee
parking spaces would also be desirable. These requirements are dependent upon
demand and spatial constraints. Demand and spatial constraints may also dictate a
400 square feet office or kiosk.

An annual growth rate of 5 to 10 percent growth rate is anticipated, but this growth
rate has not been verified other than as a suggestion by Enterprise.

Rent/return as well as one-way services can be included. They also provide car
sharing services called We Share, van pool and truck hauling services.

A dedicated phone line or shared phone line with the main MMPT facility may be
required.

Internal and external car cleaning operations would require 2 to 3 parking spaces
(i.e., 200 to 400 square feet). Enterprise will not service cars on site such as oil
changes or brake maintenance and they typically do not have fueling stations on site
as well.

Office space and parking area must be close enough for an employee to walk
customers to their rental car. If customers have to be shuttled from the office to the
car rental lot, operational costs become a factor.

Parking spaces may be included in a larger parking area or deck as long as they
have a consolidated and designated parking area for the rental cars.

The requirements expressed by Enterprise Rent-a-Car provide an initial indication of the
spatial and operational needs of car rental agencies at the proposed MMPT. Additional
consultation with other car rental agencies is needed to clarify potential bullpen area
requirements for rental cars.
5.2.4 Car Sharing Services
During an interview with Zipcar, representatives requested at least two parking spaces
for their car sharing vehicles at the proposed MMPT. Zipcars completed survey along
with other planned car sharing stakeholder interviews will clarify the potential needed
curb area or parking spaces.
If located beneath other development elements or otherwise enclosed, the vehicles for
hire operation areas will have requirements for ventilation and other fire-life safety
considerations.
These elements may not be well represented in Codes and Standards. NFPA 502
includes fire-life safety considerations for Road Tunnels. While that Standard may not
include such areas in the mandatory coverage, a prudent design will be informed by
elements of that standard. ASHRAE Handbook 2007 - HVAC Applications, Chapter 13
covers ventilation requirements for enclosed vehicular facilities.
will need to be developed for all covered roadway elements.
The development above and adjacent to the covered roadway elements will need to
coordinate any required ventilation plant and related intakes and discharges, as well as
air intakes for the development.
Beyond pollutant concentrations and EPA limits, odor will also have to be considered for
the adjacent developments intakes, even if the roadways are not covered.
5.4 Access Points
The primary streets in downtown Atlanta that will be utilized to access the proposed
MMPT facilitys site are Forsyth, Marietta, and Spring Streets, as well as Martin Luther
King, Jr. and Centennial Olympic Park Drives.
The analysis of the impact of the proposed MMPT facility on the capacity and ability of
the downtown Atlanta street network to handle the additional traffic is examined more
thoroughly in Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project Existing Conditions Technical
Memorandum dated October 2010. The MMPT Alternatives in Section 9.0 depicts
taxi/shuttle designated curb space and taxi/car rental queuing areas.

5.5 Survey of Vehicles for Hire Facilities at other National
Transportation Hubs
Below are high-level surveys of other transportation hubs that include vehicles for hire.
These facilities are more comparable in capacity and operations intended for the
proposed MMPT than an airport facility such as HJAIA.
5.5.1 Boston, Massachusetts South Station
Car Rentals

There are no car rental facilities located within the South Station complex. However,
there are some car rental locations near South Station.
Taxicabs

The taxicab stands are located along Atlantic Avenue, on the west side of the terminal
complex. There is one taxicab stand closer to the railroad station headhouse, which
appears to have a capacity of approximately 12 taxicabs. The taxicab stand closer to
the bus terminal entrance appears to have a capacity of approximately six taxicabs.
This makes for a total taxicab stand capacity of about 18 taxicabs. However, taxicabs
appear to be able to drop off passengers along Summer Street (i.e., the east side of the
terminal complex) as well.
Figure 5-1: South Station Aerial View

5.5.2 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 30
th
Street Station
Car Rentals

There are car rental facilities located within the 30
th
Street Station complex for Avis and
Hertz. The rental cars are kept in the parking garage located beneath the station
complex. However, the capacity of this garage and the number of rental cars kept there
is unknown.
The taxicab stands at South
Station are along Atlantic
Avenue, as seen in this
aerial view.
Taxicabs

The taxicab stand is located along 29
th
Street, on the east side of the terminal complex,
underneath the portico, thus providing protection from the weather. The taxicab stand
appears to have a capacity of approximately 12 taxicabs. However, taxicabs appear to
be able to drop off passengers anywhere near the station as well.
Figure 5-2: 30
th
Street Station Aerial View

5.5.3 Washington, D.C. Union Station
Car Rentals

There are car rental facilities located within the Union Station complex for Alamo, Avis,
Budget and Hertz. The rental cars are kept in the parking garage located immediately
north of the terminal, over the terminals tracks. However, the capacity of this garage and
the number of rental cars kept there is unknown.

Taxicabs

The taxicab stand is located at the front of the station, along the Columbus
Circle/Massachusetts Avenue NE side of the terminal complex. The taxicab stand is
directly in front of the terminal and appears to have a capacity of approximately 12 to 13
taxicabs. However, the queue extends back along the ramp from the parking garage and
appears to have a capacity of approximately 20 additional taxicabs up the ramp. Once
passengers are dropped off, taxicabs may enter the ramp at the other (i.e., west) end of
the terminal and join the queue to come back down the ramp and serve the taxicab
stand at the front of the terminal.
The taxicab stand is
located underneath the
portico on the 29
th

Street side of the
station, as seen in this
aerial view.
Figure 5-3: DC Union Station Aerial View

5.5.4 Los Angeles, California Union Station
Car Rentals

There are car rental facilities located within the Union Station complex for Budget and
Hertz. There may be other car rental companies at Los Angeles Union Station, but the
study team was unable to identify additional vendors. The rental cars are kept on site in
the parking facility adjacent to the terminal/Gateway Plaza complex. However, the
capacity of this garage and the number of rental cars kept there is unknown.

Taxicabs

The taxicab stand is located at the front of the station, along the Alameda Street (i.e.,
west side of the terminal complex). The taxicab stand is directly in front of the terminal
and appears to have a capacity of approximately 10 taxicabs.
Figure 5-4: LA Union Station Aerial View

5.6 Summary of Vehicles for Hire Need
A well-marked, visible taxicab queue area should be located curbside at the proposed
located at the front of
the terminal.
The queue extends
back up the ramp,
which wraps around
the back of the
terminal.
located along the
Alameda Street side of
the station, as seen in
this aerial view.
and Tow Away Zone signage on the curb. The taxicab waiting and queuing area should
be well lit and monitored with security cameras.
There is also a potential need for dedicated curb area for shuttles and car sharing
vehicles that is clearly marked. A bullpen for car rental agencies should also be
considered to support the MMPTs potential to serve as a minor car rental hub for central
Atlanta. Space for at least 30 rental cars in a parking facility would appear to be an
appropriate starting point. Table 5-1 provides a summary of current vehicles for hire
requirements.
Table 5-1: Summary of Potential Vehicles for Hire Requirements
Stakeholder/Operator* Queuing / Curb
Parking
Bullpen / Long-
Term Parking
Employee Parking
Taxicab (Checker Cab) 10 to 15 15 to 20 n/a
Car Rental (Enterprise) n/a 30 10
Shuttle (Atlanta Link) 4 n/a n/a
Car Sharing (Zipcar) 2 n/a n/a
*This table only includes requirements from stakeholders that completed a survey and/or interviewed,
additional responses may change potential requirements.


6.0 FACILITY AND SUPPORT AREA REQUIREMENTS
6.1 Design Parameters
6.1.1 Terminal Spatial Requirements
The proposed spatial program for the MMPT is based on consultation with stakeholders.
It is intended to guide future facility planning as additional meetings and coordination will
be necessary to address all stakeholder requirements. In some instances, previous
MMPT studies were used as a basis to determine requirements.
The estimation of net square footage was derived primarily from stakeholder surveys
and consultant experience in the design of comparable facilities. These estimates are
not the result of a detailed market analysis. An additional 25 percent was added to the
estimated net square footage for future growth and 30 percent was added for internal
circulation, electrical, mechanical, trash, columns, walls, and other structural elements.
Although freight rail from both NS and CSX will not require facility space, movement of
freight rail could affect passenger rail loading and unloading times. Appendix E shows
detailed estimates for space requirements for facility and support areas. Estimated
space requirements in this section have been rounded to the nearest hundred.
Previous studies suggest that three levels could be accommodated at the MMPT: a track
level, lower level, and upper level. The alternatives proposed in this report also support a
three level complex. The main pedestrian entrance should be on the upper level. Ideally,
retail should be accessible from the main terminal and directly from the street. Some of
the retail should have a connection to the individual tenant waiting areas. The main
terminal could be similar to a mall, possibly covered, but not an air-conditioned space.
The main terminal should allow day-lighting and natural ventilation. Vertical circulation
should encompass both emergency egress and convenience. Non-emergency stairs
should be open and conveniently accessible to encourage use, thus reducing the
number of elevator trips. Elevators and stairs should be grouped together where
possible to serve both public and private spaces. On the lower levels, a similar design is
proposed. These levels would accommodate service areas, loading areas, and support
spaces.
The diagrams in Section 9.0 MMPT Alternatives illustrate how the MMPT main terminal
could be integrated with passenger rail, bus operations, vehicles for hire, light rail,
streetcar, and surrounding overbuild.
6.1.2 Sustainability and Energy Efficiency Goals
Nationally and locally, there is increasing emphasis on sustainability and energy
efficiency in the construction industry. Section 75-1 of the Code of Ordinance for the City
of Atlanta states that the City shall integrate green and/or sustainable building principles
and practices into the design, construction, and operations of all city facilities, and city-
funded projects to the fullest extent possible. It also adds that the City shall act as a
leader for the private sector in the practice of green building. As a result, the
incorporation of sustainable principles will have a significant impact on MMPT
conceptual designs. Several rating systems have been developed to provide guidance to
owners, designers, and operators on how to incorporate green construction principles
and technologies into public facility designs. These include the Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design (LEED) Certification developed by the United States Green
Building Council (USGBC), Energy Star developed by the Environmental Protection
Agency, and Living Building Challenge. The spatial requirements presented in this
section do not take into account the additional space required to incorporate these
guidelines. However, future MMPT planning and design efforts should incorporate these
principles and guidelines.
MMPT design should also consider methods to:
Ensure that the orientation of the facility reduces exposure to high solar heat gain;
Reduce cooling and heating loads;
Reduce wall and roof assembly U-values;
Reduce lighting costs and provide an adequate amount of glazing;
Conserve water;
Reduce building volume and consolidate retail services and support spaces, and;
Provide community connectivity.
6.1.3 Architectural and Fire Life Safety Integration
The overall Architecture, Terminal Space Requirements, and the Sustainability and
Efficiency Goals will need to be coordinated with the normal and emergency operation
requirements for the various transportation elements and related public areas. This
includes arrangements and space allowances for items such as smoke catchment
volumes, draft curtains, and smoke management ducts, among other elements of the
ventilation approach, as coordinated with the fire protection approach.
MMPT design should also consider methods to:
Minimize overall ventilation system capacity;
Minimize overall ventilation system complexity;
Integrate with other elements to reduce building volume;
Address acoustic issues, and;
Maximize the air quality to support the overall transportation experience.
6.2 Public Amenities
6.2.1 Patron Areas: Waiting areas, Restrooms, and Support Spaces
Terminal common areas include areas that can be shared and are not unique to
individual tenant specific operations. The sizes of the spaces are based on estimated
number of passengers at a peak period multiplied by a square footage allowance
detailed in Appendix E. These areas also provide a means of connection from one mode
of transportation to another and a link to the surrounding exterior areas such as parking.
Throughout the various component programs, common spaces have been separated
from tenant spaces. Table 6-1 provides estimated space requirements for waiting areas
for each potential transportation service. The waiting areas are grouped by their modes
but may be altered due to the following:
Tenant operations;
Level of security;
Patron comfort, and;
Proximity to boarding area.
Table 6-1: Waiting Areas Program
Item
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf)
MMPT Management 700
Total 79,800
Source: AECOM
6.2.2 Ticketing / Fare Collection Areas and Procedures
As technology and patron practices change, spatial requirements for fare collection must
be updated to accommodate stakeholder requirements. Spatial requirements are based
on current technologies and a square footage allowance multiplied by number of
positions.
Automated fare collection systems are currently in use by MARTA. The Breeze Card is a
stored value smart card that allows passengers access to the MARTA transit system.
The regional express bus systems: CCT in Cobb, GCT in Gwinnett, and GRTA utilize or
will eventually utilize the Breeze Card, which will reduce the need of exiting stations
through transfer gates. Table 6-2 provides estimated space requirements for ticketing,
fare collection, and passenger services for each potential transportation service.
Table 6-2: Ticketing / Fare Collection Areas and Passenger Services Program
Item
Estimated Ticketing
Required (gross sf)
Estimated Services
Required (gross sf)
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf)
Passenger Rail 3,000 3,000 6,000
Commuter Express and Local Bus 800 700 1,500
Intercity Bus 1,200 0 1,200
Vehicles for Hire 500 300 800
Regional Light Rail and Streetcar 200 200 400
MMPT Management 0 0 0
Total 5,700 4,200 9,900
Source: AECOM
6.2.3 Office / Meeting Space
Office and meeting spaces were required primarily for the operational needs of the
individual transportation services, spatial requirements are listed under
Administrative/Operations within each component in Appendix E. Intercity bus and rail
stakeholders expressed a desire to have additional office and meeting space to support
broader operations. These spaces should be adjacent to MMPT transit operations if
possible. Additional meeting space for special events was deemed beneficial, but not
required. Table 6-3 provides estimated requirements for office and meeting space.
Table 6-3: Office / Meeting Space Program
Item
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf)
Commuter Express and Local Bus 600
Intercity Bus 4,900
Regional Light Rail and Streetcar 600
MMPT Management 14,500
Total 38,700
Source: AECOM
6.2.4 Retail Space
The incorporation of retail space is critical to the success of the MMPT as a catalyst for
redevelopment in the Gulch area; however, retail must be easily accessible and visible
by patrons of the MMPT and those who are not patrons of the MMPT. Coordination with
local planning organizations and the private sector will be required to ensure that the
MMPT is not simply a facility that acts as a transfer between transportation modes, but a
destination that attracts other users. Stakeholder requests determined types of desired
retail. Most of the retail requested included media stands, sundry vendors,
cafeterias/restaurants with seating, and gift shops. A few stakeholders requested dry
cleaning services. A detailed breakdown of retail square footage by type is provided in
Appendix E. The sizes of the spaces detailed in Appendix E are based on similar
facilities and are only a point in which to begin negotiations. A market analysis has not
been conducted at this stage, but further analysis will be needed for the Master
Developer to better determine retail for MMPT patrons and other users. Table 6-4
provides estimated stakeholder requests for retail space retail by type of passenger
facility.
Table 6-4: Retail Space Program
Item
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf)
Intercity Bus 6,900
Vehicles for Hire 300
MMPT Management 0
Total 33,800
Source: AECOM
6.2.5 Maintenance and Miscellaneous Support Areas
Contractual relationships and leases will help determine the exact maintenance and
cleaning needs of the facility. Support areas include additional spaces necessary for the
operations of transportation services such as the baggage system make-up and storage
areas. Spaces for electrical and mechanical rooms (including janitorial rooms) were
added in the program as a percentage of each transportation service. Square footage
allowances and quantities in Appendix E were based on stakeholder surveys and
stationing program requirements. Table 6-5 provides estimated space requirements for
maintenance and miscellaneous support areas.
Table 6-5: Maintenance and Miscellaneous Support Areas Program
Item
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf)
Intercity Bus 6,700
MARTA Light Rail and Streetcar 400
MMPT Management 0
Total 15,800
Source: AECOM
6.2.6 Security
Security needs will vary, but the overall security requirements for the MMPT must be
coordinated with local and state police departments. Previous studies suggest the
MMPT house a small police force; still, consideration must include crowd control for
special events and times when multiple agency management is required.
Security checkpoints should be located at the main entrance and at waiting areas.
Service areas should be monitored and controlled. Baggage screening will be required
at specific locations, which will result in additional staffing needs. Table 6-6 provides
estimated space requirements for security areas.
Table 6-6: Security Area Program
Item
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf)
Intercity Bus 200
Vehicles for Hire 0
MMPT Management
Included within
office space
Total 1,900
Source: AECOM
6.3 Parking Needs / Truck Loading Area
The main objectives of parking are to provide efficient access, storage, circulation, and
egress for vehicles while minimizing the amount of space used for parking. Most of the
stakeholders did not request parking for patrons, while some required a small amount for
employees.
A portion of the study area lies within a Parking Limitation District found in the SPI-1
Zoning Ordinance. This section is located within the study area between Spring Street
and Peachtree Street and from Trinity Avenue to Marietta Street. The ordinance requires
a maximum of 2.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area. This requirement is slightly
less than the maximum number of spaces for the remainder of the study area, which are
3 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area.
Square feet per space, typically ranges from 250 to 400, depending upon the
configuration, size of space required in the zoning code, site constraints, and level-of-
service (LOS). The square foot allowance used to develop the estimates in Table 6-7 is
based on 350 square feet for each space and use the minimum number required from
Stakeholder requests. Table 6-7 also presents a maximum number that was derived
from the maximum allowed by the zoning code with a reduction by LEED rating system
of 5 percent of full-time equivalents (FTE). Most of the parking needs, 72 spaces, were
requested to serve employees while 12 were requested for Park-n-Ride and 10 for Kiss-
n-Ride.
Table 6-7: Estimated Space Needs for MMPT Parking
Parking for Facility
Number of Spaces / Space
Required (sf)
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf)
Maximum Parking Allowed 220 spaces / 350 sf each 77,000
Minimum Parking Required 94 spaces / 350 sf each 32,900
Service Vehicles
21 spaces (3 police officers and 18
maintenance vehicles) / 350 sf each
7,400
Truck Loading 2 spaces / 735 sf each 1,500
Truck Loading 3 spaces / 1155 sf each 3,500
Bicycle and Bike Station NA 1,700
Total (using Minimum
Parking Required)
47,000
Source: AECOM
Other strategies of green design include providing preferred parking for low-emitting
vehicles and installing alternative-fuel refueling stations. Zipcar, a for-profit car sharing
company, offers services for vehicle sharing per hour or day. Accommodating a car
sharing service would require rental space at the MMPT, but would reduce the square
footage required for a parking structure.
Other considerations such as whether the parking structure should be an open or closed
structure should be determined early in project design. These decisions directly affect
life safety issues, fire separations, and ventilation (forced or natural). The SPI- 1 Zoning
Ordinance states that parking structures should conceal the visibility of automobiles from
any public ROW, street, plaza, and adjacent residential dwellings.
6.3.1 Patron and Employee Vehicle Parking
For public parking, a higher acceptable LOS is emphasized by factors such as turning
radii, ramp slopes, and flow capacity. Additionally, consideration should be given to
patrons carrying baggage. The higher acceptable LOS for employee parking is
emphasized by factors such as travel distances, entry, and exiting. Obviously,
employees are more familiar with the facility and location of parking. The patron and
employee vehicle parking is included under the maximum parking allowed in Table 6-7.
6.3.2 Service Vehicle Parking
Table 6-7 reflects stakeholder requirements for service vehicle parking. It is assumed
that police and security would need some spaces while fire and rescue may require
parking for emergencies and special events only. Additionally, operations at the MMPT
would require adequate space for service and maintenance vehicles.
6.3.3 Bicycle Storage
There are approximately 1,500 daily bike commuters to downtown Atlanta (based on
surveys and traffic counts conducted by CAP). Secure short- and long-term bike spaces
may be quite popular, especially combined with the proximity to transit services that the
proposed MMPT will provide. Atlantas hot summers make showers a near-necessity for
bike commuters traveling a distance of more than three to four miles. There may be
interest in a shared bike program for mid-day errands and meetings. The MMPT should
plan upfront for safe and accessible bike lanes, in street and separated related facilities
when taking into consideration new street connections, key bicycle routes, and the
limited ROW of existing streets. Estimated space and services in Table 6-8 are based on
recommendations from the Atlanta Bicycle Coalition.
Table 6-8: Estimated Space Needs for MMPT Bicycle Station
Bike Station Service/Facility
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf)
Secure bicycle spaces (100 bicycles) 700
Showers (6 to 8) 200
Changing room (1 men and 1 women; 100 sf each) 200
Bicycle repair shop/Self-service bicycle repair stands and tools, some parts, etc. 300
Bicycle rentals and/or shared bicycle program (40 bicycles) 300
Maps and safety information 0
Total 1,700
Source: Atlanta Bicycle Coalition
6.3.4 Truck Loading Area Requirements
Table 6-9 outlines the truck loading space requirements set forth in the SPI-1 Zoning
Ordinance for the downtown area.
Table 6-9: SPI-1 Downtown Loading Table
Floor Area (sf) Loading Space 12 x 35 Loading Space 12 x 55
10,000 sf and under None None
10,001 sf - 40,000 sf 1 None
40,001 sf - 100,000 sf 2 None
100,001 sf - 250,000 sf 2 1
250,001 sf - 500,000 sf 2 2
500,001 sf and above 2 3
Source: City of Atlanta Department of Planning and Community Development
6.3.5 General Enclosed Vehicle Facility Requirements
If located beneath other development elements, any enclosed vehicle facility areas will
have requirements for ventilation and other fire-life safety considerations.
These elements may not be well represented in Codes and Standards. NFPA 502
includes fire-life safety considerations for Road Tunnels, and local Codes will likely
address parking garage areas. Where areas are omitted from mandatory coverage, a
prudent design will be informed by elements of that standard. ASHRAE Handbook 2007
- HVAC Applications, Chapter 13 covers ventilation requirements for enclosed vehicular
facilities.
will need to be developed for all enclosed vehicle facility elements.
The development above and adjacent to enclosed vehicle facility elements will need to
coordinate any required ventilation plant and related intakes and discharges, as well as
air intakes for the development.
Beyond pollutant concentrations and EPA limits, odor will also have to be considered for
the adjacent developments intakes, even if the enclosed vehicle facility areas are not
covered.
6.4 Transit Component Spatial Requirements
Transit components are grouped by passenger rail, express and local bus, intercity bus,
vehicles for hire, and light-rail and streetcar. The type of travel, patron loads and
operational needs determined the spatial requirements. Rail requires a greater amount
of space because of vehicle lengths, increased patron loads and handling of luggage;
whereas bus transit is more adaptable to site constraints. The square footage required
for express and local bus is significant, in comparison to intercity bus, due to circulation
patterns and the number of bus bays required. Vehicles for hire tend to be the most
flexible transit component. Light rail and streetcar should be at street level to
accommodate the desired transit alignments. The following sections provide further
detail of each transit component.
6.4.1 Passenger Rail
Programmed spaces for passenger rail followed Amtrak guidelines and consultant
experience in designs of passenger rail facilities. Since further analysis must be
completed based on operating plans, HSR ridership was based on an increase of 1.33
percent. This was determined by the forecasted increase of bus ridership due to the
introduction of HSR from the Southeast HSR Study.
Figure 6-1 provides an illustration of space adjacency requirements for efficient use of
programmed spaces for passenger rail operations. Ticketing areas act as an interface to
patrons and provide baggage drop-off. Both baggage pick-up and ticketing areas need
to be adjacent to baggage handling. Baggage handling requires direct access to the
platform. Site conditions may require an additional waiting area; if not necessary, then
the platform would require direct access to the waiting area. Amtrak did request baggage
drop-off services within the main concourse.
Figure 6-1: Passenger Rail Adjacency Diagram

