My light rail line has a first name, it's C-R-I-M-E.

My light rail line has a second name, it's C-R-I-M-E.

So if you'll ask me why, I'll say...

If you just doubt me in any way just ask the people in Hunt Val-ley.

(To the tune of the Oscar Meyer commercial).

The opposition to the Red Line in the Canton and Edmondson Village is based on unsound reasoning and should be ignored by the elected officials this brief letter is addressed to. I have attended community meetings where strong feelings were voiced against the 4-C option and frankly found the arguments laughable, for the following, simple reason:

Both Edmondson Avenue and Boston Street will accommodate the same volume of traffic they now do if parking is restricted on their curbside lanes. The abolishment of the medians on each street will also provide more space. In short, neither community will be losing space on their roadways which will lead to increased congestion. They will simply be losing parking spaces, which is insufficient cause to shoot down a transportation project the city desperately needs - particularly in an age where energy costs are poised to ascend again in the future. The opponents of this much needed project are your classic NIMBY types, putting forth bogus arguments to obstruct progress in the city. They should be thoroughly ignored.

Also re: this "reason" from the letter:

"3. Neither Edmondson Avenue nor Boston Street were ever intended to carry a double-tracked surface light rail system and they are inadequate for that purpose. "

Edmondson Avenue and the surrounding Edmondson Village neighborhood was built for people to use the double tracked streetcar line which ran down Edmondson Avenue into the city center. You can see photos of it here, some directly in front of the Edmonson Village Shopping Center, exactly where the Red Line is planned for: http://www.gobaltimoreredline.com/historic.asp

You'll also notice there are two lanes of traffic on either side of the tracks in the photos. It would be nice if the opponents of this project would actually do some research before making nonsensical, knee-jerk arguments to try and deprive the city of the transit system it needs.

Baltimore hasn't had real transit since the trolleys. NIMBY idiots will stop Baltimore's only chance at a real transit line. Hey Canton the car is an endangered species. I know you yuppies love to drive but the only way Baltimore will survive is to have real transit. If you kill the Red line, it's game over.

^No, the reasoning is sound, PJ.

There are 3 lanes active during rush hour in the heavier direction on Rt. 40 currently. Parking aside, the Red Line would reduce to 2 lanes each direction at all times. Moreover, whereas now the rush hour/parking lane is used for right turns, this would put the burden of right turns to the second lane with the surface LRT scenario. Turn lanes are considered to have reduced carrying capacity, often times by more than half. Now, the bus and right turners dominate the third lane with most thru traffic staying in the left 2 lanes. If built, this would leave only one lane for thru traffic.

Also, the lanes would be narrowed by about 1 foot. Narrowing of lanes has been is known to reduce capacity.

Edmondson Ave may have been built for a double tracked streetcar, but that is different than LRT. LRT would be designed to act like rapid transit by having signal priority and pre-emption which would act as a signficant barrier across the neigbhorhood as the rail traffic would be channelized and along with it the road traffic, which would mean the Rt. 40 traffic would get the green more than it does now. Nevertheless, according the traffic study in the DEIS, the lanes reductions still act to slow traffic and increase congestion and travel time overall.

Edmondson Ave had capacity back during the end of streetcar heyday (say 1945) because they wasn't that much stuff west of it. There weren't as many places to go and distances to travel were shorter. There was no traffic from Columbia, no Social Security, there wasn't even Westview Park! I don't think we will return to those conditions in that area.

Nate Payer
TRAC

I hope that these NIMBYs get nothing accomplished and that this line goes in exactly as planned, specifically so people like Sean Jackson will get "railroaded" into silence.

People sold their houses at a loss in Mt. Washington because of the impending crime from the light rail. Guess what? Property value went up!

And Hunt Valley, well...ask me. I was born and raised and lived there. I LOVE the Light Rail and so does everyone I know.

It's a shame there are so many people in the Baltimore area share the view of the ignorant, fearful, uninformed Sean Jackson above. This thinly veiled racism has accomplished little more than to further push apart the standard of living between the more affluent and impoverished areas of the city. It is deplorable. This isn't Sao Paulo. It's America. Time to start acting like it and stop treating people like they should have no access to any decent public services simply because they weren't born on the more polished side of the tracks.

The reasoning is not sound. And let's keep in mind that, most importantly, the Red Line will be carrying riders who would otherwise be driving. That's the entire point. Transporting people more efficiently, with less emissions and at a cheaper cost than everyone driving their own personal metal box around. You're losing sight of the forest from the trees. Seriously.

^No, it won't.

The amount of capacity reduced exceeds the number of new people riding the system. Most drivers aren't transferable to the system, because they're not going where the line would go (like commercial trucks).

The line will create more congestion and delays, therefore increasing the rate of emissions per vehicle-mile. Did you look at the traffic study?

