Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

instantcoffee69 t1_izpco5f wrote

Let's not forget: light rail was meant for people from the suburbs to get into the city and back out. Not for intra-city travel.

Because as always: the state and county do not give a shit about city problems.

135

-JG-77- t1_izq3b8q wrote

Light rail was meant for politicians to be able to say “look, we built a light rail” and not much else. It was built on the cheapest route they could find which happened to be on an old railroad that didn’t serve many dense areas. The metro was built in a similar way, it just happens that the old rail corridor used for metro happened to serve denser areas than the light rail

46

wbruce098 t1_izrb1ro wrote

This exactly. The limited routes only make sense for a sliver of the population, and the whole thing stinks of “well we wanted one, but it’s getting prohibitively expensive so we stopped”, a la Honolulu’s monorail, a travesty that began construction over a decade ago, and is now about to open up its first section, a 10 mile stretch of rail that stops about 8 miles outside the airport and doesn’t quite reach Honolulu proper, much less the tourist areas like Waikiki, making it almost completely useless.

12

abcpdo t1_izpp35a wrote

doesn’t even have a stop at Towson. or at least a bus shuttle.

32

todareistobmore t1_izpv0el wrote

> Let's not forget: light rail was meant for people from the suburbs to get into the city and back out. Not for intra-city travel.

Not really, it was just made for a few specific uses (stadiums, State Center, BWI) rather than general reliance, same as the subway.

19

jdl12358 t1_izq0yqy wrote

Correct me if I’m wrong but it was also sort of pitched as a way to resurrect the west side of downtown/Howard Street corridor. Obviously not gonna work if there’s no plan and not much else on the corridor.

11

gothaggis t1_izqvos8 wrote

yes that is correct. Some people will try to say that the light rail killed howard street - but really (from what I understand) it was already in decline - they were hoping the light rail would save it.

9

baltimorecalling t1_izt627k wrote

Howard Street was DOA by the time the Light Rail began running.

2

Jrbobfishman t1_izzykul wrote

So untrue. Yes, Howard street had suffered much decay from its heyday but it was far from dead

1

STrRedWolf t1_izqhrj5 wrote

Not really. Light Rail was meant for people to get to the O's game and Raven's game and back without a car, done for as cheap as possible using floated bonds. This was done under Wm. Donald Shafer's orders.

Yes, Light Rail was build by and on politics.

15

Y2ff t1_izpohoc wrote

Look man i just like trains can we build more of them

128

Left-Indication OP t1_izoydvx wrote

Source is Jeremy Zorek on Twitter. This map really illustrates why we need the Red Line and a north-south line that serves the city properly.

62

moderndukes t1_izp4hf4 wrote

Eh - it’s missing the context of where the stations are too. The map as-is makes it look like Federal Hill, Pigtown, et al have convenient rail transit access

30

sit_down_man t1_izpy354 wrote

I mean, they do compared for the majority of neighborhoods with no access. But yea, a ton of stops have abysmal logistics for people nearby to even get there.

11

ElectricStar87 t1_izpkmvh wrote

Nope. In and of itself, this graphic actually doesn’t have much information or value.

8

Desertortoise t1_izp4x5a wrote

We need the Red Line for east-west transit and another, faster north-south line that connects the densest areas north to Downtown and South Baltimore, maybe Camden Yards.

54

HumanGyroscope t1_izpzao7 wrote

I would love to see a tram line on Greenmount/York Rd in addition to the redline.

17

ThisAmericanSatire t1_izsazsa wrote

They should put a North/South subway underneath York Road from Towson to 33rd, then go under 33rd to Charles St, then go under Charles St. south (with a station underneath Penn) all the way to Fort Ave, and end the line at the front gate of McHenry.

7

ElectricStar87 t1_izpsvsz wrote

Express buses would accomplish this just as easily.

−15

sit_down_man t1_izpy96r wrote

They would not. I love a good BRT line but a light rail or subway would be preferable for sure. The main difference is that BRT could be ready to go within months, versus a subway line taking almost a decade to complete.

16

ElectricStar87 t1_izq0g29 wrote

“Preferable” is a subjective term, and not a dimension that really bears much emphasis unless it’s accompanied by data.

Subway and light rail are not remotely in the same category.

