gaiusjuliusweezer t1_j750a5f wrote

The development process, as a whole, is a tax. Time has monetary value, as do interest payments on bank loans.

We should make that simpler along with the zoning code, but the neighborhood associations typically object to one thing or another, which, on its own wouldn't kill reform, but combined prevent a councilmanic majority from forming.


gaiusjuliusweezer OP t1_j4e0ui6 wrote

Because “2nd tier city” isn’t something you’ve even defined. It’s just something that sounds like knowledge.

Light rail as practiced in the United States is usually done poorly. Not sure why you think I would disagree.

But there is a difference between trying to fit light rail into a post-war, auto-oriented context without accompanying land use changes


gaiusjuliusweezer OP t1_j48l406 wrote

Now, you do have large populations of people who walk to shit and can be engaged in basically l every single direction.

Unfortunately Councilman Eric Costello seems to haphazardly step all over every effort to connect to them whenever bike/scooter/ped infrastructure comes up.

Which is silly! It’s his district he’s hurting in favor of Cohen’s, which doesn’t have those high volume traffic sewers like Pratt/Lombard, Paca, MLK, etc. that repel pedestrians


gaiusjuliusweezer OP t1_j46ig61 wrote

You’re right! Then, once you’re gotten to the old Norfolk Southern Right of Way, you don’t have to do this really complex portal construction operation like they were gonna end up doing to divert traffic

EDIT: although I think you have to go underground and not elevated for Edmondson Ave west of the MARC station, so I forgot about that


gaiusjuliusweezer OP t1_j46fjm3 wrote

I also prefer heavy rail, but the comparison is apples-and-oranges for the surface segments.

The dense grid with equally important perpendicular streets downtown were bypasses by the tunnel.

This is in contrast to the Edmondson Avenue and Boston Street median right-of-way.

Those are both at the top of the road hierarchy and the trains can be given signal priority.

Unfortunately you do still have to deal with drivers crossing and getting stuck in the path. But you get time back from not having to enter and exit a deep underground station

EDIT: However you should know that Heavy Rail has not yet been ruled out by the MTA.

They are likely not going to try to serve CMS anymore, which means they would save a mile long tunnel under cooks lane. If you do heavy rail, then you use the existing subway tunnel instead of digging a new one and again have a couple billion more to play with


gaiusjuliusweezer t1_iypbv29 wrote

The Metro unfortunately is 1/6th of the metro it was supposed to interface with, so while it is fast at getting you from Owings Mills to JHH, there are simply not that many people with both starts AND origins on that line.

This wasn’t enough critical mass to anchor employment in our traditional downtown.

If we extend add another line, then you add all the people with starts but no ends, and ends on no starts along the current alignment to start using it.

The light rail just has one of the worst conceivable alignments you could make in the city so it didn’t add much. But we could also allow development at some of the those sites and improve things.

About half the stations are just unused parking lots on the subway too, so developing those areas is some low-hanging fruit that we are taking very slowly