Source: AECOM
6.4.1.1 Waiting, Ticketing, and Baggage
Waiting areas as shown in Figure 6-2 should provide patrons with views of the trains.
Amtrak guidelines state anxiety is substantially reduced when guests can see the trains
and can understand when trains arrive and depart. Figure 6-2 shows an enclosed
waiting area overlooking the track with an elevated access to the covered, exterior
platforms. The size of the waiting area was based on guidelines provided by Amtrak.
Square footage allowances and peak period numbers can be found in Appendix E. Site
conditions may warrant additional rail-side waiting areas. Waiting areas may be above
the track level since access to the platforms should be above the tracks.
Figure 6-2: Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Station Waiting Area

Source: Route 128 Intermodal Facility (27,000 sq ft.) in Westwood, Massachusetts that opened in 2000

Semi-manned ticketing counters and baggage areas were provided for services
requiring longer trip times. For commuter transit, the use of self-service ticketing
(unmanned vending machines) was programmed. The number of queuing areas
required is dependent upon the number of semi-manned ticketing counters. Baggage
handling and claim areas are critical for Amtraks operations. Baggage handling
operations typically require a tunnel underneath the platforms, which was not included
within the program due to unknown site conditions. Table 6-10 provides estimated space
requirements for passenger rail services.
Table 6-10: Passenger Rail Program Summary
Item
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf)
Platform and Maintenance (not including parking) 128,400
Track Area (adjacent to platforms only) 96,000
Ticketing 3,000
Administration and Operations 11,000
Patron Areas 16,600
Passenger Services 3,000
Security 1,500
Retail 18,600
Meeting 5,700
Miscellaneous and Support Areas 7,700
Total 291,500
Source: AECOM
6.4.2 Commuter Express and Local Bus
Facility requirements for commuter express and local bus components are shared due to
the flexible nature of commuters and the short period required for loading and unloading.
Typically, spatial requirements are not extensive and usually require a waiting area and
support spaces, ticketing machines, and tenant preferred retail spaces. Commuter
express and local bus square footage was derived from ridership numbers and
stakeholder survey facility requests. Appendix E shows detailed quantities and square
foot allowances. Table 6-11 provides estimated space requirements for commuter
express and local bus services.
Table 6-11: Commuter Express and Local Bus Program Summary
Item
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf)
Boarding Area, Site Circulation and Maintenance (not
including parking)
100,100
Ticketing 800
Administration and Operations 600
Patron Areas 10, 900
Passenger Services 700
Security 200
Retail 8,000
Meeting 0
Miscellaneous Support Areas 0
Total 121,300
Source: AECOM
6.4.3 Intercity Bus
Greyhound Lines, the main stakeholder for intercity bus, submitted a detailed
spreadsheet of spatial requirements. A 25 percent increase in the intercity bus market is
projected by 2030. This percentage was applied to the overall square footage to
determine estimates for the intercity bus program. Figure 6-3 provides an illustration of
space adjacency requirements for efficient use of programmed spaces for intercity bus
operations.
6.4.3.1 Waiting, Retail and Ticketing
The waiting areas are adjacent to the loading and unloading area, providing direct
access. Queuing space is located inside the terminal concourse. Retail such as
restaurant and vending machines should preferably be located adjacent to tenant waiting
areas, but also be accessible from MMPT common areas.
The main requirement for Greyhound is the need to provide ticketing agents with a view
of the waiting areas, restrooms, and front entrance as shown in Figure 6-3. If the
ticketing area is combined with the GPX Baggage (a retail freight service provided by
Greyhound) area, then direct access from ticketing to baggage handling would be
required.
Figure 6-3: Intercity Bus Adjacency Diagram

Source: AECOM
6.4.3.2 Terminal Operations and District Office Space
The Greyhound patron is responsible for carrying personal baggage to the bus. The
baggage area is primarily for GPX Baggage, lost and found, and luggage that have
arrived at the destination prior to the passenger. It is critical that the baggage area is
adjacent to the bus loading and unloading area. Baggage is included under Operations
and Miscellaneous within Figure 6-3.
Greyhound requires office and administrative areas for their district operations. These
areas can be separated from terminal operations. However, a connection between
district office space and terminal operations is desirable. Appendix E shows detailed
square footage allowances with quantities.
Table 6-12 provides estimated space requirements for intercity bus services.
Table 6-12: Intercity Bus Program Summary
Item
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf)
Boarding Area and Maintenance (not including parking) 20,500
Site Circulation Allowance 20,500
Ticketing 1,200
Patron Areas 17,700
Security 200
Retail 6,900
Meeting 0
Miscellaneous Support Areas 6,700
Total 78,600
Source: AECOM
6.4.4 Vehicles for Hire
Vehicles for hire such as taxicabs, shuttles, and car sharing services will require space
primarily for pick-up and drop-off of patrons. The design should provide a curbside,
covered area for pick-up and drop-off spaces. Transportation facilities typically have
space allocated for queuing, which during large events can be shared perhaps with
parking. Their needs are 24 hours a day, seven days a week and they work
independently. Due to their independence, sales occur within the vehicles and do not
require ticketing spaces. Vehicles for hire will require very limited space at the MMPT.
Vehicles for Hire also include rental car services, which require administrative and
patron areas. Appendix E shows detailed square footage allowances and quantities.
Table 6-13 provides estimated space requirements for vehicles for hire services.
Table 6-13: Vehicles for Hire Program Summary
Item
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf)
Pick-up/ Drop-off Area and Maintenance 30,000
Ticketing 500
Patron Areas 1,200
Security 0
Retail 300
Meeting 0
Miscellaneous Support Areas 1,000
Total 34,700
Source: AECOM
6.4.5 Regional Light Rail and Streetcar
There are plans to implement light rail and streetcar services that could connect to or
serve the MMPT. The Transit Planning Boards Concept 3 Technical Report estimates
an average of 64,300 boardings for the four segments that will serve the MMPT. Since
the nature of the passenger is similar to local and express bus travelers, alighting and
boarding counts should be within 10 to 20 percent of each other. Taking 80 percent of
the boardings, an estimated 51,440 passengers will utilize the MMPT daily. 15 percent
provides the peak hour 2-way traffic of 7,716 and 65 percent of 2-way leaves a total of
5,015 passengers to be used for waiting area measurement. Waiting areas are only
provided for seating as it is assumed that standing patrons would be accommodated at
the boarding areas. Additional requirements for light rail and streetcar services would be
ticketing machines, vending machines, some passenger services, office space for two
employees, and an operator break area. Table 6-14 provides estimated space
requirements for Regional Light Rail and Streetcar services. Detailed spatial
requirements are listed in Appendix E.
Table 6-14: Regional Light Rail and Streetcar Program Summary
Item
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf)
Boarding Area, Track Area and
Maintenance
15,000
Ticketing 200
Administration and Operations 600
Patron Areas 25,400
Security 0
Retail 0
Meeting 0
Miscellaneous Support Areas 400
Total 41,800
Source: AECOM
6.5 Summary of Spatial Requirements
The summary of spatial requirements provided in Table 6-15 focuses on the stated
needs of stakeholders. Included are the gross building spaces, spaces required for
loading and unloading of patrons (including berthing of vehicles), site circulation for
transit operations and parking spaces. This does not include all site amenities such as
landscape and retainage areas, central and distributed mechanical and electrical plant
requirements, other retail that is not inclusive of requested stakeholder retail, and site
improvements, such as additional roadway and track work. Table 6-16 provides a
comparison of the transit components with public amenities, boarding areas (including
berthing of vehicles) and site circulation and parking needs.
Table 6-15: Building Program Summary (Including Platforms)
Item
Estimated Space
Required (gross sf
including growth factor)
MMPT Management and Operations 15,200
Subtotal 583,100
Parking Structure and Loading Area 47,000
Total Building 630,100
Source: AECOM
Table 6-16: Total Building Program Comparison
Floor Area
(sf)
Passenger
Rail
Commuter
& Express
Bus
Intercity
Bus
Vehicles
for Hire
Regional
Light Rail
& Streetcar
MMPT
Management
Total
Waiting Areas 16,600 10,900 17,700 1,200 25,400 700 72,500
Ticketing and
Passenger
Services
6,000 1,500 1,200 800 400 0 9,900
Office/
Meeting
16,700 600 4,900 1,400 600 14,500 38,700
Retail 18,600 8,000 6,900 300 0 0 33,800
Maintenance/
Miscellaneous
Support Areas
7,700 0 6,700 1,000 400 0 15,800
Security Area 1,500 200 200 0 0 NA 1,900
Boarding and
Site Areas
224,400 100,100 41,000 30,000 15,000 0 410,500
Sub-Total 291,500 121,300 78,600 34,700 41,800 15,200 583,100
Parking 18,200 3,500 14,000 3,500 0 1,100 40,300
Total 309,700 124,800 92,600 38,200 41,800 16,300 623,400
Truck Loading
and Bicycle
6,700
Grand Total 630,100
7.0 TRANSIT MODE INTEGRATION AND SITE ACCESS
7.1 Transfers between Transit Modes
Primary transfers from MMPT services will be to MARTA rail, local and regional buses,
and to potential future light rail and streetcar services. Although detailed origin and
destination data are not available to determine circulation patterns, this study has
assumed that most MMPT passengers will rely on a transfer to another transit mode to
reach their ultimate destination. This assumption has been made on the basis of a half-
mile distance as the generally acceptable maximum distance most people in the United
States are willing to walk to destinations. Factoring in the added time from waiting to
cross streets and traverse elevators and escalators, this assumed distance is effectively
shortened, especially in light of commuting passengers with a need for convenient
access to employment destinations. Using an actual walking reach of 2,000 feet as the
basis for access potential, MMPT passengers have most immediate access to the
United States federal government office buildings, Fulton Countys government center
and courthouse, and the CNN Center. They do not have access within this same
walking distance to the core business district of downtown Atlanta (at and around
Peachtree Center) or the business district of Midtown Atlanta. As both of these business
districts feature much greater concentrations of employment than the area within close
walking reach of the MMPT, it is reasonable to expect that the majority of transfers will
be commuter rail passengers who do not walk to their ultimate destination. Section 7.3
illustrates the actual walking reach along street infrastructure from each of the three
station location alternatives discussed in this memorandum.
Depending on the final platform configuration, arriving MMPT passengers may walk up
to 2,100 feet from the ends of platforms to access the Five Points or
Dome/GWCC/Philips Arena/CNN Center MARTA rail stations. Alternatively, passengers
may transfer to buses or future light rail and streetcar services with either direct access
or a short walk from platforms. Section 7.2 provides a detailed matrix of intermodal
connections within the MMPT.
7.2 Circulation of Passengers between Transit Modes
The location of the main terminal building affects the design and location of pedestrian
access links to the MARTA rail stations and other surface transit modes serving the
MMPT. Each of the three MMPT terminal location alternatives have been considered
with regard to the reach of pedestrian connectivity from likely station entrances as well
as transfer connections to other travel modes, either served directly by the MMPT or
within close proximity (such as MARTA rail and bus services).Table 7-1 through Table
7-3 provide additional detail on how these connections are made, emphasizing where
vertical movements (i.e. changes of level through elevators, escalators or stairways) and
lateral movements (i.e. the surface distance covered from one point to another). The
intent of these comparisons is to provide more detailed information on pedestrian
circulation, with attention to the actual walking distances required and the need for
vertical circulation based on the alternative designs. The general location of the MMPT
in downtown Atlanta presents a unique set of circumstances, in that track-level rail
platforms are separated by as much as three conventional stories of height from the
street viaducts above them. For this reason, three different levels of facility location
have been assumed: an upper level that interfaces directly with the street, a lower level
directly below this, and a track level where rail platforms are located (which is likely to be
the actual ground level).
A key component of connections to MARTA rail is the existing tunnel connection under
Forsyth Street into the Five Points MARTA station. Each of the three alternatives has
sought to utilize this connection, which is assumed to be at the track level of MMPT
facilities.
In general, the need for accommodating multiple transit modes and the implications of
this on configuration of the MMPT suggest that passengers transferring between modes
will need to make use of both vertical and lateral connections. In some cases there may
be more than one way to reach a different part of the facility or to connect to supporting
transit infrastructure (such as MARTA heavy rail). These both suggest that clear naming
conventions and wayfinding will be necessary as the MMPT facility is constructed. The
lateral distance between the optimal locations of rail platforms and the core activity
center of downtown Atlanta, as well as the need to accommodate multiple travel modes
and passenger functions, both underscore that each alternative has specific advantages
and challenges.
Table 7-1: Alternative A Intermodal Transfers for MMPT Passengers
Travel Modes
Alternative A Alternative A Alternative A Alternative A
From To
Vertical
Movements
Total Lateral
Movement
Pros Cons
H
i
g
h

S
p
e
e
d

R
a
i
l

High Speed Rail Street
1 (track level to upper
level: street
connections to Martin
Luther King Drive or
Mitchell Street)
Direct platform
access from either
Mitchell Street or
Martin Luther King
Jr. Drive.
Close proximity
via direct street-
to-platform
access to
Federal
Buildings

High Speed Rail
MARTA
Bus
At least 1, but
dependent on bus
stop locations.
Dependent on bus
stop locations.
Some stops may be
located close to
direct street access,
although up to 1,400
feet for Broad Street
bus mall stops.

High Speed Rail
MARTA
Rail (Five
Points)
2 (track to lower to
cross rail tracks;
lower to track to
access Five Points
ped tunnel)
Approximately 2,100
feet
All movements
can be enclosed
in station or
tunnel structures.
Distance is long and
multiple
elevator/escalator
movements are needed.
High Speed Rail
MARTA
Rail
(GWCC)
2 (track to upper;
upper to MARTA
platforms)
Approximately 600
feet, though street
crossings likely.
HSR platforms
physically closer
to GWCC than to
Five Points
Likely need to leave
station complex to walk
to MARTA; seamless
connection may require
fare collection in a tunnel
and may preclude
tunnel's use for general
connection to Philips
Arena and GWCC area
Travel Modes
From To
Vertical
Movements
Total Lateral
Movement
Pros Cons
High Speed Rail
Intercity
Rail
cross rail tracks;
lower to track to
access IC rail track)
Approximately 150
feet if terminal
access is not
needed
Access is
immediate and
simply involves
changing
platforms if
terminal access
is not needed

High Speed Rail
Commuter
Rail
cross rail tracks;
lower to track to
access commuter rail
track)
Approximately 400
feet
Access is
immediate and
simply involves
changing
platforms if
terminal access
is not needed

High Speed Rail
Commuter
Bus
1 (track to lower)
Approximately 600
feet

High Speed Rail
Intercity
Bus
cross rail tracks;
lower to track to
access intercity bus
staging area)
Approximately 600
feet

I
n
t
e
r
c
i
t
y

R
a
i
l
/
A
m
t
r
a
k

Intercity Rail Street
level)
None, other than
circulation on
platform to reach
vertical access
point.