−5

ThisAmericanSatire t1_izsbjku wrote

The biggest problem with busses is that they have to share the road with cars. This has two pitfalls:

  1. busses get stuck in traffic

  2. BRT infrastructure (i.e. Bus lanes) can easily be given back to commuter cars if some elected rep thinks happy drivers are better than happy bus riders.

Trains don't have these problems, especially if they are grade-separated.

5

ElectricStar87 t1_izsfcet wrote

Trains simply have other liabilities. Route permanence, high cost of implementation, single points of failure, etc.

They also have to negotiate traffic crossing, even if you plan to have light preemption that actually works.

To be clear, I am not fundamentally opposed to the red line — the argument simply seems insufficiently made so far, and bus options, both for the short and long term, and as a quick half-measure for hypothesis testing, does not seem to have been considered. Also note that the red line targets 50K riders per day. The existing light rail targeted 33K per day, never really reached that, and is currently at 9K per day (there are other issues with that light rail obviously, including the fundamental logic of its placement and route).

The red line also doesn’t address the needed last mile issues that will still only be possible through bus; red line is not a magic transportation panacea in and of itself, but that’s what it’s often portrayed as.

The dedicated bus lanes in the city are operating quite well. My understanding is that this has increased average speed from 9 miles an hour on average to about 12 miles an hour (apologies for lack of source). I suspect the relatively high frequency of stops for buses also contributes to lower speeds. Note that the red line claims a targeted 18 MPH. Unclear what this specifically means and broadly that’s achieved through the length of the route.

0

Strange-Effort1305 t1_izoz4ao wrote

That’s why Hogan killed the red line. To keep the poor and inaccessible areas poor and inaccessible.

39

jdl12358 t1_izq04kl wrote

I agree on the west side, but it also really would’ve made car-less life and overall life in downtown, Fells, Harbor East, Canton, and Highlandtown better too. Sadly lots of residents of canton were opposed to it.

19

pickled_things_ t1_izp9gw7 wrote

Really wish our government could serve their own people better

34

dej95135 t1_izpf4q5 wrote

That’s why everyone needs to vote like their life depends on it, because it does!

5

Japak121 t1_izr5y4g wrote

Vote for who exactly? Corrupt politician A or corrupt politician B? At the end of the day, voting does very little when the residents aren't interested in holding politicians to account. Doesn't matter who you vote for if after the election you just shrug off all the bs and say "well we'll get it right next election". Protest. March. Get on TV and make your displeasure known.

8

Rubysdad1975 t1_izpl44e wrote

The biggest problem I see is the complete lack of rail options in East Baltimore.

16

Cunninghams_right t1_izptk85 wrote

this is what I call sprawl-oriented transit. or boomer-transit. basically, the idea is "fuck the city, I want to work there and benefit from the density, ports, etc.. but I want all infrastructure spending to support folks in the suburbs".

even the red line is pretty sprawl-oriented, but it's better than nothing.

but also, the map isn't that helpful because it's not taking into account things like the gigantic park in one area might drop the overall density, or it might ignore that there are large towers near the tracks but lower density or industrial areas in the segment.

here is a better map that has finer detail/granularity, I just wish it zoomed in better
https://luminocity3d.org/WorldPopDen/#10/39.2976/-76.5253

13

PotanOG t1_izqxhem wrote

As someone relatively new to the area, is that blue line the one that runs right next to the McCormick factory in hunt valley?

6

the_last_scoundrel t1_izp724s wrote

You guys still have a free bus line? Maybe I am remembering it wrong, I was pretty lit.

3

Longey13 t1_izpe0z3 wrote

...we have two free circulators, mostly servicing tourists. All other city busses are paid.

14

pathofwrath t1_izrb9un wrote

There are 4 Charm City Circulator routes:

Purple Route

Green Route

Orange Route

Banner Route

5

ElectricStar87 t1_izpzttm wrote

It used to be awesome. I think there are some funding shortfalls, and a spat with the original contractor (Veolia?). For a long time the schedule was completely unreliable and live tracking was totally broken. Hopefully it has improved since then, but I rarely see those buses these days. Transit app would be worth checking.

4

Fr1t0_P3nd3j0 t1_izsa0ns wrote

Awhile back I was standing at the Mt. Royal Light Rail station and struck up a conversation with a guy next to me. He was convinced the the light rail used "Dynamic Scheduling". Made me LOL but it sure feels like that sometimes.

