Does anyone else think the proposed options for the north-south and east-west (red line) transit corridor proposals are lackluster? I feel like they’re wasting so much potential and money by insisting on BRT or LRT with one pathetic heavy rail option that doesn’t really go anywhere (again) that I doubt many people will use. To me it’s clear that they want BRT and will probably get it. Are there any public hearings or anything to reject these proposals or is it simply choose the least of the evils at this point?

Comments

Rubysdad1975 t1_j9huut8 wrote on February 22, 2023 at 2:04 AM

I think it’s important to remember that it’s highly unlikely that anything will be built - rail or bus rapid. The last time MTA built an extension to the system was in the late 1990s. Until MTA is reformed and taken away from state control, nothing will be accomplished.

timmyintransit t1_j9jd295 wrote on February 22, 2023 at 11:43 AM

And NIMBYs will ensure nothing gets built, ever

Xanny t1_j9kaj02 wrote on February 22, 2023 at 4:37 PM

How does the heavy rail line not go anywhere? The York road corridor is the highest ridership public transit line in the city that doesn't have rail, its projected to grow 20-40% in the next 20 years, it hits so many major points in the city (Penn Station, Charles Center metro connection, Federal Hill). Its terminus can be used as a park and ride to get cars off 83, and being grade separated heavy rail it can actually get downtown in a reasonable time compared to the existing light rail that gets stuck on Howard St.

The only part of it that doesn't really make sense is Port Covington, but if that gets turned into a park and ride as well for i95... there ya go.

A_P_Dahset t1_j9n25wm wrote on February 23, 2023 at 3:33 AM

It needs to be light metro technology to future-proof against rising operational costs as much as possible. The line also needs to reach down into far south Baltimore--Cherry Hill, and Brooklyn/Curtis Bay (Greater Baybrook).

granulabargreen OP t1_j9qopoz wrote on February 23, 2023 at 9:49 PM

The line is too short and has too few stops. The alignment is far better than the east-west proposal but I fear that once it gets built there will never be political will to add infill stations to places like mount vernon that should obviously be served by it.

Xanny t1_j9qqi44 wrote on February 23, 2023 at 10:00 PM

Yea the existing light rail is a testament to that. They talked about building infill stations and look where that went.

That being said, even flawed, its so much better than any alternatives, and if it got approved we could appeal for a Mt Vernon Station still.

granulabargreen OP t1_j9qx6e1 wrote on February 23, 2023 at 10:43 PM

I definitely believe In the heavy rail option because it’s got much better potential so I agree. However, if you look at their breakdown for some reason they believe it would have less ridership than a BRT line so I doubt it’ll ever be built

Xanny t1_j9r0wgq wrote on February 23, 2023 at 11:08 PM

It seems really poorly modeled, I think they might have only based it off transit ridership in the zone of influence of the stations. Having termini at 695 / 83 in the north and 95 in the south would have created a major park and ride and opportunity at both ends, honestly in ways that no existing route in Baltimore realizes - the light rail is too slow and the existing subway doesn't have an easily accessible station from 695, you have to go to Old Court which is like 10 minutes of driving just off the beltway alone.