Nate Payer
TRAC

It seems that people have no problem inventing their own truths, or simply choose to be ignorant of it for the sake of their own causes.

The above claims " Neither Edmondson Avenue nor Boston Street were ever intended to carry a double-tracked surface light rail system and they are inadequate for that purpose. "

Boston Street carried heavy rail frieght tracks for years until its "gentrification" in the 1990's:
http://thecrhs.org/?q=ScenicAndActionGallery/ConrailOnBostonSt

Edmondson Avenue's median carried the double tracks of the #9 and #14 streetcars for over 50 years before the GM owned BTC decided to thrust the "progress" of the #23 bus in its place:
http://collections.mdch.org/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/btpe&CISOPTR=460&CISOBOX=1&REC=4

Sadly, our enslavement to the automobile has resulted in a kneejerk reaction to oppose anything even close to progressive in this city, and in opposing it, any number of fictions are created.

Edmondson Avenue

Simply because some street DID have some type of rail on it doesn't necessarily mean it was a good thing. E.g. elevated lines on Second Ave and other places.

Perhaps the above letter didn't illustrate it, but the people there aren't opposed to a Red Line or improved mass transit, only a street running one. I've seen a lot of all or nothing type statements.

Nate Payer
TRAC

Oh, what a marvelous example of "our democracy" in action! Proponents don't like the criticism, so just trash the legitimate complaints! Right cheeky, as the supporting data is suspect, and assumes, "If you build it, they will come!" Hordes of riders don't appear out of thin air!

It still leaves unresolved: Basic and pressing livability issues in the City. Alarmingly high unemployment. All of this reliably in The Sun.

Then, the most tacky, "Who is to pay for this party?" Why, same old scam: Work it for as much Federal money as possible. Load all the rest of it, including endless operating expenses, onto all the taxpayer saps throughout the entire State! For what? A monument, at extraordinary expense, to carry few riders?

"It still leaves unresolved: Basic and pressing livability issues in the City. Alarmingly high unemployment."

Well clearly it can't completely solve these issues. However, providing public transit in a city that is severely underserved, and where 33% of residents do not have access to a car, is not only addressing livability directly, but unemployment as well (maybe people will actually be able to get to work).
COMMENT: Blarg: Please contact Michael Dresser @ 410-332-6175.

I think, Blarg, we can can basically agree on those points, at least!

Nate Payer
TRAC

Nate,

I'll check out the traffic report, but at face value your argument (as usual) seems ridiculous. Do you drive on Edmondson Avenue? The overwhelming amount of traffic is people heading downtown from the western suburbs/west side. The very same people the Red Line will serve.

And also, I know old habits die hard, but you really should try suggesting something that works and is possible to build if you're going to spend so much time and energy criticizing those who are trying to accomplish something.

It would make more sense to rebuild the streetcar system to at least it's original extent (which was extensive), but use modern streetcars. Also it would make sense to extend the subways system (heavy rail) with a few more lines. And build an East Baltimore MARC train station. Light rail is I think a lower priority, but would still be useful. As it stands now Baltimore has a shockingly poor transit system for a major city where 1/3 of the residents don't own cars (there's no place to put them). In fact this is a major reason the unemployment is so high - no way to get to work. Transit IS jobs.

PJ-

Nate has proposed options that appear affordable and possible. I think they are all great options. View them at www.getontrac.org

I just like the alignment through Canton better, because I like to go there.

PJ,

Good, even if the study is inaccurate, more people who discuss this aspect of the Red Line should be aware of the material there.

What makes my argument seem ridiculous? Please specify. Yes, I drive on Edmondson Ave. In fact, I grew up one-half block off the Academy Heights section (non-Rt 40) just inside Baltimore County, FWIW.

Why are you so confident the overwhelming amount of traffic is people heading downtown? At rush hour, the opposite direction is carrying roughly 2/3rds the volume of the heavier direction. A lot of people are using Rt. 40 to go from one non-downtown location to another location, most of which would not be served by the Red Line. Did you know that for whatever reason, the MTA only allotted 40 parking spaces at Edmondson Village Station? This means that almost no one from Catonsville will ride; the model ridership predictions verify that. Most people who live along Edmondson Ave or Fred Rd in Catonsville will not backtrack up to SSM or I-70 to go downtown, esp. if they have to travel on heavily congested Rolling Rd.

I haven’t suggested anything that “doesn’t work”. I’ve suggest options that are better transit: higher speed, higher capacity, have better connectivity, higher ridership density, superior system expansion capability, lower unit operating costs, while more amenable to the existing neighborhoods. What I and TRAC have proposed over the years may often be more expensive and may not hit the big developer hot spots, but that doesn’t mean they don’t work. I’ve provided evidence as to why I think surface won’t work well, often with numbers and vice versa. Simply because some attempt to accomplish something doesn’t make what they are trying to do a good thing. I fully admit to spending significant time on here because I’ve studied the Red Line and rapid transit for quite some time now and feel that I can be informative on issues that would benefit from clarification.

