This is post I submitted to the EnvisionBaltimore listserve on November 10 of last year. I'm reposting in light of the Pratt St discussion. I'd very much welcome thoughts and opinions on the matter from this board.

------


Many of us here are aware of the changes in Baltimore transportation in the 1950's. I've heard by some accounts that Baltimore had the worst "traffic" in the country at that time.

In comes Henry Barnes with his commuter oriented design of automobile travel. One-way streets galore. The city is redesigned to easily move traffic into downtown at rush hour and out at the evening. The signaling was designed to maximize flow.

Of course in the intervening years this had drastically declined the viability and marketability of residences along those streets he re-engineered. Automobile movement was primary, "pedestrianism" and a pleasent living environment were second. St. Paul St fell into deep decline, with its one-way downhill passage. Motorists frequently exceed 45 mph with houses less than 10 feet from the moving vehicles. (Barnes never liked the city anyway, he cursed us because we seemed to place a monument in the middle of any damn place).

But his traffic engineering was genius. It has kept Baltimore a moving city, albeit at the expense of the neighborhoods. Some say traffic in Baltimore is nothing. I disagree: we have plenty of TRAFFIC, but only modest CONGESTION. I contend this is because of Barnes. Now, the return of "true urbanism" (new urbanism, pre-WWII type development--non LeCorbusier moderism) pushes for pedestrian primacy and transit above other practices. There are calls for a return to two-way traffic on major thoroughfares.

I think that all of this is well and good, but would destroy the traffic balance of this city quickly. Baltimore isn't as bad as many other cities because of Barnes. The Charles St Trolley is another example. Minor disruptions could make drastic differences in outcome.

As more middle-class singles and DINKS move into town, they bring their cars. High oil prices will eventually temper excessive use of the auto, but most will use it where transit is not immediately convenient (ie not a one-seat bus ride or rail). Even the marvelousness of the "Barnes Effect" of riding non-stop up Calvert St from Fayette to University Parkway could be ending.

Why? Because, I think that when traffic begins to reach certain levels, it will rapidly deteriorate, as has been recongnized by traffic engineers. I think that since the new school year started up this fall traffic has been worse since I first moved into the City in 2001. I'd like some factual presentation from Gerry or someone or the like to comment on this. For highway driving can be great--until the traffic density reaches a certain point and rapidly slows down.

Could Baltimore City be nearing the capacity limit of the Barnes effect? Some streets are increadibly easily to ride on, but at rush hour, they are immpossible--a very stark constrast. Could the entire city soon be on the verge of a mobility meltdown, as not traffic, but congestion vastly increases. Even Barnes genius has limits of time and space. He probably thought we'd have our subway system by now.

I bring this up, because I think it is real. But I also bring it up as a forward thinking idea that heavy rail subways are a natural outcome of such circumstances. The poverty of Baltimore has kept much of its population transit dependent, while the middle-class moved out. A new middle-class could bring this city to its knees. Would LRT that took out lanes of precious traffic capacity be more logical than a subway system than served as a relief valve to our seemingly or future "increasing" population and high density developments.

I wonder....
Nate

Break up the Beltway
By Gerald Neily
Originally published February 21, 2007, Baltimore Sun

When the Baltimore Beltway was completed in the early 1960s, it was part of a transportation revolution. Beginning with mankind's first dirt trails, the purpose of transportation facilities had always been to connect places where people wanted to go. The Baltimore Beltway (Interstate 695) was one of the first highways built for the express purpose of allowing people to avoid a particular place - Baltimore.

Before the Beltway, the city was the inevitable focus of regional commerce, but the Beltway made it easy to avoid the city. The Beltway served its original purpose well, and people have been avoiding Baltimore ever since. Forty years later, we should recognize the need to make our transportation facilities work to create real connections between specific, well-defined places.

The Beltway defies one of the great laws of geometry: The shortest distance between two points is a straight line. In contrast, the Beltway is a circle. If you travel far enough on the Beltway, you end up right back where you started. Traditional travel terms such as "northbound" had to be replaced with inadequate, almost metaphysical terms such as "inner loop."

Breaking the laws of geometry has consequences. By making it possible to drive in circles around Baltimore, what the Beltway really did was to create many new activity centers in lieu of the city. The Beltway's primary function is no longer to avoid the city, because there is not really enough "city" left to avoid, relative to the vast complex of activity surrounding Baltimore in all directions.

As a concept, the Beltway never made sense. It was a stopgap measure to compensate for the lack of other suburban roads and the incompletion of Interstate 95 for two more decades. Major road planning in Baltimore County pretty much began and ended with the completion of the Beltway (except for a few appendages such as Interstate 795 and White Marsh Boulevard). Not coincidentally, Baltimore County has been one of the nation's most successful jurisdictions in fighting sprawl.