Intercity Rail
MARTA
Bus
At least 1, but
dependent on bus
stop locations.
Dependent on bus
stop locations.
Transfers to buses
at Five Points may
use street
connections.

Intercity Rail
MARTA
Rail (Five
Points)
cross rail tracks;
lower to track to
access Five Points
ped tunnel.
Approximately 2,000
feet
All movements
can be enclosed
in station or
tunnel structures;
no street-level
circulation
needed.
multiple
elevator/escalator
Intercity Rail
MARTA
Rail
(GWCC)
2 (track to upper,
which involves
reaching the street
and walking on
streets to MARTA
station; upper level to
descend to MARTA
platforms).
Approximately 600
feet, though street
crossings likely.

Intercity Rail
Commuter
Rail
cross rail tracks;
lower to track to
track)
Approximately 300
feet

Travel Modes
From To
Vertical
Movements
Total Lateral
Movement
Pros Cons
Intercity Rail
Commuter
Bus
1 (track to lower)
Approximately 500
feet

Intercity Rail
Intercity
Bus
cross rail tracks;
lower to track to
track)
Approximately 500
feet

C
o
m
m
u
t
e
r

R
a
i
l

Commuter Rail Street
level: street
Luther King Drive)
Direct platform
access from Martin
Luther King Jr.
Drive.
Close proximity
via direct street-
to-platform
access to
Federal
Buildings

Commuter Rail
MARTA
Bus
At least 1, but
dependent on bus
stop locations.
Approximately 400
feet for terminal-
staging buses.
Some stops may be
located close to
direct street access,
although up to 1,400
feet for Broad Street
bus mall stops.
Closer access to
Five Points, new
street
connections
(especially
Alabama
extension) can
be used as 'bus
mall' stops to
increase
proximity

Commuter Rail
MARTA
Rail (Five
Points)
cross rail tracks;
lower to track to
access pedestrian
tunnel to Five Points)
Approximately 1,700
feet
All movements
can be enclosed
in station or
tunnel structures;
no street-level
circulation
needed.

Commuter Rail
MARTA
Rail
(GWCC)
2 (track to upper,
which involves
reaching the street
and walking on
streets to MARTA
station; upper level to
descend to MARTA
platforms).
Approximately 800
feet
All movements
can be enclosed
in station
structures and a
tunnel
Use of potential
pedestrian tunnel
requires three vertical
movements; this tunnel
would likely need to
include MARTA fare
collection if providing
direct platform access
and could therefore not
be used as a general
connection to
GWCC/Philips Arena.
Commuter Rail
Intercity
Bus
cross rail tracks;
lower to track to
access intercity bus
bays).
Approximately 300
feet
Intercity staging
area close to
Commuter Rail
platforms

Travel Modes
From To
Vertical
Movements
Total Lateral
Movement
Pros Cons
C
o
m
m
u
t
e
r

B
u
s

Commuter Bus Street 1 (lower to upper)
Negligible: entrance
points to station are
adjacent to street
Main terminal
facility is directly
above bus
staging area

Commuter Bus
High
Speed
Rail
1 (lower to track)
Approximately 600
feet.

Commuter Bus
Intercity
Rail
1 (lower to track)
Approximately 500
feet

Commuter Bus
MARTA
Rail (Five
Points)
1 (either lower to
track to use Forsyth
Street tunnel, or
lower to street to use
Alabama Extension
to reach Five Points)
Approximately 500
feet.
Connection is
directly adjacent
to ped tunnel
around
Constitution
Building and
under Forsyth
Street.

Commuter Bus
MARTA
Rail
(GWCC)
1 (lower to upper to
access street, then
walk along streets to
Dome)
Approximately 1200
feet along streets.

This is far from the
MARTA rail station and
its design will likely
require street connection,
although Five Points is
closer
Commuter Bus
Intercity
Bus
1 (lower to track)
Negligible: modes
are in the same
location, only
separated vertically
Intercity to
commuter
transfers can be
accomplished
simply by
changing levels

Commuter Bus
MARTA
Bus
May require none, 1 if
connections are
made to street
Some MARTA bus
locations may be in
the same staging
area; buses at
Broad Street Mall
may be as far as
800-1,000 feet
Some MARTA
buses using
express staging
area can allow
immediate
transfer
Connection to buses
terminating/staging at
Five Points requires
more lateral movement
and may require
Source: AECOM

Table 7-2: Alternative B Intermodal Transfers for MMPT Passengers
Travel Modes
Alternative B Alternative B Alternative B Alternative B
From To
Vertical
Movements
Total Lateral
Movement
Pros Cons
H
i
g
h

S
p
e
e
d

R
a
i
l

1 (track to upper) for direct
Mitchell Street
Direct platform access
from Martin Luther King
Jr. Drive or Mitchell
Street.
Close proximity via
direct street-to-platform
access to Federal
Buildings

High Speed Rail MARTA Bus
At least 1, but dependent
on bus stop locations.
Up to 1,400 feet for
Broad Street bus mall
stops

Bus connections to
routes terminating near
Five Points may be far
High Speed Rail
MARTA Rail
(Five Points)
2 (track to lower to cross rail
tracks; lower to track to
access Five Points ped
tunnel)
Approximately 1,700 feet
High Speed Rail
MARTA Rail
(GWCC)
1 (track to upper) for street
access via MLK and
Centennial Olympic Park
along streets.

High Speed Rail Intercity Rail
None needed, assuming
terminal access not
required for ticketing/fare
collection
Negligible: on same
platforms
On same platforms: not
factoring in scheduling
or need for ticketing in
the main platform, this
transfer is easy

High Speed Rail
Commuter
Rail
platforms)
Approximately 100-200
feet
Tracks are located in
the same general
alignment and are easy
to reach from
passenger rail platform

High Speed Rail
Commuter
Bus
1 (track to lower to access
passenger rail terminal and
to walk along Alabama
Street to express bus area)
Long connection and
walk through multiple
functional areas (car
rental, taxi shuttle, etc.)
High Speed Rail Intercity Bus
2 (shortest method is track
to lower to cross tracks,
access overbuild of intercity
bus staging area and use
elevator access from there)
Approximately 200 feet
Requires multiple
vertical movements to
make transfer
Travel Modes
From To
Vertical
Movements
Total Lateral
Movement
Pros Cons
I
n
t
e
r
c
i
t
y

R
a
i
l
/
A
m
t
r
a
k

Mitchell Street
Jr. Drive.
Close proximity via
access to Federal
Buildings

Intercity Rail MARTA Bus
on bus stop locations.
Up to 1,400 feet for
Broad Street bus mall
stops

Bus connections to
routes terminating near
Five Points may be far
Intercity Rail
MARTA Rail
(Five Points)
access Five Points ped
tunnel)
Intercity Rail
MARTA Rail
(GWCC)
access via MLK and
along streets.

Intercity Rail
Commuter
Rail
platforms)
Approximately 100-200
feet
Tracks are located in
the same general
alignment and are easy
to reach from
passenger rail platform

Intercity Rail
Commuter
Bus
1 (track to lower to access
passenger rail terminal and
to walk along Alabama
Street to express bus area
Long connection and
walk through multiple
functional areas (car
rental, taxi shuttle, etc.)
Intercity Rail Intercity Bus
access Intercity bus staging
area
Tracks are in close
proximity, passage
through terminal may
not be needed if
ticketing is separate

Travel Modes
From To
Vertical
Movements
Total Lateral
Movement
Pros Cons
C
o
m
m
u
t
e
r

R
a
i
l

Mitchell Street
Jr. Drive.
Close proximity via
access to Federal
Buildings
No direct street access
at north end of
platforms.
Commuter Rail MARTA Bus
on bus stop locations. 2
vertical movements
required for buses
terminating in track-level
bus facility of MMPT.
Some stops may be
located close to direct
street access, although
up to 1,400 feet for Broad
Street bus mall stops

Commuter Rail
MARTA Rail
(Five Points)
2 (track to lower to clear rail
platforms and connect to
main terminal; lower to
track to access Five Points
Ped Tunnel)
All movements can be
enclosed in station or
tunnel structures.
multiple
elevator/escalator
Commuter Rail
MARTA Rail
(GWCC)
access via MLK and
along streets.

Connection is indirect
and requires multiple
turns along street,
although Five Points
station connection can
also be made (and more
directly)
Commuter Rail Intercity Bus
access Intercity bus staging
area
Tracks are in close
proximity, passage
through terminal may
not be needed if
ticketing is separate

Travel Modes
From To
Vertical
Movements
Total Lateral
Movement
Pros Cons
C
o
m
m
u
t
e
r

B
u
s

Commuter Bus Street 1 (lower or track to upper)
Negligible: connection to
Alabama Street
extension can be made
vertically
Location is adjacent to
both Alabama and
Forsyth Streets,
providing convenient
pedestrian access to
multiple destinations

Commuter Bus
High Speed
Rail
1 (lower to track after
walking along Alabama
and accessing passenger
rail terminal)
Connection can be
made entirely below
street
Walk distances are long
Commuter Bus Intercity Rail
1 (lower to track after
walking along Alabama
and accessing passenger
rail terminal)
Connection can be
made entirely below
street
Walk distances are long
Commuter Bus
MARTA Rail
(Five Points)
0 or 1 (depends on the level
where buses alight; if on
lower level, passengers are
already aligned with Five
Points pedestrian tunnel)
Negligible: Facilities are
across Forsyth Street
from one another.
Facilities located in
close proximity and
existing tunnel under
Forsyth Street can be
used
Bus staging area may
be difficult to work
around Atlanta
Constitution building
Commuter Bus
MARTA Rail
(GWCC)
1 (lower or track to upper) to
use Alabama extension to
walk to GWCC station
plaza
Five Points connection
is much closer and can
be used instead
Walk distance is long;
street interface required
to access another
underground transit
facility
Commuter Bus Intercity Bus
0, potentially 1 (lower to
track to move from Intercity
overbuild to Intercity staging
area
Facilities are close and
can potentially be
connected at track level
If no track level
connection, potentially 2
vertical movements if
express buses alight on
track level
Commuter Bus MARTA Bus
Potentially none for MARTA
routes terminating/staging
in MMPT facility; 1 for
street-level connections that
are required
Up to 400 feet for Broad
Street bus mall
Commuter bus facility is
relatively close to a
wide range of MARTA
terminal stops for local
bus routes

Source: AECOM

Table 7-3: Alternative C Intermodal Transfers for MMPT Passengers
Travel Modes
Alternative C Alternative C Alternative C Alternative C
From To
Vertical
Movements
Total
Lateral
Movement
Pros Cons
H
i
g
h

S
p
e
e
d

R
a
i
l

1 (track level to
upper level: street
connections to
Martin Luther King
Drive or Mitchell
Street)
Direct platform
access from
either Mitchell
Street or Martin
Luther King Jr.
Drive.
Close
proximity via
direct street-
to-platform
access to
Federal
Buildings

High Speed Rail MARTA Bus
At least 1, but
dependent on bus
stop locations.
Dependent on bus
stop locations.
Transfers to
buses at Five
Points may use
street
connections.

High Speed Rail MARTA Rail (Five Points)
cross rail tracks
and proceed
through terminal;
lower to track to
access Five Points
ped tunnel)
Approximately
2,100 feet
All
movements
can be
enclosed in
station or
tunnel
structures.
Distance is long
and multiple
elevator/escalator
movements are
needed.
High Speed Rail MARTA Rail (GWCC)
2 (track to upper;
upper to MARTA
platforms)
Approximately
600 feet, though
street crossings
likely.
HSR platforms
physically
closer to
GWCC than to
Five Points
Likely need to
leave station
complex to walk
to MARTA;
seamless
connection may
require fare
collection in a
tunnel and may
preclude tunnel's
use for general
connection to
Philips Arena and
GWCC area
High Speed Rail Intercity Rail
None needed,
assuming terminal
access not
required for
ticketing/fare
collection
Negligible: on
same platforms
On same
platforms: not
factoring in
scheduling or
need for
ticketing in the
main platform,
this transfer is
easy

High Speed Rail Commuter Rail
cross rail tracks;
lower to track to
access commuter
rail platforms)
Approximately
100-200 feet
Tracks are
located in the
same general
alignment and
are easy to
reach from
passenger rail
platform

Travel Modes
From To
Vertical
Movements
Total
Lateral
Movement
Pros Cons
High Speed Rail Commuter Bus
access passenger
rail terminal and to
walk along
Alabama Street to
express bus area)
Approximately
1,200 feet

Long connection
and walk through
multiple functional
areas (car rental,
taxi shuttle, etc.)
High Speed Rail Intercity Bus
access passenger
walk along
Alabama Street to
express bus area;
then lower to track
for Intercity bus
connection)
Approximately
1,200 feet

Long connection
and walk through
multiple functional
areas (car rental,
taxi shuttle, etc.);
multiple vertical
movements
I
n
t
e
r
c
i
t
y

R
a
i
l
/
A
m
t
r
a
k

1 (track level to
upper level: street
connections to
Martin Luther King
Drive or Mitchell
Street)
Direct platform
access from
either Mitchell
Street or Martin
Luther King Jr.
Drive.
Close
proximity via
direct street-
to-platform
access to
Federal
Buildings

Intercity Rail MARTA Bus
At least 1, but
dependent on bus
stop locations.
Dependent on bus
stop locations.
Transfers to
buses at Five
Points may use
street
connections.

Intercity Rail MARTA Rail (Five Points)
cross rail tracks
and proceed
through terminal;
lower to track to
access Five Points
ped tunnel)
Approximately
2,100 feet
All
movements
can be
enclosed in
station or
tunnel
structures.
Distance is long
and multiple
elevator/escalator
movements are
needed.
Intercity Rail MARTA Rail (GWCC)
2 (track to upper;
upper to MARTA
platforms)
Approximately
600 feet, though
street crossings
likely.
HSR platforms
physically
closer to
GWCC than to
Five Points
Likely need to
leave station
complex to walk
to MARTA;
seamless
connection may
require fare
collection in a
tunnel and may
preclude tunnel's
use for general
connection to
Philips Arena and
GWCC area
Travel Modes
From To
Vertical
Movements
Total
Lateral
Movement
Pros Cons
Intercity Rail Commuter Rail
cross rail tracks;
lower to track to
access commuter
rail platforms)
Approximately
100-200 feet
Tracks are
located in the
same general
alignment and
are easy to
reach from
passenger rail
platform

Intercity Rail Commuter Bus
access passenger
walk along
Alabama Street to
express bus area)
Approximately
1,400 feet

Long connection
and walk through
multiple functional
areas (car rental,
taxi shuttle, etc.)
Intercity Rail Intercity Bus
access passenger
walk along
Alabama Street to
express bus area;
then lower to track
for Intercity bus
connection)
Approximately
1,400 feet

Long connection
and walk through
multiple functional
areas (car rental,
multiple vertical
movements
C
o
m
m
u
t
e
r

R
a
i
l

1 (direct
connections to
Martin Luther King
Drive)
Direct platform
access from
Martin Luther King
Drive.
Close
proximity via
street access
to GWCC
facilties
Farther from
federal
government
buildings and
Five Points area
Commuter Rail MARTA Bus
At least 1, but
dependent on bus
stop locations.
Approximately
1,700 feet

Commuter Rail MARTA Rail (Five Points)
clear tracks and
move through
terminal facilities;
lower to track to
access Forsyth
Street tunnel to
Five Points)
Approximately
2,100 feet

Walk distance is
long and requires
connections
through multiple
functional areas
of the MMPT
Commuter Rail MARTA Rail (GWCC)
2 (track to upper,
which involves
reaching the street
and walking on
streets to MARTA
station; upper level
to descend to
MARTA
platforms). Could
also be 2 (track to
lower to clear
commuter rail
tracks and access
passenger rail
Approximately
800 feet

Likely need to
leave station
complex to walk
to MARTA;
seamless
connection may
require fare
collection in a
tunnel and may
preclude tunnel's
use for general
connection to
Philips Arena and
GWCC area.
Travel Modes
From To
Vertical
Movements
Total
Lateral
Movement
Pros Cons
terminal, then
lower to track to
access potential
pedestrian tunnel
directly to GWCC
station).
Commuter Rail Intercity Bus
access passenger
walk along
Alabama Street to
express bus area;
then lower to track
for Intercity bus
connection)
Approximately
1,400 feet

Long connection
and walk through
multiple functional
areas (car rental,
multiple vertical
movements
C
o
m
m
u
t
e
r

B
u
s

Commuter Bus Street 1 (lower to upper)
Negligible:
connection to
Alabama Street
extension can be
made vertically
Location is
adjacent to
both Alabama
and Forsyth
Streets,
providing
convenient
pedestrian
access to
multiple
destinations

Commuter Bus High Speed Rail
1 (lower to track
after walking along
Alabama Street to
express bus area
and accessing
passenger rail
terminal)
Approximately
1,200 feet
Connection
can be made
entirely below
street
Walk distances
are long
Commuter Bus Intercity Rail
1 (lower to track
after walking along
Alabama Street to
express bus area
and accessing
passenger rail
terminal)
Approximately
1,200 feet
Connection
can be made
entirely below
street
Walk distances
are long
Commuter Bus MARTA Rail (Five Points)
1 (lower to track to
access Forsyth
Street pedestrian
tunnel into Five
Points)
Approximately
200 feet
Connection
can be made
entirely below
street and
takes
advantage of
Forsyth Street
tunnel

Travel Modes
From To
Vertical
Movements
Total
Lateral
Movement
Pros Cons
Commuter Bus MARTA Rail (GWCC)
1 (lower to upper
to access street,
then walk along
streets to GWCC
station)
Approximately
1,700 feet along
streets.

