Perhaps those lights are intentionally timed that way in order to slow cars down, making it safer for pedestrians and other drivers.

Moving cars as fast as possible isn't the only objective of the DOT.

As someone who drives South on St. Paul and North on Calvert daily between North Ave and Conway every day, I can say the lights are horribly timed. Occasionally when traveling North on Calvert I will get the situation where I will get a green and the next light will turn from red to green right as I come to a stop

I cannot disagree more that, by and large, the City's lights are timed very well, esp. when compared to surrounding juristictions, including Washington, DC.

There are a few problem areas that don't fit the pattern (like near President St), but often I can catch "the wave" of green lights on most main arterials.

Certainly some of the traffic engineers should chime in here, but IIRC the signals are timed to maximize inbound flow at the expense of cross traffic AND opposite flow traffic. Some times traveling in heavier traffic into downtown in the morning rush is faster than traveling outbound, even the the outbound direction has fewer cars. Maybe this section of Charles mentioned above has some new quirk to it, but farther south it works beautifully.

Of course, at a certain traffic threshold, nothing will move quickly and you'll get the red light.

Nate Payer
TRAC

COMPLETELY valid complaint. Similar situations occur daily around Cultural Center/State Center and MLKing: the next light turns red just as you're accelerating away from the first one, and the cycle repeats for block after block.

In fact, I don't bother reporting these badly timed lights to you because it's basically the city DEFAULT. Instead, what you specifically need to ask the City's traffic managers is for a SPECIFIC demonstration of WHERE their supposed $10 million traffic-light-synchronization program actually WORKS. Go ahead, ask them to show you before-and-after traffic times. Show you (and us) where they made what changes, and show results.

I don't buy that "slowing traffic to make it safer for pedestrians" poppycock. Ask them where, if anyplace, such a strategy is actually implemented. It's just unsynchronized lights, pure and simple. Hey, I'm not always driving against the larger volume of traffic, but I swear there's a transmitter in my car making every light I approach turn red.

Pappas is ABSOLUTELY right.

When I lived in Riverside/Fed Hill and drove through downtown to go to work, I swear I always hit every light.

Furthermore, I live in White Marsh now and drive into the city for school via a different route and have to stop at many lights on the way. The city's lights are full of flaws.

One former roommate of mine made a lot of sense when he said, "Sheila Dixon must be in bed with the gas companies because of these stupid lights!"

Valid complaint. One has to wonder where City Hall is in this issue. One of their top priorities is "Cleaner and Greener", right? Is it not more wasteful to have a vehicle go one block, stop, go one block, stop, etc.

Where is Capt. Planet (Councilman Kraft) when you REALLY need him?

An analogy I use is that, if you read a horrible book, you blame the author, not Microsoft Word. The same holds true with signal systems: someone has to come up with the numbers and enter them in the system; it just doesn't do it on its own. If the numbers happen to be bad, it's not the system's fault. Garbage in, garbage out.

In other words, you can spend whatever you want on these traffic systems, but at the end of the day, if you don't have the right people and processes in place to analyze what the system is telling you, respond to it, tweak the numbers, and review the results, it's not the system's fault. It's a management issue, not an engineering issue.

Granted, some of this has to do with agencies tempering expectations at the outset of these projects where these wiz-bang systems are installed. They have these grand press conferences with the director of the DOT standing in front of gigantic video displays of colorful maps and blinking displays, giving everyone the impression that the computer is going to magically give you the green everywhere you go. Uh, no.

Also, at some point, you have to realize that, no matter what street you are on, eventually you're going to hit a street that is more major than you are, and you're going to have to wait. That's life. I'm not trying to excuse poor timing, because there are plenty of instances of that; just trying to provide some perspective.

Valid Complaint.

I travel on Baltimore, from Patterson Park, to President/83 every morning and afternoon. I hit just about every light, though this trend seems to have occurred in the last 2-3 years. When I first started making this commute, 4 years ago, I recall a much better green to red ratio.

And the whole, "It's timed so it's safer for pedestrians/cyclists/other drivers" is a joke. The reality is, a lot of people actually go faster than normal, to try and make the light, and even then, run the red light.
Heck, I've been passed on Baltimore, when I was doing 30mph, just so someone could try and make the light.

@James D., you should try taking Lombard in the morning. Driving at 25-30 MPH, I can get from Wolfe Street to President Street, usually with no stops. In the evening, driving East on Baltimore from President is pretty well synchronized.

Also, Falls Road south from Northern Parkway in the morning can be a faster alternate into the city when 83S is backed up; it's also more scenic.

While there are definitely streets where all of the lights are synced, the city does a terrible job of publicizing which roads they want you to take. I've randomly found certain routes that work with the lights, but occasionally, the timing is changed and I have to find a new route. Other times, none of the lights are timed and zig-zagging across town is actually faster.