Baltimore is now a much smaller piece of a much larger region that extends in all directions, but it relates most clearly to the megalopolitan corridor from Washington to Philadelphia and New York. So while it is probably too late to create stronger connections between the city and the small, well-established Beltway suburbs such as Catonsville and Parkville, there are greater opportunities along the larger Northeastern U.S. corridor: military base relocations to Fort Meade and Aberdeen, transit-oriented development opportunities in Odenton and Edgewood, commuters seeking outlet from Washington, and even New York Yankee fans attracted to Camden Yards.

Baltimore should be an integral part of it all. So we should get rid of the old, circular planning mentality and determine the best and most direct way to connect our city to the greater region.

We can start by thinking of the Beltway as less of a beltway. As you travel south on Interstate 83 from northern Baltimore County, the signs and markings direct you naturally from I-83 onto the Beltway's westbound outer loop. The natural southbound procession is then to continue around the Beltway. The west side of the Beltway should be renumbered I-83 instead of I-695 to reflect this.

Then, when the westbound/southbound/outer loop of the Beltway hits the Interstate 97 interchange south of Baltimore, the natural movement is to leave the Beltway and proceed south on I-97 toward Annapolis. So I-97 should also be renumbered I-83 to reflect this. The west side of the Beltway should be considered an integral part of the I-83 highway that is the most direct path from Harrisburg, Pa., to Annapolis, and all points in between.

The Jones Falls Expressway into downtown Baltimore is but a spur from this interstate highway, so it should be renumbered Interstate 183 - a three-digit number, like all interstate spurs. The I-795 spur to Owings Mills could also be renumbered I-183 as part of this urban spur into downtown.

The east side of the Beltway would remain I-695, creating a distinct identity from its west-side counterpart. The interchanges of I-95 and I-695 would no longer have a split personality. I-695 would be anchored to the east, while the interchange of I-95 and I-83 would be distinctly anchored to the west, with no more confusing talk of inner and outer loops.

It is time to break up the Beltway, and liberate ourselves from the circular reasoning of highways past.

Gerald Neily is an independent transportation planner who blogs at www.baltimoreinnerspace.blog- spot.com. He can be reached at geraldneily@msn.com.

^I've mentioned Gerry Neily several times in threads before. I know him and he actually came down to Annapolis with TRAC last year to testify for our position on behalf of the Red Line.

He had a few responses to my original post on EnvisionBaltimore as a matter of fact. :)

Nate

Break up the Beltway
By Gerald Neily

As a concept, the Beltway never made sense. It was a stopgap measure to compensate for the lack of other suburban roads and the incompletion of Interstate 95 for two more decades. Major road planning in Baltimore County pretty much began and ended with the completion of the Beltway (except for a few appendages such as Interstate 795 and White Marsh Boulevard). Not coincidentally, Baltimore County has been one of the nation's most successful jurisdictions in fighting sprawl.

What?!? As a concept the beltway makes perfect sense on two levels. 1. It was began as a Baltimore Co. project to connect the country, which because of history surrounds the city. This naturaly produces a loop. Baltimore Co. had little say in its historical shape. 2. Two it works as a bypass of Baltimore. hence it goes around. Is it Baltimore Co. fault that the city delayed and redesigned 1-95 through the city? Or that 1-70 and 1-83 were not compleated as planned. Apparently this author has forgotten it was activists that stopped those roads and approves of sprawl. Baltimore Co. planned a far more expansive road network befor it decided to limit growth to its designated growth areas.

Now you may argue that the growth around the beltway has taken away from the city, but it was only one of many socioeconomic factors.


The east side of the Beltway would remain I-695, creating a distinct identity from its west-side counterpart. The interchanges of I-95 and I-695 would no longer have a split personality. I-695 would be anchored to the east, while the interchange of I-95 and I-83 would be distinctly anchored to the west, with no more confusing talk of inner and outer loops.


Who exactly is confused by the terms of inner and outer loop?

Redesignating I-695 west to I-97 (why does I-97 get its own seperate number anyway, that never made sense to me, it should probably be I-995) to Annapolis at route 50 (which BTW is secreatly designated as I-595 by the feds) as all I-83 is a concept I have not heard before, but is interesting. I doubt it will happen.

For clarity, I didn't write it I just posted it. It was in the Sun yesterday.

While I agree Barnes had an enormous impact on the flow of traffic in Baltimore, we can’t assign the decline of Baltimore to him or his policies; when Barnes arrived, Baltimore was already in a state of decline. The city had hit rock bottom in terms of economic vitality long before; taxable income was decreasing, as businesses and people started to flee the city.