This is far from
the MARTA rail
station and its
design will likely
require street
connection,
although Five
Points is closer.
Commuter Bus Intercity Bus 1 (lower to track)
Negligible: modes
are in the same
location, only
separated
vertically
Intercity to
commuter
transfers can
be
accomplished
simply by
changing
levels

Commuter Bus MARTA Bus
Potentially none
for MARTA routes
terminating/staging
in MMPT facility; 1
for street-level
connections that
are required
Up to 400 feet for
Broad Street bus
mall; no
connection
needed for
MARTA local
buses terminating
in MMPT facility.
Commuter bus
facility is
relatively
close to a
wide range of
MARTA
terminal stops
for local bus
routes

Source: AECOM
7.3 MMPT Access for Pedestrians, Bicyclists, and Automobiles
7.3.1 Pedestrians
Pedestrian access to the MMPT site relies on the existing sidewalk and pedestrian
infrastructure of downtown Atlanta. The three alternatives presented here and in earlier
sections of the technical memorandum utilized different expanded street networks,
although each relies on the street-level connections made on sidewalks as critical to
passenger access to different areas of downtown Atlanta.
As discussed in previous sections of the technical memorandum, each of the three
alternatives for MMPT location uses a combination of track-level, lower-level and upper-
level facilities to describe key points of pedestrian and passenger orientation. These
walkshed discussions deal exclusively with connections to the upper level of MMPT
facilities and consider pedestrian access along existing and proposed streets.
7.3.1.1 Alternative A Walkshed
The walkshed for Alternative A includes a street-level connection of Alabama Street west
to intersect with Centennial Olympic Park Drive. It preserves the existing CNN/Philips
Arena parking structure and as such requires that pedestrian connections circumvent
this block. The advent of a direct platform-to-street connection from the commuter rail
platforms in Alternative A does underscore the expansion of reach that this provides to
passengers, allowing passengers on commuter rail platforms to access the Philips
Arena, CNN Center and Georgia World Congress Center without first passing through
the terminal facility. Figure 7-1 provides a walkshed diagram of Alternative A.
Figure 7-1: Alternative A Walkshed

Source: AECOM
7.3.1.2 Alternative B Walkshed
By locating direct platform access at both Mitchell Street and Martin Luther King, Jr.
Drive, this alternative greatly expands the walking reach of the MMPT to the west. This
is useful for access to the Federal office complex along Martin Luther King, although it
does not provide the same level of access to the Fairlie-Poplar district north of Marietta
Street. Figure 7-2 provides a walkshed diagram of Alternative B.
Figure 7-2: Alternative B Walkshed

Source: AECOM
7.3.1.3 Alternative C Walkshed
Although this alternative does not provide direct platform access along Centennial Olympic
Park Drive, it provides multiple access points for commuter and intercity rail by allowing direct
access to Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive and Mitchell Street. It also uses a street grid that
extends Russell Plaza northward from Alabama Street to Wall Street, allowing a direct
pedestrian connection to the CNN Center at Marietta and Centennial Olympic Park. Figure
7-3 provides a walkshed diagram of Alternative C.
Figure 7-3: Alternative C Walkshed

Source: AECOM
7.3.1.4 Comparison of Walkshed Reach
As the previous figures illustrate, the three different alternatives considered have similar
walkshed potential over and around the study area, although they are nonetheless likely
to appear differently to potential MMPT users in terms of convenience and utility. The
primary station locations feature similar entrance locations to the main terminal facility.
However, the location of any direct platform access greatly expands the pedestrian
reach by allowing passengers to particular destinations, especially the CNN/Georgia
Dome/Philips Arena complex north of the study area, to reach these locations directly
without needing to pass through the main terminal facility.
7.3.2 Bicyclists
Section 6.3.3 discusses the need for bicycle accommodations, noting approximately
1,500 commuters travel to downtown Atlanta by bicycle. All walkshed locations analyzed
here are located on downtown streets and part of the downtown street network, thus
providing broad access to cyclists. The City of Atlantas two major bicycle planning
efforts of the last two decades, the 1995 Commuter On-Street Bicycle Plan and the
Connect Atlanta Plan of 2008, have both identified Marietta Street and Martin Luther
King, Jr. Drive as designated bicycle corridors. Connect Atlanta assigned each a high
priority as a core connection providing a continuous route to other districts of the City.
7.3.3 Automobiles
The potential MMPTs central location in downtown Atlantas street network makes it
easily accessible by automobiles, with multiple route alternatives in the event of
exceptional or long-term street closures. The Forsyth Street location, a two-way street
with access to and from I-20 south of downtown, has direct connections to the federal
government office district and downtown Atlantas business district on Peachtree Street.
In addition, it is within one block of the Marietta Street-Decatur Street corridor, a major
Atlanta thoroughfare connecting to the Citys northwest and eastern neighborhoods.
As is common in major city business districts, downtown Atlanta typically experiences its
greatest levels of traffic congestion in the morning and afternoon periods that generally
coincide with the beginning and end of normal business hours. Although this does not
physically limit automobile access to the MMPT, it is likely that it will increase travel
times to and from the station during these periods. Refer to the Multi-Modal Passenger
Terminal Project Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum from October 2010 for a
more detailed discussion of traffic volumes and conditions through downtown Atlanta.
The City of Atlanta has typically designated Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive and Mitchell
Street as one-way traffic flow. This does not physically limit automobile access to the
MMPT at either of these locations; however, it does influence travel patterns and can
potentially increase trip length and travel time. For example, Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive
has typically been designated as one-way westbound. A station entry location along this
street would require a motorist leaving the site and wishing to access the Georgia State
Capitol to travel west, in the opposite direction of the desired destination. That motorist
cannot turn northward on Centennial Olympic Park Drive due to southbound one-way
traffic on that street. The motorists first opportunity for a northward turn is Northside
Drive, approximately one mile west of the Capitol building. Although this is one example,
it does illustrate the potential circulation, access, and connection challenges that
terminal locations on one-way streets may present. Planning and development of the
MMPT should consider one-way street patterns and should explore opportunities for
different traffic flow configurations if more detailed study determines that one-way streets
do not facilitate access and distribution needs of the MMPT. It should also reference the
citywide Connect Atlanta Plans recommendations for two-way conversion of Mitchell
Street, Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive, Centennial Olympic Park Drive, and Spring Street.
Development activity coordinated with the City of Atlanta may be able to help advance
the implementation of those projects.
7.3.4 Fire Life Safety Considerations
Major transportation elements may require significant mechanical and electrical plant
spaces to address normal, congested and emergency operating needs, in coordination
with the fire protection approach.
fire-life safety requirements of an emergency nature. Adequate access and space for
installation and on-going maintenance is critical to the availability of these critical
systems.
Where major transportation elements are located with immediate or short connections
between them, the ventilation demands and requirements for each should be
coordinated.
Where proposed, any combinations of plant capability and capacity should be carefully
reviewed with consideration of individual operating requirements and schedules,
redundancy versus reliability, and flexibility of operation.
7.3.5 Train-Tunnel Interaction Considerations
The configuration of tunnel and overbuild portals will need to be coordinated with the
train speeds and tunnel blockage ratios. The resultant pressure transients due to train
motion into and out of portals will have to meet passenger comfort criteria, as
recommended in the Subway Environmental Design Handbook.
7.4 Transit Mode Integration and Site Access Summary
Transfers between modes and general connections of the MMPT to its surroundings in
downtown Atlanta are important factors in potential terminal location decisions. The
historic preference for a Forsyth Street location adjacent to the Five Points MARTA rail
station requires rail operations that conflict with the needs and preferences of the
agencies providing intercity passenger rail service. In exploring the potential of the
MMPT to be located closer to rail platforms further west, this section seeks to
understand the following:
implications of a western location for pedestrian movement;
connections to MARTA transit service; and
the general potential for the station to connect to the existing built and economic
fabric of downtown Atlanta.
Each location offers a range of pedestrian-accessible connections and connects directly
to the Five Points MARTA rail station, the hub of Atlantas local transit network through
the existing Forsyth Street tunnel. Alternatives A and C can potentially create a similar
direct connection to the Dome/GWCC/Philips Arena/CNN Center MARTA rail station.
Although this reduces the effectiveness of the modal transfer by giving MMPT
passengers limited access to bus routes and heavy rail lines and potentially requires
reconstruction of this station to interface directly with its platforms. In brief, no one
location avoids the competing challenges of rail operations, modal transfer potential, and
downtown connectivity.
The modal transfer matrix in Section 7.2 and the walkshed diagrams in Section 7.3 are
intended to help the Master Developer understand the tradeoffs in different station
locations. It will be important for stated requirements and guidelines to be in place to
help guide proponents to a mutually agreeable outcome. Proponents should also be
encouraged to propose outside the box solutions to the sites transportation and
intermodal needs such as grade separation of tracks, the development of new rail ROW
alignments or other strategies should these prove feasible from a technical and cost
perspective.
8.0 PASSENGER DISTRIBUTION
8.1 Distribution of Passengers from Track Level to Upper Levels
The critical factor in placement of escalators, elevators, stairs, or other means of vertical
circulation between the track level and levels above, both the lower and upper levels,
with access to the street. It is important that facility design ensure ADA compliant
access. Although vertical circulation can be placed at several different locations along a
rail platform, it should land in the footprint of the main terminal in order to connect to bus
circulation and loading areas and to provide convenient pedestrian access to other parts
of downtown Atlanta. This suggests a limited number of locations, as illustrated in Figure
8-1, which shows the three primary walkshed locations and their relationship to the
surrounding streets, MARTA rail lines, and land use context of Downtown Atlanta.
Platform connections to the upper terminal level should not create an environment of
isolation or perceived discomfort or danger. Traditional multi-level station design
connects platforms directly with a waiting area or central space of the station with direct
vertical circulation. The underground layer of downtown Atlanta created by the
construction of its street viaducts beginning in the 1920s is largely blocked from natural
light and visibility by the overhead street viaducts, buildings and other structures. As
discussed in Section 6.1.1 Terminal Spatial Requirements, platforms will be located on
this track level; every attempt should be made to integrate passenger arrival and
departure from the actual platforms as closely as possible to a functional above ground
terminal space that facilitates connection with the street network. Passengers
accustomed to well-illuminated public buildings and spaces are likely to perceive long
tunnels and pedestrian walkways connecting platforms to terminal spaces as
inconvenient and perhaps even unsafe. Table 8-1 illustrates how passengers would
connect to frequent destinations from each of the walkshed locations.
Figure 8-1: Walkshed Locations and Points of Interest

1a. Alternative A
1b. Alternative B
1c. Alternative C
2. Five Points MARTA Rail
Station
3.Five Points Intersection
4.Sam Nunn Federal Center
offices
5.Martin Luther King, Jr. Federal
Center offices
6.Richard B. Russell Federal
Center offices
7.Dome/GWCC/Philips
Arena/CNN Center MARTA Rail
Station
8.Philips Arena
9.Georgia World Congress
Center
10.Norfolk Southern Operations
Building (Vacant and For Sale)
11.Garnett MARTA Rail Station
12.Fulton County Administration
Center
13.Underground Atlanta
14.Georgia State MARTA Rail
Station
15.Georgia State Capitol
Source: AECOM
Table 8-1: Passenger Frequent Destination
Point of Interest
MMPT Location Alternatives
Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C
2. Five Points MARTA
Rail Station
<0.1 mile walk via Alabama
Street/through Forsyth Street
Tunnel
<0.1 mile walk via Alabama
Street/through Forsyth Street
Tunnel
<0.1 mile walk via
Alabama Street/through
Forsyth Street Tunnel
3.Five Points Intersection
0.2 mile walk via Alabama and
Peachtree Street
0.2 mile walk via Alabama
and Peachtree Streets
and Peachtree Streets
4.Sam Nunn Federal
Center offices
0.1 mile walk via Forsyth Street
0.1 mile walk via Forsyth
Street
Street
5.Martin Luther King, Jr.
Federal Center offices
0.2 mile walk via Spring Street
and Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive
0.2 mile walk via Spring
Street and Martin Luther
King, Jr. Drive
King, Jr. Drive
6.Richard B. Russell
Federal Center offices
Street
Street
7.Dome/GWCC/Philips
Arena/CNN Center
MARTA Rail Station
<0.1 mile walk Centennial
Olympic Park Drive
0.3 mile walk via Martin
Luther King, Jr. Drive and
Drive
Luther King, Jr. Drive and
Drive
8.Philips Arena
<0.1 mile walk Centennial
Olympic Park Drive
0.4 mile walk via extended
Alabama Street and
Drive
0.4 mile walk via extended
Alabama Street and
Drive
9.Georgia World
Congress Center
0.1 mile walk Centennial
Olympic Park Drive
Luther King, Jr. Drive,
Drive, and Philips Drive
Luther King, Jr. Drive,
Drive, and Philips Drive
10.Norfolk Southern
Operations Building
(Vacant and For Sale)
Street
Street
11.Garnett MARTA Rail
Station
0.4 mile walk via Forsyth Street
Street
Street
12.Fulton County
Administration Center
and Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive
King, Jr. Drive
King, Jr. Drive
13.Underground Atlanta 0.1 mile walk via Alabama Street
Street
Street
14.Georgia State MARTA
Rail Station
0.7 mile walk via Spring Street,
Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive and
Washington Street
Street, Martin Luther King, Jr.
Drive and Washington Street
Street, Martin Luther King,
Jr. Drive and Washington
Street
15.Georgia State Capitol
0.7 mile walk via Martin Luther
King, Jr. Drive
Luther King, Jr. Drive
Luther King, Jr. Drive
Source: AECOM
8.1.1 Open Access Platforms and Ingress / Egress Points
Another important consideration is the potential for location of open-platform access
points, especially to the commuter rail platforms. This is likely to be driven by methods of
ticketing and payment, but other commuter transit systems do allow direct access to
platforms (sometimes through controlling fare gates) to increase pedestrian circulation
capacity through multiple channels of ingress and egress and to minimize walking
distances. Limitations of adding direct platform access points are that these are entry
points that must be secured and that ticketing and fare collection infrastructure may
need to be distributed through a wider range of access points. However, the minimized
distances facilitated by allowing this pattern of circulation suggest a greater passenger
convenience in connecting to downtown destinations. Diagrams in Section 9.0 of this
technical memorandum depict access points.
8.2 Distribution of Passengers from Location Walksheds to other
Points of Interest
Because of the MMPT study areas location adjacent to one of Atlantas three major
business districts and a large concentration of visitor attractions around Centennial
Olympic Park, this section considers two major themes: circulation to points of interest in
downtown Atlanta, where walking is a viable mode choice; and circulation to other parts
of metropolitan Atlanta involving longer travel distances.
8.2.1 Distribution to Points of Interest Downtown
Section 7.3 discusses considerations for access to the MMPT by pedestrians, bicycles,
and automobiles. Downtown Atlantas relatively comprehensive street network and
sidewalk coverage provides the immediate opportunity for circulation, although the reach
and potential destinations from walking varies greatly based on the primary access
points from the terminal to the surface street network. Refer to Section 7.3 for a more
detailed analysis of walksheds and pedestrian reach along with potential complications
to pedestrian circulation.
One of the largest concentrations of employment immediately adjacent to the MMPT site
is the complex of federal office buildings around the intersection of Forsyth Street and
Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive. Commuters using the MMPT to reach these destinations
would likely walk; the distance from a Forsyth Street entrance to the MMPT to the Sam
Nunn Federal Office Building is approximately 400 feet. To the north, downtown
Atlantas financial and business district is located mostly along Peachtree Street north of
the Five Points intersection. Figure 8-1 illustrates nearby points of interest and their
connections to the three MMPT location walksheds considered.
8.2.2 Distribution to Points of Interest Elsewhere in Atlanta
Through the MARTA rail and bus systems, passengers arriving in downtown Atlanta
through the MMPT have access to a much greater geography without needing to transfer
to automobile travel. MARTA currently provides service in Fulton and DeKalb Counties.
Through projects currently advancing as well as projects envisioned in the regional
Concept 3 plan, service will expand accessibility. With the heavy rail system at the Five
Points MARTA rail station and a substantial number of bus routes either terminating
around it or serving it along their routes, the MMPT is well positioned to offer transfer
opportunities to local transit. This allows service to the business and activity districts of
Downtown, Midtown, and Buckhead; HJAIA; Georgia Institute of Technology and the
Atlanta University Center; and the cities of East Point, College Park, and Decatur, along
with many other cities and points of interest located near MARTA stations throughout the
system.
It is important that connections from the MMPT to MARTA be as seamless as possible
and if probable allows direct connection from one facility to another. Location of the
MMPT at a Forsyth Street location as identified in previous plans and studies allows
passengers the shortest distance to a MARTA rail facility from the terminal building. Due
to the heavy concentration of local bus routes around the Five Points plaza and along
the Broad Street transit mall this connection could feasibly be accomplished simply by
crossing Forsyth Street at the surface street level or accessing the existing pedestrian
tunnel below Forsyth Street.
From a commuter perspective, there is considerable advantage to the MMPT offering a
direct connection to the Five Points MARTA rail station and plaza. This station offers
access to both MARTA rail trunk lines directly from fare gates and thus allows a
passenger to reach any MARTA rail station from a single boarding. Connection to the
Dome/GWCC/Philips Arena/CNN Center MARTA rail station would require passengers
to transfer at the Five Points MARTA rail station if they wish to access a station on the
north-south trunk line or either of its northern branches (i.e. the Gold or Red lines). In
peak hour commutes, this potentially adds 15 minutes of trip time. This is assuming
seven-minute headways due to branch line doubling on the same track and a full
headway wait at each of the two MARTA platforms accessed.
HJAIA is located approximately seven miles south of Atlantas downtown business
district and is served by MARTAs Red and Gold line heavy rail transit service. Due to
the airports role as the preeminent hub of Delta Airlines, HJAIA is a major origin and
destination airport for a large area beyond metropolitan Atlanta even though other
commercial airports with less extensive service are located closer to passengers in other
parts of the Southeast. Because of this, it is reasonable to expect that passengers from
areas outside of MARTAs service area may wish to use the MMPT to transfer to
MARTA rail and access the airport, most likely through future commuter or intercity rail
service. The construction of a new international terminal at HJAIA will move all
international air service from the existing terminal, which is served by MARTA.
Consequently, airport passengers using MARTA to access HJAIA will only have access
to the domestic facility. The two terminals will not have a direct connection between
secured areas, meaning that transfers between the two will rely on airport circulator
service (whether through shuttles or through extension of the underground trans-concourse
tramway system). Future transit serving the international terminal may also serve the
MMPT, although airport passengers using this new terminal will not be able to use
existing MARTA rail service without some form of connecting transportation to access
the international terminal. However, passengers using the international terminal could be
served by future commuter/passenger rail services on the Atlanta-Griffin-Macon corridor at
the proposed Southern Crescent terminal.
8.3 Passenger Distribution Summary
The need to access the levels above the track-level platforms, both the lower and upper
levels, in a safe and convenient manner will also likely guide the MMPTs location.
Track-level platforms do not need to be directly below a street-level terminal entrance,
but they should be close as to encourage seamless connection to and from the MMPT
rail platforms. Although the track to upper level connection must meet ADA
requirements, it must also provide a reasonable sense of security, comfort, and
proximity.
A Forsyth Street location, which has been presented in multiple plans and studies offers
a direct connection for passengers to MARTA and easy access to disperse into
downtown Atlanta. Connections between this site and the location of rail operators would
require a long distance and potentially complicated structures to allow walking between
the two. This suggests a location further west such as along Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive
should be considered, but it does not reach the same number or types of destinations.
Even with the Dome/GWCC/Philips Arena/CNN Center MARTA rail station connection,
the need for significant expansion of street network and pedestrian facilities is likely to
ensure comfortable walking distances for a location further west closer to existing freight
rail ROW.



