Submitted by Purple_Box3317 t3_z8t637 in baltimore
As if the random lanes ending and turn only lanes weren’t enough to cause crazy traffic now they’ve completely removed the lane on the right. I swear Baltimore prides itself on terrible roads..
Comments
skullduggery38 t1_iydc2vs wrote
Agreed. There are growing pains while we build it out and cars are still the primary method of commute, but we have to bite the bullet eventually
Redditanother t1_iyddmlw wrote
On Charles St? It’s one of the main arteries of the city. Would be like putting a bus lane on 83. Traffic issues won’t be solved until there is a decent Subway in town. Bus lanes are a joke.
IncidentNo4550 t1_iyeywml wrote
I imagine there's significant overlap between the folks who think this is a good idea, and those who want to completely dismantle I-83.
malakamanforyou t1_iyd6y7l wrote
Baltimore buses are straight trash. Their app that tells you where the bus is doesn't work, the buses are filthy, and the drivers are rude. Maybe we should prioritize making our current system functional before we start expanding it.
TerranceBaggz t1_iyd7kvh wrote
Make it functional by expediting rides/improving transit time. People will ride if it’s a faster option.
TerranceBaggz t1_iyd7gk3 wrote
Car centric cities are dying cities.
Anarcho-Crab t1_iyd6nk8 wrote
Making better public transport makes less cars on the road which makes less traffic congestion. Expanding roads never eases traffic, like ever. Ask Houston.
telmar25 t1_iyd898x wrote
In theory sure. In practice public transport ridership has to actually increase substantially for this to happen, otherwise this just makes it worse for everyone traveling by car. And I’m not sure what the rationale for ridership increasing is—will the buses run a much faster or more frequent schedule than they did before? I think many are skeptical of Baltimore’s investments in public transport (especially the metro and light rail) as they have been so badly planned and executed upon (they don’t connect, etc.) and haven’t actually resulted in their projected usage.
Anarcho-Crab t1_iydf2ip wrote
Public transport can't have more ridership until it is made more functional. Yes we need more frequent buses, more train lines, hell even more bicycle options. When cities prioritize walking it creates more economic activity which then helps fund the public transport. Also I ride the metro everyday to work and you can catch the metro and lightrail at Lexington Market. Though I would like more trains that move through the city than the half finished attempts that are the lightrail and metro. Would've been nice if Hogan didn't literally break federal law and steal the money from the red line.
In short, if you build it, they will come.
brutereasons t1_iyddi0t wrote
Absurd that cars are allowed on Charles and St Paul at all through most of the city tbh, they should have just one lane for buses then wider sidewalks with space for restaurants and bars to expand into the street and bike lanes
ElectricStar87 t1_iyfcfhx wrote
Uhhhh….Cathedral/Maryland (right next to Charles) already has a two-lane separate bike lane at least all the way from Pratt to at least Homewood. Other bike lanes take it up from those termini.
And just to be clear, there’s already a lot of bars and restaurants that are empty on Charles Street. I don’t see a need for added restaurant/bar capacity anywhere on the Charles corridor.
I really don’t see the value add at all.
evev13 t1_iyegp4p wrote
What happens when a bus breaks down?
hoi4kaiserreichfanbo t1_iyers5k wrote
Yes because there is famously only a single bus in all of Baltimore City. A few years ago I was riding a bus and it broke down. We were sat for maybe 10 minutes and boom another bus came and we got on it.
evev13 t1_iyewx7o wrote
Except you were probably not on a one lane street when it happened
brutereasons t1_iyfefaq wrote
So? I've been on one-way streets with buses and cars breaking down before, you can just go to the next street over. In any case, there would be space for 2 bus lanes (one in each direction), wider sidewalks, and bike lanes, because there wouldn't be taxpayer-funded parking spaces everywhere
covidcares t1_iyepd5n wrote
What happens to what?
MotoSlashSix t1_iyds8kr wrote
Charles St a one-lane road with a dedicated Public Transit lane sounds like an improvement to me.
nameisinusetryagain t1_iyd74cd wrote
This is also one of the options being considered for York Road from Ridgely down into the city.
TerranceBaggz t1_iyd7q2t wrote
I’d rather they put a rail line down York/Greenmount, but BRT would definitely help the people along the corridor.
AttisofAssyria t1_iyd7o59 wrote
Well Charles Street itself is one of the worse roads in the city. I've been in 3rd world countries that have roads in better repair than Charles Street. It's embarrassing, tbh.
Matt3989 t1_iyecqlf wrote
Serious question: Why do you think Charles needs to be multi-lane?
cooldoc116 t1_iyeavva wrote
Building subways is very costly. (Bus lanes with clean buses running on electric power) that are reliable and go where people want to h could improve transit very quickly.
episcopaladin t1_iyewkvg wrote
lmk if you find out so i can buy them a beer
evev13 t1_iyeh9wz wrote
What part of Charles St has a bus lane now? Is that downtown near the harbor? Aren't the roads already 4 lanes wide down there?
whiteclawappreciator t1_iyd3yhx wrote
Prioritizing more efficient public transportation seems like a good thing.