Nate Payer
TRAC

From everything that I've read, the folks in Canton aren't opposed to the existance of the light rail, they are simply asking that the underground tunnel be extended for another 1/2 mile or so.

And let's be realistic, this Red Line will not ease traffic unless it goes up I-95 with stops in White Marsh, Bel Air and Aberdeen and across I-70 with stops near Ellicott City, Columbia and Fredrick.

As a Homeland area resident I am late to this debate, but I often ride the very convenient No. 11 bus to and from downtown and Canton. I am wondering why we would spend so much money on constructing a new transport option that seems to duplicate what the bus system already does pretty well. Why not spend the money on a new "ride the bus" media campaign? Why not construct "park and ride" lots near main highway exits with regular (electric?) bus service to downtown locations? Better yet, why not use stimulus funds to promote city living by offering regular shuttle bus service from light rail and MARC train stops in the County to major business parks? I have family members who live in Federal Hill and need to own two cars for their daily commutes to Lockheed Martin and the National Business Parkway (both within 15 miles of downtown) because public commuter transport is organized around getting people to the city and not out of it.

The ridiculousness of your argument is multifaceted. For starters to rely on the statement that a large portion of the Edmondson/Rt. 40 Traffic is not going downtown is really a waste of time for this discussion. We obviously cannot build a comprehensive transit system in one fell swoop. Sure it should have happened by now, but it hasn't. In the meantime,an East West corridor line is much needed and the current plan at hand, while not perfect, is decent and seems politically, legally and financially feasible. Unfortunately your proposals for heavy rail and the alignments on your website are not. They are fantasies. All of which rely on using the Amtrak line in the city which is not only a logistical nightmare but also illegal for a municipal transit system to share.

We should not be arguing over Edmondson Village at all. This part of the planned route is absolutely necessary and the community will benefit greatly from the transit option. The east side route is more debatable. But Boston St is a good option.

The real problem with the plan is downtown. Taking the line along Lombard St is silly, as we've noted on here before. It is too close to the Subway to provide the coverage for riders needed for downtown, yet a little too far for efficient transfers between the lines. I'm sticking to my Elevated Tracks idea to take the line along the Pratt St Corridor, after a transfer point at Lexington Market where all 3 lines will come together - (Baltimore's new Times Square Station), followed by another transfer to just the light rail at Camden Yards. Given that El tracks are cheaper than tunneling, perhaps the tunnels could even be expanded a little more on the East and West sides.

Such a route would help strengthen the traditional downtown along Pratt Street and the harbor area (in a time when it needs the help) plus would help the west side of downtown economically by creating a major transit hub at Lexington Market.

PJ,

I'm pretty much going to resign myself from this for now. Suffice to say, most of your arguments against mine amount to handwaving, because you haven't provided evidence to support your claim or refute mine.

The heavy rail alignment would utilize space along the Amtrak right-of-way, but not the active tracks themselves.

Now, awhile back, I offered to give you some information about Metro alternative ridership and the physical diffiuclties of accomplishing your downtown alignment proposal. I'm happy to discuss that off-line if you're still interested.

Nate Payer
TRAC

Edmondson avenue is always a mess,and maybe it will be easy to go to work if this RED LINE comes to fruition,and crime where have you been look at West View nothing is there anymore,movies are gone stores are closed so is not the RED LINE is the people and the lack of enforment of the law.

"this Red Line will not ease traffic unless it goes up I-95 with stops in White Marsh, Bel Air and Aberdeen"

Ed, I'd bet the house on The Red Line not going to White Marsh, Bel Air, or Aberdeen given service is already duplicated by MARC's Penn Line (Martin St., Edgewood, Aberdeen).

Someone mentioned an East Baltimore MARC station. Fair enough; there's enough vacant property there for that along with adequate area for parking. Wanna link it to Canton in the East and Edmondson Ave. to the west, fair enough. Link in an express bus terminus from/near the Edmondson Village Shopping Ctr (or even the I-70 park-n-ride near Cooks Ln/Ingleside Ave - tie in Security Blvd peeps too!) going to the West Baltimore MARC station. Link in an Express Bus for an East Baltimore MARC station with a bus terminus at/near the 1st Mariner Bldg or the Baltimore Travel Plaza. Problem with that is the limited service you'll get on the MARC line and crowding (and this blog has well documented the problems dealing with Amtrak in expansion of service pursuits). AND, for the money, you wouldn't be able to get intermediate stations between West B-more, Penn Sta., and East B-more, and the existing light rail link into Penn Sta. is shoddy.

I have a monorail for sale. Cheap, must sell.