9.0 COMPREHENSIVE MMPT ALTERNATIVES
Based on the findings and recommendations outlined in previous sections, three
comprehensive potential alternative layouts for the MMPT facility have been developed.
These alternatives present potential facility layouts that incorporate passenger rail and
bus operations as well as connections and circulation to existing local transit and future
regional light rail and streetcar services. They are presented only as options and are not
fully vetted layouts, as many design issues are not reflected in the diagrams.
Furthermore, much coordination with the appropriate agencies and stakeholders would
have to continue for a complete design.
Table 9-1 identifies major items that are an overall comparison of the layouts.
Connection to the Five Points MARTA rail station is the closest transit component to the
proposed MMPT. Each layout provides overbuild areas. However, potential overbuild
areas above rail tracks are separated out due to inherit coordination issues, additional
structural elements and other considerations such as fire protection, ventilation, vibration
and noise control. Two out of the three layouts require partial or complete demolition of
the CNN parking structure. Further negotiations with stakeholders and a detailed design
process for the proposed MMPT will determine the final configuration of the CNN
parking structure. Typically, the more services are consolidated, the more operations are
efficient. However, transit systems take a considerable amount of space for circulation,
which often causes spaces to be spread over multiple parcels of land. Distances from
the furthest points of one transit component to another shows the facility consolidation.
All of the options will require the addition of roads and infrastructure work.
Table 9-1: MMPT Alternatives Comparison
Item Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C
Connection to Five Points MARTA Station (in
relation to the main terminal)
650 feet 75 feet 75 feet
Overbuild area amount 498,000 s.f. 833,900 s.f. 904,200 s.f.
Potential Overbuild area above rail tracks 352,200 s.f. 413,500 s.f. 315,500 s.f.
Demolition (and replacement) of CNN Parking
Structure
0 s.f. 451,250 s.f. 1,065,000 s.f.
Distances from furthest transit components (in
relation to the main terminal)
1,150 feet 1,450 feet 1,500 feet
Area of Right-of-Way improvements 96,600 s.f. 105,900 s.f. 170,600 s.f.
Amount of Green Space 0 s.f. 167,000 s.f. 208,000 s.f.
Source: AECOM
9.1.1 MMPT Alternative A
MMPT Alternative A, shown in Figure 9-1 through Figure 9-3, is based on the passenger
rail layout described in the Southeast HSR Study and illustrated in Figure 3-2. This
alternative proposes a six track, three-platform footprint aligned parallel to the north-
south freight mainline. Platforms extend approximately 800 feet north from Mitchell
Street. The westerly four tracks are intended for HSR and the easterly two for intercity
rail. In addition, four intercity tracks with two platforms are located immediately west of
the former NS headquarters building and Spring Street. This configuration may not allow
tangent track longer than 1,000-feet, which corresponds to the current consist length for
the Amtrak Crescent. This configuration would not accommodate longer trainsets and,
therefore, may be a limitation for some Amtrak long-distance trains. Since high speed
trainsets are typically shorter (approximately 664 feet for an Acela 8-car consist), an 800-
foot platform would be sufficient.
However, MMPT Alternative A differs from the Southeast HSR Study because it includes
north-south through commuter rail tracks adjacent to the west leg of the Circle wye.
These tracks replace the stub end tracks shown for intercity rail in the Southeast HSR
Study. Station platforms extend 800 feet north from Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive. In
addition, a terminal is shown for commuter trains from the Madison line; two stub end
tracks with a center platform are perpendicular to the north-south platform.
Bus operations are located relatively close to the passenger rail operations and parallel
to freight rail operations. This location may provide a more cohesive passenger terminal
complex. Bus operations are directly north of the Richard B. Russell Federal building
with access and egress from Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive and Alabama Street. This
setback loses direct connection to the Five Points MARTA rail station and requires
construction of a subsequent underground tunnel to connect to Five Points. Intercity and
commuter bus are stacked above one another, consolidating terminal and bus
operations.
The MMPT main terminal is clustered towards the western part of the Gulch area. Main
entrances would be located on Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive, Spring, and Alabama
Streets. This alternative allows for elements of the Green Line Plan and potentially the
existing CNN parking structure to remain. The overbuild potential occurs to the north of
passenger rail functions, close to Five Points MARTA rail station, and along Centennial
Olympic Park Drive. This alternative benefits from its proximity to the
Dome/GWCC/Philips Arena/CNN Center MARTA rail station. The walk distance from the
end of the MMPT passenger rail platforms to the Dome/GWCC/Philips Arena/CNN
Center MARTA rail station ranges 300 feet for MMPT Alternative As westerly platforms.
However, MMPT Alternative A is furthest away from the Five Points MARTA rail station
and shifts the walkshed from the main part of downtown. There is potential to connect to
an existing pedestrian tunnel underneath Forsyth Street to access the Five Points
MARTA rail station. Additionally, there is potential for a streetcar connection at street
level from Spring Street.
Pros:
1. This alternative presents the closest proximity of the commuter rail platforms to the
local bus boarding area.
2. Multiple street entrances allows for separation of types of access and flexibility while
bringing patrons into a centralized space.
3. All rail platforms (except the Madison Line) connect to the street level of Martin
Luther King, Jr. Drive and Alabama Street. This keeps main access close to the
terminal.
4. A consolidated terminal provides shorter distances for patrons to maneuver within
the station, allows for more efficient services and easier to secure.
5. This alternative allows the phased development of the Green Line Plan and
reconfiguration of CNN parking structure (not shown in diagram).
6. There is potential to preserve the historic GA Power Building.
Cons:
1. Commuter rail only has connection to the Five Points MARTA rail station, which is a
considerable distance.
2. Limited initial area for overbuild.
3. The main terminal building would have to span across a new street to create the
continuous facility.
4. The boarding areas of the express and local buses would have to continue
underneath the connection of Alabama Street and Andrew Young International Blvd.
Generally, the design of the bus boarding areas should stay clear of the roadway
ROW. It can be difficult to gain approval for the building to project into the ROW and
it would violate zoning setback requirements.
5. Rail configuration is difficult to achieve due to a 100-foot buffer requirement from the
centerline of the nearest freight rail track.

Figure 9-1: MMPT Alternative A Track Level

Source: AECOM
Figure 9-2: MMPT Alternative A Lower Level

Source: AECOM
Figure 9-3: MMPT Alternative A Upper Level

Source: AECOM
9.1.2 MMPT Alternative B
MMPT Alternative B, shown in Figure 9-4 through Figure 9-6, requires that the west leg
of the Circle wye be implemented for passenger rail. Amtrak, HSR, and commuter rail
tracks would have a north-south orientation, but generally parallel to Spring Street.
These tracks would be located in the same vicinity of tracks and platforms for the former
Terminal Station. A 1,200- by 108-foot footprint is identified for four tracks and two
platforms to be shared by Amtrak and HSR. These platforms extend approximately from
Mitchell Street to Centennial Olympic Park Drive. Six commuter rail tracks and three
platforms for north-south service would be located to the west of Amtrak and HSR
tracks. The footprint for this area is approximately 600 by 162 feet. The commuter rail
platforms extend, generally, from Mitchell Street north to the extension of Alabama
Street. With this alternative, intercity rail would utilize Amtrak, HSR, and commuter rail
tracks and platforms. One critical issue is how additional tracks would interface with
Philips Arena. As discussed in Section 2.4 Freight Rail Improvements and Modifications
to Tracks, rail tracks were once active underneath Philips Arena. However, further
investigation will determine if the number of tracks depicted for passenger rail in
Alternative B is feasible. Track design will have to take into consideration not only
existing structures above the proposed station, but also underground elements that may
dictate track location or required mitigation. Layouts are conceptual and intended to
identify potential issues that will need to be addressed in the design process.
The Madison line would utilize the Amtrak/HSR platform or a separate side platform
could be provided. As described earlier, a design option is to terminate Madison trains at
a two-track east-west oriented island platform that is generally perpendicular to the
north-south platforms.
MMPT Alternative B shows a consolidated main terminal along Alabama Street with
connections to intercity bus and express bus on one end and passenger rail on the
other. This separates the two uses, providing the main entrance from an extension of
Alabama Street. Separating intercity and express/local bus operations can be
advantageous by lessening the bus traffic in a concentrated area. The rail platforms are
consolidated, providing shorter walking distances from one mode to the other. Potential
overbuild areas occur at three locations:
above intercity bus, on the western side of the Gulch area, south of the
Dome/GWCC/Philips Arena/CNN Center MARTA rail station;
on the northern edge of the Gulch; and
above the commuter and express/local bus boarding area.
The Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive access points are intended to provide a more direct
connection to the federal offices along Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive. The north platform
end to Philips Arena/CNN Center access points are likely to be used to connect directly
to the Dome/GWCC/Philips Arena/CNN Center MARTA rail station. Connection to the
upper (street) level can potentially provide direct access to Philips Arena and CNN
Center. However, the CNN parking structure would have to be partially demolished and
rebuilt. The south platform end to the Richard B. Russell Federal Building and Mitchell
Street access points are likely to be driven by ultimate platform configuration (namely,
whether commuter rail occupies eastern platforms closer to downtown). HSR and
intercity rail are less likely to be configured with open access points.


Pros:
1. Separating the main pedestrian entrance (off the open green area) from the pick-
up/drop-off areas (off Alabama Street) helps evenly distribute patron circulation and
integrates the Green Line Plan vision.
2. Overbuild areas surround the terminal and allows for phased growth from a central
point.
3. The rail platforms are aligned with each other, providing ease of passenger
movement and wayfinding.
4. This alternative provides a direct connection between express/local bus boarding
areas and the Five Points MARTA rail station.
5. This alternative conforms to the existing City grid by extending Alabama Street and
providing a new street connection between Alabama Street and Martin Luther King,
Jr. Drive.
Cons:
1. The long distances between commuter rail, the Five Points MARTA rail station, and
local buses.
2. Extension of Alabama Street does not connect directly to Andrew Young
International Boulevard due to limited touchdown points above tracks and platform
area. This also takes away from the open green area noted in the Green Line Plan.
3. Development opportunities above tracks and platform area would be difficult
because of limited touchdown points, but not impossible. Structural considerations
would have to be given and could be cost prohibitive.

Figure 9-4: MMPT Alternative B Track Level

Source: AECOM
Figure 9-5: MMPT Alternative B Lower Level

Source: AECOM
Figure 9-6: MMPT Alternative B Upper Level

Source: AECOM
9.1.3 MMPT Alternative C
MMPT Alternative C, shown in Figure 9-7 through Figure 9-9, combines aspects of the
passenger rail options in MMPT Alternatives A and B. In this case, Amtrak and HSR
would be located along the east side of the study area as described in Alternative B.
Commuter rail tracks would be aligned parallel to freight tracks along the west side of
the study area as shown in Alternative A and in the Southeast HSR Study. Madison line
trains would either stop at the north-south Amtrak/HSR platform, a north-south side
platform specifically for that route or at the east-west platform described as a design
option.
The Five Points Area Bus Transfer Center Concept and Operating Plan report assumed
that the proposed MMPT would utilize Spring and Forsyth Streets for access and egress
to and from the bus bays. MMPT Alternative C presents an option that aligns with the
Five Points Area Bus Transfer Center Concept and Operating Plan report by utilizing
Spring Street and the cross streets between Forsyth and Spring Streets.
MMPT Alternative C suggests a separation of the waiting areas with a main terminal
connecting passenger rail and bus operations. Additionally, it creates a greater walking
distance from commuter rail to local bus.
This alternative shows the extension of Alabama Street, leading into Andrew Young
International Boulevard as indicated in the Green Line Plan. The south platform end at
the Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive access point provides an additional entry to the south.
Bus operations at the Forsyth Street access point allows for a direct connection to the
Five Points MARTA rail station at the street level.
Pros:
1. Allows for a large open green space and provides the flexibility for integration of the
Green Line Plan vision.
2. Bus functions are consolidated and adjacent to Five Points MARTA rail station.
3. Separated waiting areas allows for overbuild areas to connect and integrate the
facility.
Cons:
1. This alternative creates the furthest distance between commuter rail, the Five Points
MARTA rail station, and local buses.
2. Rail configuration is difficult to achieve due to a 100-foot buffer requirement from the
centerline of the nearest freight rail track.
3. Terminal is not consolidated: efficiency for service is reduced.

Figure 9-7: MMPT Alternative C Track Level

Source: AECOM
Figure 9-8: MMPT Alternative C Lower Level

Source: AECOM
Figure 9-9: MMPT Alternative C Upper Level

Source: AECOM
10.0 NEXT STEPS
The operational requirements outlined in this technical memorandum will assist in the
following next steps:
Further clarify the current and future needs of stakeholders and potential operators
through discussions with the MMPT Technical Committee
Support the development of minimum standards, design criteria and concept
drawings for the MMPT facility. This includes such items as, overbuild, platforms,
bus bays, bus shelters, signage, pedestrian enhancements, street grid, tunnel and
facilities ventilation, ventilation system plant, ventilation shaft and intake/discharge
requirements, other fire-life safety elements, possible signalization to facilitate bus
access and passenger transfers between modes.
Prepare order of magnitude cost projections for the MMPT
Develop a phased implementation plan for the MMPT
The majority of next steps should be conducted as part of the Phase 1 scope of work of
the selected Master Developer using inputs from this technical memorandum.


APPENDICES
Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project A-1 November 2010

Appendix A: List of Stakeholders

Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project A-2 November 2010

Appendix A: List of Stakeholders
The following is the list of stakeholders considered for transit operation and property
ownership input:
Norfolk Southern
CSX
Amtrak
Greyhound
Southeastern Stages
Georgia Department of Transportation
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority Rail and Bus
Georgia Regional Transportation Authority
Cobb Community Transit
Gwinnett County Transit
Atlanta Development Authority
General Services Administration
Georgia World Congress Center Authority
Georgia State University
Atlanta Fulton County Recreation Authority
State Properties Commission
Zipcar
City of Atlanta Police Division of Taxicabs and Vehicles for Hire
Atlanta Link
Enterprise
Checker Cab

Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project B-1 November 2010

Appendix B: Governing Codes and
Standards

Appendix B: Governing Codes and Standards
The following section provides standards used to develop area requirements for the functional and
support spaces, and codes used to regulate transit operations and facilities. This section is not
meant to be inclusive of all codes and standards that transit operations and facilities must adhere to
within the study area, but as a reference point for the selected Master Developer.
Commuter Rail Station Requirements
Commuter rail stations requirements should be defined based on vehicle types operated, passenger
demand, and operating plan. For new commuter rail systems, a peer review of station infrastructure
criteria can be completed as an interim step in development of design criteria. The following
describe general criteria and considerations for commuter rail and Amtrak station platforms based
on information from New Jersey Transit and the Amtrak Station Manual
3
.
Platform Height
Commuter rail platform height varies by operating condition. Where the track may be shared with
freight, the operating railroads may require a clear zone or envelope for freight service. This window
may preclude the use of high-level platforms or restrict the height of low-level platforms. This, in
turn, may affect the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) level boarding requirements. In addition,
the vehicle type is key in defining the platform design.
While high-level boarding is the most efficient for high demand corridors and improves safety,
capital costs are higher and an appropriate vehicle must be acquired. Many newer commuter rail
operations utilize bi-level equipment with door on the lower level that requires a low- or mini high-
level platform. Should high-level platforms be present, an alternative vehicle must be used, as is the
case with New Jersey Transit bi-levels.
High-level platforms offer the advantages of decreased train dwell times, and greater accessibility
for all passengers. While the advantages of low-level platforms include a compatibility with wide-
load freight service, lower initial cost, and compatibility with curved track, which is inappropriate for
high-level platforms.
In many cases where a low-level platform is envisioned, mini high-level platforms can also be
implemented. Mini high-level platforms provide level boarding for riders with disabilities. Mini high-
level platforms may be appropriate for the MMPT for bi-level commuter rail cars. In cases where the
platform is to be shared by commuter rail and Amtrak, high speed, or intercity rail further review and
analysis must be undertaken to define how ADA guidelines can be met.
Platform Type
Center, or island, platforms are envisioned for the MMPT. A side platform may be necessary to
accommodate specific movements.
Platform Length
Platform length is defined by the maximum train length envisioned for service. Amtrak long-distance
trains are often in excess of 800 feet. A tangent platform of 1,000 to 1,500 feet may be desirable.

3
Amtrak Station Manual (Version 2.2) from the Station Program and Planning Standards and Guidelines 2008.
Commuter rail platform length must be based on anticipated ridership and vehicle type. Economies
can be achieved by utilization of bi-level equipment that accommodate more passengers per car
and therefore require shorter platforms. If long-term growth and longer trains are anticipated
sufficient space should be available to allow platform extension.
Platform Location
Adjacency to tangent track, centrality to access points, and an ability to accommodate future
expansion serve as guidelines for locating platforms.
Platforms should be located along tangent track whenever possible. The gap between the vehicle
door threshold and the platform is minimized along tangent track. This improves safety as the
probability of an injury due to the gap is decreased. Additionally, the train crew cannot observe
passenger boarding or alighting.
Platforms should be located centrally to the primary access point. This improves distribution of
passengers along the platform. For stations with multiple access point, the platform should be sited
to ensure equal distribution of passenger access and egress points.
Platform Functionality
Functional aspects of platforms include safety, accessibility, and sustainability.
For safety, all platforms must have a 24-inch wide, ADA compliant, detectable warning (tactile)
surface at the trackside platform edge. The tactile surface must extend the full length of the
platform.
Maintaining unobstructed clear widths on platforms promotes safety and accessibility. Platform clear
widths should be established. A common minimum is 8.5 inches, measured from edge of platform.
A greater clear distance may be necessary for stations with significant ridership and pedestrian
flows. The clear area must be free of obstructions, including the following items:
Canopy Columns
Benches
Trash Receptacles
Bridge Plate Boxes
Advertising
Telephones
TVMs
Kiosks
Shelters
Windscreens
Light Poles
Guardrails
Platforms may be tapered at the ends if required by physical constraints. However, the minimum
width must be provided at passenger access points.
Low-Level Platforms
Key dimensions for low-level platforms are summarized in Table 1. Depending on the host railroad,
freight clearances can be an issue with low-level platforms. Dimensions must be confirmed with the
railroad and must meet ADA access requirements. For the MMPT, the southeast leg of the Circle
wye within the study area may be of concern if commuter rail and freight share this track through the
station area.
Table 1: Low-Level Platform Dimension Summary
Dimension Measurement
Top of Rail to Platform Surface 8
Track Centerline to Platform Edge (Tangent Track) 51
Side Platform Width, without Shelter or Amenities 100
Side Platform Width, with Shelter or Amenities 120
Island Platform Width 260
Platform Clear Width Minimum 85
Track Centerline to First Obstruction (Clear Width) 140
Source: New Jersey Transit
High-Level Platforms
Key dimensions for high-level platforms are summarized in Table 2. High-level platforms must
conform to current regulations of ADA. High-level platform stations require bridge plates to provide
gap-free access for all passengers. High-level platforms should be located on tangent track.
However, should a curved high-level platforms be unavoidable, the following guidelines should
prevail:
Curvature no greater than 1 degree per 40 feet
Outer rail super-elevation of no more than 1 inch
The gap between the car door edge and the platform edge cannot exceed 13 inches at any door, at
any location over the length of a platform.
Table 2: High-Level Platform Dimension Summary
Dimension Measurement
Top of Rail to Platform Surface (Tangent Track) 43
Track Centerline to Platform Edge (Tangent Track) 57
Side Platform Width, without Shelter or Amenities 100
Side Platform Width, with Shelter or Amenities 120
Island Platform Width 260
Platform Clear Width Minimum 85
Track Centerline to First Obstruction (Clear Width) 140
Source: New Jersey Transit
New Jersey Transit, for example, requires that the distance from centerline of tangent track to edge
of platform be 5 feet 7 inches and notes that Amtrak may require a platform height of 4 feet above
the top of rail at Northeast Corridor Line stations. For New Jersey Transit commuter rail line stations
outside the Northeast Corridor, the platform height standard is 4 feet 3 inches.
High-level platforms on lines with freight traffic require special consideration. The common
clearance standard of 5 feet 7 inches from centerline of track to platform edge may not provide
adequate clearance for all freight operations. Where wider clearances are required for freight
movement, the following options exist:
Retractable edges
Gauntlet track
Mini high-level platforms
In evaluating these options, designers should consider the following factors:
Line operating requirements
Physical constraints
Initial cost
Maintenance cost
A retractable edge must be installed along the full length of the platform. The retractable edge
comprises hinged panels along the platform edge. These can be manually lifted. When in their
upright position, the minimum clearance required for freight movement is provided. For safety, the
panels must lock in both the lowered and lifted positions.
Gauntlet tracks are an alternative to retractable edges. For a gauntlet track to be practical, sufficient
clearance must exist adjacent to the track, and the track geometry has to accommodate the switch
points for the gauntlet track. Gauntlet tracks can be configured either to move the freight train away
from the platform or to move the passenger train closer to the platform. The choice of the gauntlet
track configuration should be based on right-of-way (ROW) ownership, the relative split between
freight and passenger trains, and the ROW available.
Mini High-Level Platforms
At low-level platform stations, mini high-level platforms provide access to those with disabilities. Mini
high-level platforms may be installed at stations where these best meet vehicle door thresholds or in
cases where implementation of a high-level platform is not feasible. Consideration of mini high-level
platforms should be based on the following issues:
Track curvature exceeds standards for high-level platform
Type of rolling stock
Frequency and dimensions of freight movements
Revised ADA guidelines require level boarding access for all doors. Therefore, it is unlikely that mini
high-level platforms can be considered for new commuter rail operations.
Amtrak Station Requirements
Passenger Facilities
Amtrak categorizes stations into several groups: Large, Medium, Small, Basic, and Bus. Minimum
requirements have been defined for each station category; these are to serve as guidelines for
station development and ensure a level of consistency throughout the Amtrak network.
The current Amtrak station in Atlanta registered 96,453 boardings and alightings for the Crescent,
which operates daily between New York and New Orleans via Atlanta. This station is classified in
the Medium category; this indicates that annual ridership is greater than 50,000 passengers and
ticket revenue exceeds $500,000 annually. As Atlanta will likely be a key station for the extension of
HSR from Washington DC, future station standards for the Large category should be considered.
Table 3 displays the minimum requirements for a Medium and Large station.
Table 3: Amtrak Medium and Large Minimum Station Requirements
Projected Ridership Thresholds
Classifications
Small
Unstaffed
Platform
Under
4,000
Small
Unstaffed
Shelter
4,000 -
20,000
Small to
Medium
with
Caretaker
(20,000 -
100,000)
Medium
Staffed
(100,000 -
400,000)
Large
Staffed
(Over
400,000)
Facility Type
Platform
Platform canopy
Sheltered waiting area providing
windbreak/weather protection