3

epzik8 t1_izpqrq2 wrote

I never thought about how relatively undeveloped the JFX corridor is north of Hampden, and I spent three months in 2019-20 riding between Northern Parkway and Fayette every day.

2

Cheomesh t1_izpto6j wrote

I remember the first time I rode the light rail into the city from Timmonium how the city has basically a forest and a suburban-like sprawl within city limits.

3

Blatmore t1_izsy05h wrote

I don't want public transit of any kind within a mile of where I live.

−4

ElectricStar87 t1_izpkde7 wrote

Sure but virtually all of the densely populated areas not served by rail here have substantial bus service. You can certainly critique the speed and frequency of those buses and the quality of their Inter-connectedness (we need more of them, and more express busses), but the argument for large rail investment over simply better buses has never been convincing.

Unless you’re talking about subway additions or all surface rail lines having light preemption, this isn’t really an argument that’s being made in good faith. And even then you’re talking about astronomical investment and infrastructure additions.

−8

instantcoffee69 t1_izpkudx wrote

Oh no, we're talking about wanting a substantial infrastructure investment. It's how you make a city a better place to live and work.

Get people out of car and into public transportation. The only way to do that is to have GOOD public transportation, and you have to pay and build it

14

baltinerdist t1_izq50gj wrote

The other way to do it is to make it free. MTA costs roughly $800M per year and sees less than 100M riders. If every rider was spending two bucks a ride, that still wouldn't even get to 25% of the budget.

Just make all transit services free and watch ridership balloon.

6

ElectricStar87 t1_izqlfk9 wrote

This has been tried, and things didn’t work out that way. Obviously perhaps other conditions might change the outcome.

I could understand subsidies/vouchers for individual transit users with limited means, but overall you likely need to maintain fees.

I think overall, fare recovery ratios for public transit tend to be between 20-30% on average, if that’s of use.

4

ElectricStar87 t1_izpla7d wrote

Buses provide an extremely good step in that direction, without the costs or liabilities of rail, and with much faster implementation. So many people here just insist that trains are magic and anything other than that is a pale shadow of a solution.

EDIT: buses also allow for greater route flexibility over time (additions, changes).

To everyone downvoting this comment, you are providing no counter argument or contrary data.

−5

ElectricStar87 t1_izpzkr3 wrote

Buses provide an extremely good step in that direction, without the costs or liabilities of rail, and with much faster implementation. So many people here just insist that trains are magic and anything other than that is a pale shadow of a solution.

EDIT: buses also allow for greater route flexibility over time (additions, changes).

−1

Beneficial-Pickle787 t1_izpmq9o wrote

How often do you take MTA buses?

3

ElectricStar87 t1_izpnucq wrote

I don’t have a vehicle and haven’t for a decade. I take buses less since coronavirus (prefer biking) but for many years have taken buses twice a day for commuting across the city and for other purposes as well (grocery shopping, etc. — both MTA and Circulator), with light rail and subway trips as well, depending on destination. I have also previously taken commuter buses out to Columbia in years past.

EDIT: Also a frequent MARC train rider — I buy tickets by the 20 pack.

8

ElectricStar87 t1_izptcsj wrote

So….I’m being downvoted for being an exclusively bike and public transport user? Cool. Makes total sense.

3

ticumac t1_izqn96o wrote

I would say for being inconsiderate of others and acting like because you can do it, everyones else can. But hey, whatever makes you sleep good at night.

5

ElectricStar87 t1_izqsm1v wrote

There’s nothing inconsiderate about my responses, nor anything presumptuous about how my particular experiences with using transit translates to other people’s abilities or capacity.

There are however a lot of claims made by other people here that would incur extraordinary costs with potentially far less benefit than many other solutions, soaking up funding that could otherwise go to other very deserving needs like child care, healthcare, senior centers, schools, lunches etc.

Just because people really like trains doesn’t mean their proposals for trains are superior to other options.

1

rmphys t1_izq3p4w wrote

Anyone who is unwilling to take an MTA bus will be equally unwilling to take any rail line they build.

0

Beneficial-Pickle787 t1_izul5fg wrote

That’s not true. If buses were the same speed as rail, then maybe. But rail with dedicated ROW is definitely faster and more reliable.

1