Station building with restroom(s) and other
amenities in conditioned structure

Access and wayfinding
Auto pick-up / drop-off
Parking
Rental cars
Bus access
Other transit access (bus, light/commuter rail)
Taxicab access
Bicycle racks
Station signage (Amtrak standards)
Highway signage
Customer service
Ticketing and Baggage
Quik-Trak/e-Ticketing
Ticket office
Passenger boarding assistance
Checked baggage handling
Caretaker / greeter staff
Passenger information
Passenger information display system (PIDS)
Projected Ridership Thresholds
Classifications
Small
Unstaffed
Platform
Under
4,000
Small
Unstaffed
Shelter
4,000 -
20,000
Small to
Medium
with
Caretaker
(20,000 -
100,000)
Medium
Staffed
(100,000 -
400,000)
Large
Staffed
(Over
400,000)
Pay telephones
Information counter
Customer service office
Security
Emergency platform call box
Security facilities on site
Security on call / systems
Local police surveillance / call box
Source: Amtrak Station Manual

Generally required for classification / Optionally required for classification

Table 3 indicates the services and amenities that should be available at Amtrak stations. Those that
are generally required are indicated with a black circle; those that are optional are indicated with an
open circle.
Platforms
Amtrak desires that station platforms accommodate the length of the train. This ensures that long
trains will not be required to stop twice. For the MMPT, the platform length should accommodate the
longest train operated. Table 4 provides platform lengths.
Table 4: Amtrak Platform Length Guidelines
Service Type
Preferred Length
All Locations (feet)
Minimum Length
Northeast Corridor
(feet)
Minimum Length
Off Corridor (feet)
Acela (HSR) 700 550 NA
Regional (intercity) 1,000 850 425
Corridor (commuter) 700 850 300
Long distance 1,200 850 500

Platform height presents a more critical issue for areas where commuter and long distance trains
may operate. Key issues are ADA accessibility, access to all cars, and door height of the railcar.
Amtrak station platform heights are generally 48 inches above top of rail for east coast stations and
8 inches above top of rail elsewhere. USDOT guidelines published in 2005 mandate that all new
Amtrak and commuter rail stations have full-length level boarding platforms. Alternative boarding
methods or devices are not permitted except where level boarding is infeasible
4
. To meet ADA
requirements at low platforms, Amtrak utilizes a portable wheelchair lift. Moreover, at high-level
platforms, a bridge plate is used to cover the gap between the platform edge and the car door
threshold.
High-level platforms are preferred at all HSR and Northeast Corridor stations and at all locations
where activity levels exceed 50 passengers per train or 100,000 boardings and alightings. The
Atlanta commuter rail vehicle is envisioned to be similar to those in Seattle, Los Angeles, and New
Mexico. These vehicles require a lower platform height. However, a bi-level commuter railcar,
similar to that used by New Jersey Transit may be used at high-level platforms that could be shared
with Amtrak and HSR.
Platform width must account for minimum clear distances for passenger circulation and must meet
ADA requirements. The minimum distance from the edge of a platform to a column is 5 feet; the
minimum clearance from the platform edge to a wall or other obstruction is 6 feet. Desirable and
minimum platform widths are shown in Table 5.
Table 5: Amtrak Platform Width Guidelines
Platform Type
Preferred
Width (feet)
Minimum
Width (feet)
Live Loading
Island 24 20 see below
Side with baggage loadings 15 12 250 psf
Side passengers only 12 10 150 psf
Service platforms are located between passenger tracks at several stations. These platforms
typically accommodate baggage handling as well as train servicing at station stops. Should baggage
handling be necessary along a 12-foot passenger platform, equipment turnarounds are required at
platform ends.
Streetcar and Light Rail Station Requirements
For MMPT station interface, it is prudent that design criteria not preclude either streetcar or light rail.
In this case, light rail design criteria would prevail as these can accommodate operation by both
modes.
Stops/Platform Height
Streetcar and light rail are envisioned to operate along roadways in downtown Atlanta.
Correspondingly, stop locations may be at sidewalks or separate platforms within the roadway
ROW. ADA access must be assured and level boarding with vehicle floors must be assured. The
vehicle type, either high-floor or as typical for new system, low-floor, will determine stop design. For
vehicles without low boarding, a lift device or stationary high-block must be available. For low-floor

4
Amtrak Station Manual (Version 2.2) from the Station Program and Planning Standards and Guidelines 2008.
vehicles, boarding height of the sidewalk or platform must conform to the vehicle door threshold
height; this may result in a sidewalk/curb height of up to 8 inches.
Platform Length
Platform length is defined based on the maximum length of the vehicle or train. Streetcar service is
characterized by operation of a single vehicle, whereas light rail service typically operates with up to
four vehicles coupled into a train. In some cases, one or more routes may stop at the same location;
the stop or platform length must accommodate the total number of vehicles as well as the longest
vehicle. Modern streetcars vary between 50 and 130 feet in length; at least the same distance would
be required for a stop. A light rail vehicle may be 80 to 100 feet in length. A four-car light rail train
would therefore require a stop or platform of 320 to 400 feet.
Platform Location
Guidelines for stop or platform location are the same as those described for commuter rail and
include adjacency to tangent track, centrality to access points, and the ability to accommodate future
expansion.
Platforms should be located along tangent track whenever possible. The gap between the vehicle
door threshold and the platform is minimized along tangent track. This improves safety as the
probability of an injury due to the gap is decreased. Additionally, the operator cannot observe
passenger boarding or alighting.
Intercity Bus Station Requirements
Bus Boarding and Staging Areas
Loading and unloading for intercity bus service occurs on the front right of the bus. Figure 1 shows a
45-degree deep sawtooth bus slip configuration utilized by Greyhound Lines. A deep sawtooth bus
berth allows independent movement, but buses must reverse out of it. It is most appropriate for
buses with long dwell times, such as intercity services. A curb may be used; however, it is preferred
to have no curb. All pavement and curbs at the bus bays shall be concrete. The pavement on the
bus boarding platform area shall be concrete or approved pavers. Bus boarding area shall have a
continuous, cantilever supported from the building side (unless covered from floor level above) and
provide full weather protection (sun and rain) over the passenger platform and the passenger
access path to the bus door. The queuing area must have a 12-foot clearance from the front of the
bus to the building. The canopy height shall be such as to maximize passenger protection from the
weather and permit bus and emergency vehicle (fire truck) access beneath.
Ready bus, or bus staging areas, shall also be provided to accommodate buses in the act of
positioning itself near the first bus stop of a trip before the trips start time so that it can get to the
stop easily and begin its trip on time. MMPT Alternatives in Section 9.0 provides an example of
what this might look like. The staging areas are not intended for passenger boarding and can be
separated from the bus slips. The ready bus area requires a 9-foot space for the bus and a 3-foot
space between buses. Pavement in this area shall be concrete.
Bus Circulation
Figure 1 shows the turning dimensions of the motor coach utilized by Greyhound Lines. Current bus
coaches utilized must be confirmed prior to design of facility. Right turns require a greater turning
radius of 51 feet and needs an allowance of 5 feet for out of spec steering alignment: a total of 56
feet. Left turns with the 5-foot allowance require 52 feet 6 inches. It is advisable to increase the
outside dimension and decrease the interior dimensions (24 feet 9 inches for right turns and 23 feet
1 inch for left turns) for added driver comfort and safety. A 3-foot clearance from turning bus to
nearest obstruction should be increased as much as is allowable.
Figure 1: Greyhound Bus Slip Layout and Turning Dimensions

Source: Greyhound Lines

Bus circulation should be separated from any vehicular circulation, including employee parking. Bus
movement ought to be one-way to provide safer staging. The site should be designed as to reduce
pedestrian circulation at locations where bus circulation occurs and encourage pedestrians to utilize
alternative routes.
Bus Station Design
The boarding area for the buses should be secured; additionally, requirements of the downtown
review board should be followed for visual screening of bus bays from public areas and ROW
locations. All public spaces must be accessible by the physically handicapped.
Exterior walls of the concourse waiting area shall have ample glazing to view the intercity buses to
promote passenger comfort and provide a higher level of security. Materials shall be durable,
approved by tenant, and strive to be a sustainable product.
Elevators shall conform to all code requirements, but as a minimum shall be sized to fit an
emergency rolling stretcher with attendants or passenger with bicycle. Stairs shall conform to all
code requirements, and be constructed of a durable material with a suitable walking surface to
minimize slippage and maintenance.
Commuter / Express Bus Station Requirements
Bus Boarding and Staging Areas
Commuter and Express Buses require a shallow bus berth to eliminate backing up of buses. A
shallow bus berth allows independent movement and does not require reversal to exit. Figure 2
shows bus slip layouts for both a 40-foot commuter bus and an articulated bus. Platform centerto-
center dimension would remain consistent regardless of articulated bus slips or commuter bus slips.
A center of platform to center of platform dimension of 80-foot 6 inches allows 40 feet of clearance
for two-way circulation bus drives. The distance required for the bus berth for a commuter bus would
be 83 feet 11 inches while an articulated bus requires 78 feet.
Bus slips should be alternated as to allow ample space for bus boarding queuing. The platforms
shall be concrete or approved pavers, curbs and bus slips should be concrete. Asphalt paving could
be utilized for the bus drive; however, concrete is recommended due to less maintenance and more
durability. Concrete must be used if the drive is located underneath the building.
Bus Circulation
Figure 2 shows the turning dimensions of typical city type buses utilized for commuter, express, and
local service. Current bus coaches utilized must be confirmed prior to design of facility and the site
circulation should be flexible to accommodate all buses. Right turns for a 40-foot bus requires an
outside turning radius of 46 feet 6 inches and an inside radius of 24 feet. It is advisable to increase
the outside dimension and decrease the interior dimensions for added driver comfort and safety. A
3-foot clearance from turning bus to nearest obstruction should be increased as much as is
allowable. However, Xpress commuter service, Cobb Community Transit (CCT), and Gwinnett
County Transit (GCT) all utilize 45-foot intercity type of buses, which, indicates that all bus
circulation within the commuter / express bus site should be designed to accommodate circulation
for a 45-foot intercity type of bus.
Bus circulation should be separated from any vehicular circulation, including employee parking. Bus
movement should be two-way circulation, which allows for more efficiency of platform use and
reduces the number of platforms. Articulated buses are longer in dimension, but rotate in the middle
allowing an even tighter turning radius. The site should be designed as to dictate pedestrian
circulation with defined pedestrian crossings at locations with maximum driver visibility and traffic
calming devices should be used. Although access to platforms should be elevated, passengers will
still walk across the bus drive to the other platforms and the design should accommodate ground
pedestrian circulation.
Figure 2: Commuter / Express Bus Boarding Layout and Turning Guidelines

Source: AECOM
Bus Station Design
The boarding area for the buses should be secured; additionally, requirements of the downtown
review board should be followed for visual screening of bus bays from public areas and ROW
locations. All public spaces must be accessible by the physically handicapped.
Most patrons waiting for commuter or local buses will wait on the platforms; however, some will
prefer to be in an enclosed, interior space. The interior waiting areas should be in close proximity to
the platforms and provide easy access to each platform area. Exterior walls of the concourse waiting
area shall have ample glazing to view the buses, to promote passenger comfort, and provide a
higher level of security. Materials shall be durable, approved by tenant, and strive to be a
sustainable product.
Elevators shall conform to all code requirements, but as a minimum shall be sized to fit an
emergency rolling stretcher with attendants or a passenger with a bicycle. Stairs shall conform to all
code requirements, be constructed of a durable material with a suitable walking surface to minimize
slippage and maintenance.
Codes and Standards
Transit Service MARTA, GRTA, CCT, and GCT may have service standards (or service
guidelines) that they utilize to describe not only service conditions (e.g., frequency and span of
service criteria) but also certain design standards for physical development (e.g., bus stop
placement, etc.).
Greyhound Intermodal Facility Standards 2010 Greyhound supplied standards utilized to help
determine the appropriate amount of space needed at bus terminal facilities such as the MMPT. In
addition, Greyhound adheres to all Federal and State laws, including USDOT standards; as well as
any applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards that will govern its
driving and facility operations.
Atlanta City Codes Chapter 162 governs the taxicab industry in the City of Atlanta.
NFPA 101 Life Safety Code 2009 Edition, produced by the National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA) to serve as a standard, not a legal code (unless adopted by the authority having jurisdiction)
for protection of occupants in facilities. This standard does not address general fire prevention or
building construction features, but is meant to be coordinated with other building codes.
NFPA 130 Standard for Fixed Guideway Transit and Passenger Rail Systems 2010 Edition,
produced by the NFPA to serve as a standard for life safety issues from fire and fire protection
requirements for fixed guideway transit and passenger rail systems. The mandatory parts of this
standard do not cover requirements for buses, conventional freight, or any other types of transit
facilities, but offers useful guidance where these facilities are not well addressed by other codes and
standards.
NFPA 502, Standard for Road Tunnels, Bridges, and Other Limited Access Highways 2008
Edition, produced by the NFPA to serve as a standard for life safety issues from fire and fire
protection requirements for Road Tunnels, Bridges, and Other Limited Access Highways, which
includes air rights structures. The mandatory parts of this standard do not cover requirements for
bus terminals or other types of enclosed vehicular facilities, but offers useful guidance where these
facilities are not well addressed by other codes and standards.
ASHRAE Handbook 2007 HVAC Applications Chapter 13 of the handbook covers ventilation
requirements for enclosed vehicular facilities. Enclosed facilities include road tunnels, rapid transit
tunnels and stations, railroad tunnels, automotive repair facilities, bus garages, bus terminals,
tollbooths and diesel locomotive facilities. The chapter also covers ventilation equipment.
Subway Environmental Design Handbook (SEDH), U.S. Department of Commerce, Volume1:
Principles and Application, 2nd Edition, March 1976 - This reference provides guidance and
reference for planning, design, construction, and operation of environmental control systems for
underground rapid transit. The concepts are extendable to rail and other applications.
Georgia State Minimum Standard Building Code 2010 Edition, the State of Georgia uses the
International Building Code with Georgia State Amendments as the legal building construction code.
It covers issues such as life safety, accessibility, building types, features, and materials.
Georgia State Minimum Standard Fire Code 2010 Edition, the State of Georgia uses the
International Fire Code with Georgia State Amendments as the legal fire prevention code. It works in
conjunction with the standard building code.
Amtrak Station Program & Planning: Standards and Guidelines Version 2.2, document
produced by National Railroad Passenger Corporation to serve as general guidelines for station
design.
Amtrak Engineering Practices: Overbuild Of Amtrak Right-of-Way Design Policy EP4006,
document produced by National Railroad Passenger Corporation to serve as general guidelines for
fire-life safety and ventilation criteria in the development of property resulting in a closed or partially
enclosed overbuild structure over tracks and stations.
Code of Ordinances of the City of Atlanta, Georgia, 2002-2005 and all supplements City of
Atlanta produced code that covers zoning issues. Applicable sections include but are not limited to
Part II Chapter 75: Sustainable Development Design Standards; Part III, Part 16, Chapter 16-18A:
SPI-1 Downtown Special Public Interest District Regulations.
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 specifies standards and requirements for pedestrian
access for people with disabilities, including detailed standards for pedestrian connections and
passageways that involve a change in grade or elevation. They also set standards for elevators,
escalators, and other means of mobility involving machinery.
Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards - sets standards for facility accessibility by physically
handicapped persons for Federal and federally-funded facilities. These standards are to be applied
during the design, construction, and alteration of buildings and facilities to the extent required by the
Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, as amended.
LEED Reference Guide for Green Building Design and Construction 2009 Edition, produced
by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC), is a guide for the rating system and
implementation of sustainable building practices.
Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project C-1 November 2010

Appendix C: Definition of Terms

Appendix C: Definition of Terms
Appendix C includes a definition of terms commonly used in the discussion of bus and
rail operations.
Term Definition
Low-level Platform
Generally, 8 inches to 18 inches from the top of rail to platform surface and
are primarily used by some commuter rail and light rail lines. Wheelchairs can
board low-floor vehicles directly from the platform, but high-floor vehicles
require retractable lift or ramp.
High-level Platform
Generally, above 18 inches from the top of rail to platform surface and are
primarily used by heavy rail, automated guideway, and some commuter rail
lines. Only high-floor vehicles can be used, but wheelchairs can board directly
from platforms if vehicle floors are level with the platform.
Mini High-level Platform
A section of a transit station platform that is the same height as the floors of
the vehicles using the platform, the remainder of the platform will be lower.
Such platforms are used where site constraints prevent construction of full-
length high platforms.
Pantograph
A device that collects electric current from overhead lines for electric trains or
trams.
Bi-level Passenger Rail Vehicle
Passenger cars that provide seating on two separate floors; each floor has a
central aisle.
Gallery Passenger Rail Vehicle
Passenger cars that include a single row of seats and an aisle on each side of
the upper level; the lower level includes a single central aisle.
Dwell Time Time spent by a bus loading and unloading passengers at a bus stop
Layover/Recovery Time
Time allotted at the end of a bus trip for the driver to have a break and
prepare for the next trip.
Staging
The act of positioning a bus near the first bus stop of a trip before the trips
start time so that it can get to the stop easily and begin its trip on time.
Storage
Storing a bus for an extended period of time (e.g., overnight) typically
accomplished at the bus maintenance location/driver reporting base.
Deep Sawtooth Bus Berth
Bus berths which allow independent movement but which buses must reverse
out of; most appropriate for buses with long dwell times, such as intercity
services.
Shallow Sawtooth Bus Berth
Bus berths which allow independent movement and which reverse moves are
not required to exit.
Ready Bus (or Spare or Strategic
Bus)
Buses which are kept available at certain key locations (such as a major
terminal) to provide a back-up or schedule protection bus in case they are
needed due to overcrowding, mechanical problems, etc.
Alternative-fuel refueling station
Station for the refueling of low-polluting, non-gasoline fuels such as electricity,
hydrogen, propane, natural gas, and methanol .
Day-lighting
The controlled admission of natural light into a space, used to reduce or
eliminate electric lighting.
Displacement Ventilation System System where air supply is introduced to the space at or near the floor level.
Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Regular building occupant who spends 40 hours per week in building.
Greywater (or Graywater)
Wastewater discharged from lavatories, bathtubs, showers, clothes washers,
and laundry sinks and other untreated wastewater that has not come into
contact with toilet waste.
Term Definition
Level-of-Service (LOS)
Measure used to determine the effectiveness of elements of transportation
infrastructure. An A through F scale; whereas, A is the best while F is the
worst. LOS in parking structures are based on wayfinding, freedom to
maneuver, and wait times.
Net Square Footage
Floor area within inside perimeter with deductions for hallways, stairs, closets,
thicknesses of interior walls, columns, or other features.
Sustainable Design (or Green
Design)
Practice of design principles that have little or no negative impact on the
environment and society throughout its life cycle.
Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
A high density, mixed-use area that maximizes access to public
transportation.
U-value (or U-factor)
A measure of thermal resistance of a material or assembly of materials. The
higher the number, the better the building insulative properties.
Variable Air Volume Air Handling Unit
A system from a central plant that delivers constant supply air delivered to
each zone.
Walkshed
An area accessible to a given point or destination by walking a specified
distance or time along available street sidewalks, paths, passages and other
available ROWs for pedestrians. The walkshed is not the same as the area
created by a uniform radius from the point or destination of reference.

Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project D-1 November 2010

Appendix D: NS Property and Track
Owned

Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project D-2 November 2010
Appendix D: NS Property and Track Owned
Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project E-1 November 2010

Appendix E: Facility Component
Program

Bus and Rail Operations Requirements
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common
Site
134,640 89,760 224,400 0 Subtotal
Platform (30'x800') 3 24000 72,000 2 24000 48,000 120,000 0
Vertical circulation 3 1680 5,040 2 1680 3,360 8,400 0
Track area (adjacent to platform) 6 9600 57,600 4 9600 38,400 96,000 0
5,100 0 6,783 0 11,883 0 Subtotal
Employee 10 350 3,500 13 350 4,655 8,155 0
Patron/ Park-n-Ride 0 350 0 0 350 0 0 0
ADA 1 550 550 1 550 732 1,282 0 verify with jurisdictional code
Bicycle 0 16 0 0 16 0 0 0
Service 3 350 1,050 4 350 1,397 2,447 0
Drop-Off and Pick-up 0 240 0 0 240 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 Subtotal
Facility 0 520 0 0 520 work area/office 0 0 0
Fueling 0 1080 0 0 1080 per bay 0 0 0
Storage/ Miscellaneous 0 712 0 0 712
varies upon specific
needs
0 0 0
139,740 0 96,543 0 236,283 0
Facility
453 602 1,055 0 Subtotal
Manned Stations (ticket booth) 0 55 per position 0 0 55 per position 0 0 0
Semi-Manned Kiosks 2 90 per kiosk, information 180 3 90 per kiosk, information 239 419 0
Vending machines 3 15 per machine 45 4 15 per machine 60 105 0 no direct number, assumed
Cash Room 1 48 per 2 positions 48 1 48 per 2 positions 64 112 0
Queuing 2 90 per counter 180 3 90 per counter 239 419 0
3,300 3,059 6,359 0 Subtotal
Reception 1 100 per position 100 1 100 per position 133 233 0
Office Facilities 10 120 per position 1,200 13 120 per position 1,596 2,796 0
Meeting 0 196 conference/ training 0 0 196 conference/ training 0 0 0
Employee Lounge 10 200
min. 100 add 10 sf per
employee per shift
2,000 13 100
employee per shift
1,330 3,330 0
Equipment/ Work areas 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 0
Record Storage/ Supplies 0 320 0 0 320 0 0 0
Secure Storage 0 35 0 0 35 0 0 0
APPENDIX E: COMPONENT PROGRAM
PASSENGER RAIL
Maintenance
Parking
Train
Square Foot Allowance Square Foot Allowance
AMTRAK HIGH SPEED RAIL
ITEM
SUBTOTAL SQUARE
FEET
REMARKS
TOTAL SITE
Administrative/ Operations
Ticketing
Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project E-2 October 2010
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common Square Foot Allowance Square Foot Allowance
ITEM
SUBTOTAL SQUARE
FEET
REMARKS
168 2,251 223 2,993 391 5,244 Subtotal
Seating/Waiting 41 20 per seat, peak ons 820 55 20 per seat, peak ons 1,091 0 1,911
total daily ridership/ number of peak departure
periods
Standing/Waiting 14 10 per seat, peak ons 140 19 10 per seat, peak ons 186 0 326
periods
Loading/ Queuing 12 14 168 16 14 223 391 0
Showers 0 80 0 0 80 0 0 0
VIP Lounge 12 15 per person 180 16 15 per person 239 0 419
Quiet Rooms 0 80 0 0 80 0 0 0
Secure Baggage Storage 12 2 per locker 24 16 2 per locker 32 0 56
Smoking Rooms 55 6.6667 1/3 seating area 367 73 6.6667 1/3 seating area 488 0 854 Not requested but should provide
Charging/Payphones/Wi-Fi 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 0
Restrooms 16 40 per fixture 640 21 40 per fixture 851 0 1,491 verify with jurisdictional code
Electric Water Cooler 8 10 per fixture 80 11 10 per fixture 106 0 186 verify with jurisdictional code
286 380 666 0 Subtotal
Lost and Found 1 100 per position 100 1 100 per position 133 233 0
Way Finding Signage/Kiosks 0 10 per kiosk 0 0 10 per kiosk 0 0 0
Checked Bag Service in Main
Terminal
1 90 per position 90 1 90 per position 120 210 0
Guest Concierge Service 0 32 per position 0 0 32 per position 0 0 0
Guest Accompany Services 1 32 per position 32 1 32 per position 43 75 0
Departure/ Arrival Information 2 32 per board 64 3 32 per board 85 149 0 no direct number, assumed
327 50 379 67 706 117 Subtotal
Check at MainConcourse 1 50 50 1 50 67 0 117 Verify with jurisdictional police department
Check at Platform 0 50 0 0 50 0 0 0 Verify with jurisdictional police department
Holding Room 1 35 35 1 35 47 82 0 Verify with jurisdictional police department
Restroom 2 56 112 3 35 93 205 0 Verify with jurisdictional police department
Ready Room/ Office 1 100
100 min. 10/employee
over 5
100 1 100
over 5
133 233 0 Verify with jurisdictional police department
Security Office 1 80 80 1 80 106 186 0 Verify with jurisdictional police department
2,676 3,559 0 6,235 Subtotal
Food Vendor/ Snack Stand 3 100 per stand 300 4 100 per stand 399 0 699 no direct number, assumed
Vending Machines/ Video Games 0 15 per machine 0 0 15 per machine 0 0 0
Vending Storage 0 8 per machine 0 0 8 per machine 0 0 0
Sundry 8 40 per occupant 320 11 40 per occupant 426 0 746 no direct number, assumed
Cafeteria/ Fast Food 1 1404 kitchen area 1,404 1 1404 kitchen area 1,867 0 3,271 no direct number, assumed
Dining Area 8 24 per seat 192 11 24 per seat 255 0 447 12% of seating
Sit-down Restaurants 0 1404 kitchen area 0 0 1404 kitchen area 0 0 0
Dining Area 0 24 per seat 0 0 24 per seat 0 0 0
Media Stand (newspapers, etc.) 2 50 per stand 100 3 50 per stand 133 0 233 no direct number, assumed
Package/ Mail Service 0 100 per occupant 0 0 100 per occupant 0 0 0
Branch Bank location 0 100 per occupant 0 0 100 per occupant 0 0 0
ATM 2 10 per machine 20 3 10 per machine 27 0 47 no direct number, assumed
Movie Theater 0 20 per occupant 0 0 20 per occupant 0 0 0
Dry Cleaning 1 100 per occupant 100 1 100 per occupant 133 0 233 no direct number, assumed
Child Care 0 35 per occupant 0 0 35 per occupant 0 0 0
Shops 2 120 gift shop 240 3 120 gift shop 319 0 559 no direct number, assumed
Retail Storage 0 20 per shelf 0 0 20 per shelf 0 0 0
Travel Retail (suitcases, etc.) 0 40 per occupant 0 0 40 per occupant 0 0 0
Patron Areas
Passenger Services
Security
Retail
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common Square Foot Allowance Square Foot Allowance
ITEM
SUBTOTAL SQUARE
FEET
REMARKS
1,932 80 2,587 106 4,519 186 Subtotal
Storage Other 0 24 per rack 0 0 24 per rack 0 0 0
Baggage Room 0 12 per passenger 0 0 12 per passenger 0 0 0
Baggage Cart Staging 0 40 per cart 0 0 40 per cart 0 0 0
Baggage Make-up 96453 0.015 per annual passenger 1,447 128282 0.015 per annual passenger 1,924 3,371 0
Public Claim Area 35 7
per detraining
passenger
245 47 7
per detraining
passenger
326 571 0
Lockers/ Showers 2 120
employee per shift
240 3 126.6
employee per shift
337 577 0
Driver Dormitories 0 200 per room 0 0 200 per room 0 0 0
Operator Break Area 0 300 0 0 300 0 0 0
Operator Office 0 130 per position 0 0 130 per position 0 0 0
Quiet Rooms 1 80 80 1 80 106 0 186
0 0 0 0 Subtotal
Special Event Location 0 7 per occupant 0 0 7 per occupant 0 0 0 Beneficial but not required
Conference Room 0 15 per occupant 0 0 15 per occupant 0 0 0 Beneficial but not required
6,466 5,057 7,231 6,725 13,697 11,782
1,616 1,264 1,808 1,681 3,424 2,946
2,425 1,896 2,712 2,522 5,136 4,418
10,507 8,217 11,751 10,929 22,258 19,146
Meeting
Miscellaneous Support Areas
TOTAL NET S.F. FACILITY
TOTAL GROSS S.F. FACILITY
Adjustment for Rail Market increase (25%)
Internal Circulation Space, Mechanical,
Electrical, Loading, Trash, Columns, Walls and
other Structural Members (30% of Net Area)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common
Site
0 0 224,400 0 Subtotal
Platform 0 24000 0 0 0 0 120,000 0 Georgia Commuter Rail to use shared platforms
Vertical circulation 0 1680 0 0 0 0 8,400 0 Included in shared platforms
Track area (adjacent to platform) 0 9600 0 0 0 0 96,000 0 Included in shared platforms
0 0 5,800 960 17,683 960 Subtotal
Employee 0 350 0 10 350 3,500 11,655 0
No information is available from Georgia
Commuter Rail
Patron/ Park-n-Ride 0 350 0 0 350 0 0 0
ADA 0 550 0 0 1 550 550 1,832 0 verify with jurisdictional code
Bicycle 0 16 0 0 16 0 0 0
Service 0 350 0 5 350 1,750 4,197 0
Drop-Off and Pick-up 0 240 0 4 240 960 0 960 MARTA Kiss n Ride quantity assumed
0 0 0 0 Subtotal
Facility 0 520 0 0 520 0 0 0
Fueling 0 1080 0 0 1080 0 0 0
Storage/ Miscellaneous 0 712 0 0 712 0 0 0
0 0 5,800 960 242,083 960
Facility
450 360 1,865 0 Subtotal
Manned Stations (ticket booth) 0 55 per position 0 0 55 per position 0 0 0 Amtrak agents can sell commuter rail tickets
Semi-Manned Kiosks 0 90 per kiosk, information 0 2 90 per kiosk, information 180 599 0 No specific number for MARTA given: assumed
Vending machines 30 15 per machine 450 0 15 per machine 0 555 0 Includes queuing for machines
Cash Room 0 48 0 0 48 0 112 0
Queuing 0 90 per counter 0 2 90 per counter 180 599 0
0 440 6,799 0 Subtotal
Office Facilities 0 120 per position 0 2 120 per position 240 3,036 0
Meeting 0 196 conference/ training 0 0 196 conference/ training 0 0 0
Employee Lounge 0 100 0 1 100 100 3,430 0 assumed for MARTA
Equipment/ Work areas 0 100 0 1 100 100 100 0 assumed for MARTA
Storage 0 35 0 0 35 0 0 0
GEORGIA COMMUTER RAIL REMARKS
ITEM
Train
Parking
Maintenance
TOTAL SQUARE FEET
Square Foot Allowance
MARTA RAIL
TOTAL SITE
Ticketing
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common
ITEM
TOTAL SQUARE FEET
MARTA RAIL
0 996 0 3,566 391 9,806 Subtotal
Seating/Waiting 0 20 per seat, daily/ peak 0 59 20
1/4 of 10% transfers of
peak hour
1,180 0 3,091
Georgia Commuter Rail to use Amtrak
Meeter/Greeter spaces for waiting
Standing/Waiting 0 10 per seat, daily/ peak 0 178 10
3/4 of 10% transfers of
peak hour
1,780 0 2,106
Georgia Commuter Rail to use Amtrak
Meeter/Greeter spaces for waiting
Loading/ Queuing 0 14 0 0 14 on platform 0 391 0 Georgia Commuter Rail to use Amtrak platforms
Showers 0 80 0 0 80 0 0 0
VIP Lounge 0 15 per person 0 0 15 per person 0 0 419
Quiet Rooms 0 80 0 0 80 0 0 0
Smoking Rooms 0 6.6667 1/3 seating area 0 59 6.6667 1/3 seating area 393 0 1,248
Charging/Payphones/Wi-Fi 44 1.5 per phone 66 2 1.5 per phone 3 0 69 Utilized existing data; no new data provided
Restrooms 22 40 per fixture 880 2 40 per fixture 80 0 2,451 verify with jurisdictional code
1,000 220 1,886 0 Subtotal
Lost and Found 3 100 per position 300 1 100 per position 100 633 0 Utilized existing data; no new data provided
Checked Bag Service in Main
Terminal
0 32 per position 0 0 32 per position 0 210 0
Guest Accompany Services 7 100 per position 700 1 100 per position 100 875 0 Utilized existing data; no new data provided
Departure/ Arrival Information 0 32 per board 0 0 32 per board 0 149 0
0 0 80 0 786 117 Subtotal
Check at MainConcourse 0 50 0 0 50 0 0 117
Check at Platform 0 50 0 0 50 0 0 0
Restroom 0 56 0 0 56 0 82 0
Holding Room 0 35 0 0 35 0 205 0
Ready Room/ Office 0 100
over 5
0 0 100
over 5
0 233 0
Security Office 0 80 0 1 80 80 266 0 Enhanced monitoring location
0 5,181 0 11,416 Subtotal
Food Vendor/ Snack Stand 0 100 per stand 0 1 100 per stand 100 0 799
Sundry 0 40 per occupant 0 5 40 per occupant 200 0 946
Cafeteria/ Fast Food 0 1404 kitchen area 0 1 1404 kitchen area 1,404 0 4,675
Sit-down Restaurants 0 1404 kitchen area 0 1 1404 kitchen area 1,404 0 1,404
Media Stand (newspapers, etc.) 0 50 per stand 0 1 50 per stand 50 0 283
ATM 0 10 per machine 0 2 10 per machine 20 0 67
Dry Cleaning 0 100 per occupant 0 0 100 per occupant 0 0 233
Shops 0 120 gift shop 0 0 120 gift shop 0 0 559
Patron Areas
Passenger Services
Security
Retail
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common
ITEM
TOTAL SQUARE FEET
MARTA RAIL
0 0 0 0 4,519 186 Subtotal
Baggage Make-up 0 0.015 per annual passenger 0 0 0.015 per annual passenger 0 3,371 0
Public Claim Area 0 7 per detraining passenger 0 0 7 per detraining passenger 0 571 0
Lockers/ Showers 0 80 per shower 0 0 80 per shower 0 577 0
Quiet Rooms 0 80 0 0 80 0 0 186
0 3,500 0 3,500 Subtotal
Special Event Location 0 7 per occupant 0 500 7 per occupant 3,500 0 3,500
Conference Room 0 15 per occupant 0 0 15 per occupant 0 0 0
1,450 996 1,100 12,247 16,247 25,025
363 249 275 3,062 4,062 6,256
544 374 413 4,593 6,093 9,385
2,356 1,619 1,788 19,902 26,401 40,666
Meeting
Adjustment for Rail Market increase (25%)
Quantity
Total Square
Foot
Subtotal
Common Area
Quantity
Total Square
Foot
Subtotal
Common Area
Tenant Common
Site
53,900 46,200 100,100 0 Subtotal
Loading/ Unloading 14 2450 34,300 12 2450 29,400 63,700 0
Staging 0 518 0 0 518 0 0 0
Layover 0 518 0 0 518 0 0 0
Platform 14 1400 per slip 19,600 12 1400 per slip 16,800 36,400 0
2,100 1,600 0 0 2,100 1,600 Subtotal
Employee 6 350 2,100 0 350 0 2,100 0
Patron 0 350 0 0 350 0 0 0
ADA 1 550 550 0 550 0 0 550 verify with jurisdictional code
Bicycle 0 16 0 0 16 0 0 0
Service 3 350 1,050 0 350 0 0 1,050
Drop-Off and Pick-up 0 240 0 0 240 0 0 0 no direct number, assumed
0 0 0 0 Subtotal
Facility 0 520 work area/office 0 0 520 work area/office 0 0 0
Bus Wash 0 1080 per bay 0 0 1080 per bay 0 0 0
Fueling/ Maintenance Bay 0 1080 per bay 0 0 1080 per bay 0 0 0
Storage/ Miscellaneous 0 712
varies upon
specific needs
0 0 712
varies upon
specific needs
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 Subtotal
Kiosk 0 18 per kiosk,VRU 0 0 18 per kiosk 0 0 0
Pay Phone 0 18 per phone 0 0 18 per phone 0 0 0
56,000 1,600 46,200 0 102,200 1,600
REMARKS
COMMUTER EXPRESS BUS AND LOCAL BUS
Miscellaneous
Maintenance
Parking
Bus Parking (includes site circulation)
SUBTOTAL SQUARE
FEET
COMMUTER EXPRESS BUS LOCAL BUS
ITEM
TOTAL SITE
Quantity
Total Square
Foot
Subtotal
Common Area
Quantity
Total Square
Foot
Subtotal
Common Area
Tenant Common
REMARKS
SUBTOTAL SQUARE
FEET
ITEM
Facility
350 120 470 0 Subtotal
Manned Stations (ticket booth) 0 32 per position 0 0 32 per position 0 0 0
Semi-Manned Kiosks 0 32
per kiosk,
information
0 0 32 per kiosk 0 0 0
Unmanned Kiosks 2 10 per kiosk 20 0 10 per kiosk 0 20 0 no direct quantity, assumed
Vending machines 12 15 per machine 180 8 15 per machine 120 300 0 no direct quantity, assumed
Cash Room 0 48 0 0 48 0 0 0
Queuing 2 75 per kiosk 150 0 75 per kiosk 0 150 0
340 0 340 0 Subtotal
Office Facilities 2 120 per position 240 0 120 per position 0 240 0
Meeting 0 196
conference/
training
0 0 196
conference/
training
0 0 0
Break Room 0 200 0 0 200 0 0 0
Equipment/ Work areas 1 100 100 0 100 0 100 0 assumed at least one work area
Storage 0 100 0 0 100 0 0 0
2,441 2,088 0 4,529 Subtotal
Seating/Waiting 105 20 per seat 2,100 90 20 per seat 1,800 0 3,900 7.5 persons per bus slip
Showers 0 80 0 0 80 0 0 0
VIP Lounge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Quiet Rooms 0 80 0 0 80 0 0 0
Smoking Rooms 34.65 6.6667 1/3 seating area 231 29.7 6.6667 1/3 seating area 198 0 429
Restrooms 2 40 per fixture 80 2 40 per fixture 80 0 160 verify with jurisdictional code
386 20 406 0 Subtotal
Departure/ Arrival Information 8 32 per board 256 0 32 per board 0 256 0 no direct number, assumed
0 120 0 0 0 120 Subtotal
Check at MainConcourse 0 9 per person 0 0 9 per person 0 0 0
Check at Platform 0 9 per person 0 0 9 per person 0 0 0
Enhanced monitoring 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Security Office 1 120 per 2 positions 120 0 120 per 2 positions 0 0 120 assumed at least one security area
Patron Areas
Passenger Services
Security
Ticketing
Quantity
Total Square
Foot
Subtotal
Common Area
Quantity
Total Square
Foot
Subtotal
Common Area
Tenant Common
REMARKS
SUBTOTAL SQUARE
FEET
ITEM
4,746 0 0 4,746 Subtotal
Food Vendor/ Snack Stand 2 100 per stand 200 0 100 per stand 0 0 200 no direct number, assumed
Sundry 34 40 per occupant 1,360 0 40 per occupant 0 0 1,360 no direct number, assumed
Cafeteria/ Fast Food 1 1404 kitchen area 1,404 0 1404 kitchen area 0 0 1,404 no direct number, assumed
Dining Area 12.6 24 per seat 302 0 24 per seat 0 0 302 12% of seating
Dry Cleaning 10 100 per occupant 1,000 0 100 per occupant 0 0 1,000 no direct number, assumed
Shops 4 120 gift shop 480 0 120 gift shop 0 0 480 no direct number, assumed
0 0 0 0 Subtotal
Special Event Location 0 7 per occupant 0 0 7 per occupant 0 0 0
1,076 7,307 140 2,088 1,216 9,395
269 1,827 35 522 304 2,349
404 2,740 53 783 456 3,523
1,749 11,875 228 3,393 1,976 15,268 TOTAL GROSS S.F. FACILITY
Adjustment for Bus Market increase (25%)
Meeting
Retail
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common
Site
35,936 5,044 40,980 0 Subtotal
Loading/ Unloading 20 743 14,860 2 743 1,486 16,346 0
Staging 6 518 3,108 2 518 1,036 4,144 0
Layover 0 518 0 0 518 0 0 0
Concourse 0 416 per slip 0 0 416 per slip 0 0 0
Site Circulation 100% of above 17,968 100% of above 2,522 20,490 0
7,000 7,050 0 1,490 7,000 8,540 Subtotal
Employee 20 350 7,000 0 350 0 7,000 0
Patron 9 350 includes GPX 3,150 2 350 700 0 3,850 3% of seating
ADA 3 550 1,650 1 550 550 0 2,200 verify with jurisdictional code
Bicycle 0 16 0 0 16 0 0 0
Service- Taxi 3 350 1,050 0 350 0 0 1,050
Drop-Off and Pick-up 5 240 1,200 1 240 240 0 1,440 no direct number, assumed
0 0 0 0 Subtotal
Facility 0 520 work area/office 0 0 520 work area/office 0 0 0
Bus Wash 0 1080 per bay 0 0 1080 per bay 0 0 0
Fueling/ Maintenance Bay 0 1080 per bay 0 0 1080 per bay 0 0 0
Storage/ Miscellaneous 0 712
varies upon
specific needs
0 0 712
varies upon
specific needs
0 0 0
54 0 54 0 Subtotal
Kiosk 2 18 per kiosk,VRU 36 0 18 per kiosk 0 36 0
Pay Phone 1 18 per phone 18 0 18 per phone 0 18 0
42,990 7,050 5,044 1,490 48,034 8,540
Facility
706 56 762 0 Subtotal
Manned Stations (ticket booth) 7 32
per position,
includes GPX
224 0 32 per position 0 224 0
Semi-Manned Kiosks 1 32
per kiosk,
information
32 1 32 per kiosk 32 64 0 no direct number, assumed
Unmanned Kiosks 0 10 per kiosk 0 0 10 per kiosk 0 0 0
Vending machines 0 15 per machine 0 0 15 per machine 0 0 0
Checked Luggage 4 24
per well, includes
GPX
96 1 24 per well 24 120 0 no direct number, assumed
Cash Room 1 48 48 0 48 0 48 0
Queuing 34 9
per person,
includes GPX
306 0 9 per person 0 306 0
2,986 0 2,986 0 Subtotal
Office Facilities 10 145 per position 1,450 0 145 per position 0 1,450 0
Meeting 1 196
conference/
training
196 0 196
conference/
training
0 196 0
Break Room 1 200 200 0 200 0 200 0
Equipment/ Work areas 2 100 200 0 100 0 200 0
Storage 2 100 200 0 100 0 200 0
ITEM
TOTAL SITE
REMARKS TOTAL SQUARE FEET
GREYHOUND LINES
INTERCITY BUS
Miscellaneous
Maintenance
Parking
Bus Parking
SOUTHEASTERN STAGES
Ticketing
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common
ITEM
GREYHOUND LINES SOUTHEASTERN STAGES
2,800 6,633 0 1,482 2,800 8,115 Subtotal
Seating/Waiting 200 20
per seat, 10
seats per slip
4,000 56 20
per seat, daily/
peak
1,120 0 5,120
periods
Bus Loading/ Queuing 200 14 per door 2,800 0 14 per door 0 2,800 0
Showers 0 80 0 0 80 0 0 0
VIP Lounge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Quiet Rooms 0 80 0 0 80 0 0 0
Secure Baggage Storage 60 2 per locker 120 16 2 per locker 32 0 152 30% of seating
Smoking Rooms 200 6.6667 1/3 seating area 1,333 0 6.6667 1/3 seating area 0 0 1,333
Charging/Payphones/Wi-Fi 16 10 160 5 10 50 0 210 8% of seating
Restrooms 25 40 per fixture 1,000 7 40 per fixture 280 0 1,280 12.5% of seating
Electric Water Cooler 2 10 per fixture 20 0 10 per fixture 0 0 20
0 0 0 0 Subtotal
9 129 9 0 18 129 Subtotal
Check at MainConcourse 1 9 per person 9 0 9 per person 0 0 9 no direct number, assumed
Check at Platform 1 9 per person 9 1 9 per person 9 18 0 no direct number, assumed
Enhanced monitoring 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 no direct number, assumed; sf unknown
Security Office 1 120 per 2 positions 120 0 120 per 2 positions 0 0 120 no direct number, assumed
2,574 10 1,672 2,574 1,682 Subtotal
Food Vendor/ Snack Stand 0 100 per stand 0 1 100 per stand 100 0 100
Vending Machines/ Video Games 14 15 per machine 210 0 0 15 per machine 0 210 0
Vending Storage 8 8 per machine 64 0 0 8 per machine 0 64 0
Cafeteria/ Fast Food 0 1404 kitchen area 0 1 1404 kitchen area 1,404 0 1,404
Sit-down Restaurants 1 1404 kitchen area 1,404 0 0 1404 kitchen area 0 1,404 0
Dining Area 24 24 per seat 576 0 0 24 per seat 0 576 0
Shops 1 120 gift shop 120 0 0 120 gift shop 0 120 0
Retail Storage 10 20 per shelf 200 0 0 20 per shelf 0 200 0
Patron Areas
Passenger Services
Security
Retail
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common
ITEM
GREYHOUND LINES SOUTHEASTERN STAGES
0 0 0 0 Subtotal
4,113 0 4,113 0 Subtotal
Storage Other 25 24
per rack, locked
and COD
600 0 24
per rack, locked
and COD
0 600 0
Baggage Racks 70 24 per rack 1,680 0 24 per rack 0 1,680 0
Baggage Cart Staging 25 40 per cart 1,000 0 40 per cart 0 1,000 0
Shipping Desk 1 63 GPX 63 0 63 GPX 0 63 0
VRU Room 1 80 80 0 80 0 80 0
Quiet Rooms 0 80 0 0 80 0 0 0
Laundry Facilities 0 24 per machine 0 0 24 per machine 0 0 0
13,188 6,772 65 3,154 13,253 9,926
3,297 1,693 16 789 3,313 2,482
4,946 2,540 24 1,183 4,970 3,722
21,431 11,005 106 5,125 21,536 16,130
Meeting
Adjustment for Intercity Bus Market increase
(25%)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common
Site
29,725 0 29,725 Subtotal
Loading/Unloading 21 525 11,025 0 350 0 11,025 0
Staging 20 350 7,000 0 350 0 7,000 0
Rental Car Storage 30 350 10,500 0 350 0 10,500 0
Car Wash 3 400 1,200 0 400 0 1,200 0
3,500 0 0 0 3,500 Subtotal
Employee 10 350 3,500 0 350 0 3,500 0
Patron 0 350 0 0 350 0 0 0
ADA 0 550 0 0 550 0 0 0
Bicycle 0 16 0 0 16 0 0 0
Service 0 350 0 0 350 0 0 0
Drop-Off and Pick-up 0 240 0 0 240 0 0 0
33,225 0 0 0 33,225 0
Facility
Manned Stations (ticket booth) 3 55 per position 165 0 32 0 165 0
Semi-Manned Kiosks 0 32 per kiosk, information 0 0 32 0 0 0
Unmanned Vending 2 15 per machine 30 0 15 0 30 0
Cash Room 0 48 per 2 positions 0 0 48 0 0 0
Queuing 3 30 per person 90 0 9 0 90 0
840 11,174 12,014 0 Subtotal
Reception 0 100 per position 0 4 175 700 700 0
Office Facilities 1 120 per position 120 15 363 5,445 5,565 0
Meeting 0 196 0 3 450 1,350 1,350 0
Employee Lounge/ Lockers 2 100 200 3 400 1,200 1,400 0
Equipment/ Work areas 2 100 200 1 900 900 1,100 0
Record Storage/ Supplies 1 320 320 7 197 1,379 1,699 0
Holding Room 0 35 0 1 200 200 200 0
Ticketing
ITEM
TOTAL SITE
VEHICLES FOR HIRE, MMPT MANAGEMENT, REGIONAL LIGHT RAIL & STREETCAR
Parking
Vehicular
VEHICLES FOR HIRE (Taxicabs, Shuttles, Rental Car and Car Sharing) MMPT MANAGEMENT
Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal Project E-14
October 2010
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common
ITEM
0 713 0 500 0 1,213 Subtotal
Seating/Waiting 20 20 per seat, daily/ peak 400 0 20
per seat, daily/
peak
0 0 400
Loading/ Queuing 0 14 per door 0 0 14 per door 0 0 0
Showers 0 80 0 0 80 0 0 0
VIP Lounge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Quiet Rooms 0 80 0 0 80 0 0 0
Smoking Rooms 20 6.6667 1/3 seating area 133 0 6.6667 1/3 seating area 0 0 133
Restrooms 4 40 per fixture 160 12 40 per fixture 480 0 640
Electric Water Cooler 2 10 per fixture 20 2 10 per fixture 20 0 40
0 27 0 0 0 27 Subtotal
Check at MainConcourse 3 9 per person 27 0 9 per person 0 0 27
Check at Platform 0 9 per person 0 0 9 per person 0 0 0
Enhanced monitoring 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Security Office 0 120 per 2 positions 0 0 120 per 2 positions 0 0 0
Food Vendor/ Snack Stand 2 100 per stand 200 0 100 per stand 0 0 200 no direct number given, assumed
Cafeteria/ Fast Food 0 1404 kitchen area 0 0 1404 kitchen area 0 0 0
Shops 0 120 gift shop 0 0 120 gift shop 0 0 0
Patron Areas
Passenger Services
Security
Retail
October 2010
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common
ITEM
0 0 0 0 Subtotal
Baggage Make-up 0 0.015 per passenger 0 0 63 per passenger 0 0 0
Public Claim Area 0 7 per passenger 0 0 80 per passenger 0 0 0
Quiet Rooms 0 80 0 0 80 0 0 0
Laundry Facilities 0 24 per machine 0 0 24 per machine 0 0 0
1,897 950 11,174 500 13,071 1,450
569 285 3,352 150 3,921 435
2,466 1,235 14,526 650 16,992 1,885 TOTAL GROSS S.F. FACILITY
Meeting
October 2010
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common
Site
15,000 44,725 0 Subtotal
Boarding Area (200' long) 3 3000 9,000 20,025 0
Track Area (200' long) 3 2000 6,000 13,000 0
Layover 0 950 0 10,500 0
Wash 0 950 0 1,200 0
0 0 3,500 0 Subtotal
Employee 0 350 0 3,500 0
Patron 0 350 0 0 0
ADA 0 550 0 0 0
Bicycle 0 16 0 0 0
Service 0 350 0 0 0
Drop-Off and Pick-up 0 240 0 0 0
15,000 0 48,225 0
Facility
124 409 0 Subtotal
Manned Stations (ticket booth) 0 55 per position 0 165 0
Semi-Manned Kiosks 2 32 per kiosk, information 64 64 0
Unmanned Vending 0 15 per machine 0 30 0
Cash Room 0 48 per 2 positions 0 0 0
Queuing 2 30 per person 60 150 0
440 12,454 0 Subtotal
Reception 0 100 per position 0 700 0
Office Facilities 2 120 per position 240 5,805 0
Meeting 0 196 0 1,350 0
Employee Lounge/ Lockers 1 100 100 1,500 0
Equipment/ Work areas 1 100 100 1,200 0
Record Storage/ Supplies 0 320 0 1,699 0
Holding Room 0 35 0 200 0
TOTAL SQUARE FEET REMARKS
ITEM
Vehicular
Parking
TOTAL SITE
Ticketing
REGIONAL LIGHT RAIL & STREETCAR
October 2010
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common
ITEM
0 25,180 0 26,393 Subtotal
Seating/ Waiting 1254 20 per seat, daily/ peak 25,080 0 25,480
Standing/ Waiting 0 10 per person, daily/ peak 0 0 0 standing waiting area at boarding area
Loading/ Queuing 0 14 0 0 0 included in site area at boarding area
VIP Lounge 0 0 0 0 0
Quiet Rooms 0 80 0 0 0
Secure Baggage Storage 0 2 per locker 0 0 0
Smoking Rooms 0 6.6667 1/3 seating area 0 0 133 exterior area
Charging/Payphones/Wi-Fi 1 10 10 0 10
Restrooms 2 40 per fixture 80 0 720
Electric Water Cooler 1 10 per fixture 10 0 50
142 314 0 Subtotal
Lost and Found 1 100 per position 100 200 0
Way Finding Signage/Kiosks 1 10 per kiosk 10 50 0
Guest Concierge Service 0 32 per position 0 32 0
Guest Accompany Services 1 32 per position 32 32 0
Departure/ Arrival Information 0 32 per board 0 0 0
9 0 9 27 Subtotal
Check at MainConcourse 0 9 per person 0 0 27
Check at Platform 1 9 per person 9 9 0
Enhanced monitoring 0 0 0 0 0
Security Office 0 120 per 2 positions 0 0 0
0 0 210 Subtotal
Food Vendor/ Snack Stand 0 100 per stand 0 0 200
Vending Machines/ Video Games 2 15 per machine 0 0 0
Vending Storage 2 8 per machine 0 0 0
Sundry 0 40 per occupant 0 0 0
Cafeteria/ Fast Food 0 1404 kitchen area 0 0 0
Dining Area 0 24 per seat 0 0 0
Sit-down Restaurants 0 1404 kitchen area 0 0 0
Dining Area 0 24 per seat 0 0 0
Media Stand (newspapers, etc.) 0 50 per stand 0 0 0
Package/ Mail Service 0 100 per occupant 0 0 0
Branch Bank location 0 100 per occupant 0 0 0
ATM 0 10 per machine 0 0 10
Movie Theater 0 20 per occupant 0 0 0
Dry Cleaning 0 100 per occupant 0 0 0
Child Care 0 35 per occupant 0 0 0
Shops 0 120 gift shop 0 0 0
Retail Storage 0 20 per shelf 0 0 0
Travel Retail (suitcases, etc.) 0 40 per occupant 0 0 0
Retail
Patron Areas
Passenger Services
Security
October 2010
Quantity
Tenant Area
(square feet)
Common Area
(square feet)
Tenant Common
ITEM
0 0 0 Subtotal
Special Event Location 0 7 per occupant 0 0 0
Conference Room 0 15 per occupant 0 0 0
300 900 0 Subtotal
Storage Other 0 24 per rack 0 0 0
Baggage Room 0 12 per passenger 0 0 0
Baggage Cart Staging 0 40 per cart 0 0 0
Baggage Make-up 0 0.015 per passenger 0 0 0
Public Claim Area 0 7 per passenger 0 0 0
Lockers/ Showers 0 80 per shower 0 0 0
Driver Dormitories 0 200 per room 0 0 0
Operator Break Area 1 300 300 900 0
Operator Office 0 130 per position 0 0 0
Quiet Rooms 0 80 0 0 0
Laundry Facilities 0 24 per machine 0 0 0
1,015 25,180 14,086 26,630
25% was not added for growth since Light Rail and
Streetcar is a future transit option
305 7,554 4,226 7,989
1,320 32,734 18,312 34,619
Meeting
October 2010

Multi - Modal Passenger Terminal Project Final Bus and Rail Complete

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Multi - Modal Passenger Terminal Project Final Bus and Rail Complete

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MULTI - MODAL PASSENGER

TERMI NAL PROJECT

You might also like