As for a "return of 'true urbanism'", this is somewhat of a misnomer: society, culture and time have changed. Sure, current trends appear to suggest a new model rooted in a pre-World War II style of living, however economically we have transformed. The trend we’re currently experiencing isn’t based on need…it’s based on choice.

We cannot go back to a pre-war lifestyle. Not only is society different today than eighty years ago, but so is our economy. While the notion of slowing down traffic in the heart of the city, with lots of pedestrians walking along the sidewalks with store bought purchases in hand is charming and nostalgic, it isn’t feasible. These changes enabled our economy to grow and expand; prior to the war the United States was not considered a “super power”…after the war it was.

As to slowing traffic speeds, how dare we impede the flow of commerce? Time is money; every minute a commercial truck sits in traffic to transport goods equates lost revenue.

Sure, we can blame Detroit for wrecking the American city and streetcar, but the post-war boom was fueled by nearly twenty years of economic contraction; stagnation at best. The outward migration was to be expected, and in many ways predates the automobile.

Take a close look at Baltimore development over the centuries. As the commercial core and port grew, the further outward people migrated. After all, who would actually want to live in congestion and within smelling distance of the Basin!? Federal Hill, Fells Point and Canton were all lower class working neighborhoods.

I’m not saying people do not want to live, work and/or shop in the city today. Merely, there are those who don’t need or want to…and that’s perfectly fine. Barnes simply provided relief to a city choked by traffic and an inadequate infrastructure, and enabled several generations of residents to find “greener pastures” in the suburban realm. This migration was to be expected, and happened…as the current and other future trends will occur.

As a side note, I highly recommend a book by Barnes, “The Man with the Red and Green Eyes.” It provides wonderful insight into what he encountered upon arrival in Baltimore. I doubt they sell it at bookstores, but I’m positive Amazon.com or at least the Pratt system has it in their collection.

It's interesting to read different opinions. I happen to find this guy's completely wrong, but there is some truth that the Beltway has hurt the city.

Speaking of sprawl, I do think one area that could become a terrific northern suburb and form a great connection with the city is the Timonium/Hunt Valley area. I doubt Hereford area would get in on the act, but the former two could be great suburbs close to the city that limit sprawl.

Well, I hate sprawl too...but to allegorically demolish the beltway is extreme. Likewise, a deliberate interruption of traffic flow is also unwise.

As wada guy said in another post, let the market decide; this isn't a communist state. We can't force people to stay in the city by making it impossible for them to leave. Heck, instead of making all the streets two-way, let's make them all one-way: all inbound into the city. That way, no one can ever leave!

Seriously, we have to let people decide where they want to live: it's their choice. A vibrant and bustling city will develop when residents and businesses find value in being in the city, versus the suburbs...not by municipal, state or federal mandates.

I would go so far as to say we have “the beltway” to thank for the current resurgence we see in Baltimore and in other cities. People are tired of the same-old dull suburban living. They are in search of what the suburbs lack…

The current trend we are witnessing has less to do with urban planning and transportation engineers, and more to do with a societal cultural trend.

You can find a cul-de-sac just about anywhere…but masses of people, culture, history, and business? Not everywhere…

I don't think Gerry was advocating for the destruction of the Beltway, but defining it. Unless y'all were being sarcastic and I missed it.....:cheers:

Nate

Edit: Believe me Gerry didn't forget anything... ;) He has a certain writing style.....

For clarity, I didn't write it I just posted it. It was in the Sun yesterday.

I realized that, thats why I used the word author to try and differentiate. I think your opinion wada_guy would of been more thought out.

For clarity, I didn't write it I just posted it. It was in the Sun yesterday.

Either way is a bunch of Bull Shit made to tear down the concept of building new highways.

But yet the same people that opposes Highway building in Maryland will support Expensive Highway Building in Northern Virginia.

I don't think Gerry was advocating for the destruction of the Beltway, but defining it. Unless y'all were being sarcastic and I missed it.....:cheers:

Nate

Edit: Believe me Gerry didn't forget anything... ;) He has a certain writing style.....

There is nothing sarcastic about it.

This Gerry guy sounds like one of those Obstructionist anti-Maryland tree hugging extremist that wants to help sabatoge Maryland from growing as a modern competitive state for the future.

Its a damn shame how you people always try to find ways to sabatoge Highway building and other forms of Business/Economic/Revenue Growth in Maryland as part of a secret agenda to chase off the middle and upper class population from Maryland.

I should've known that extremist BS like this would start popping up as soon as O'Malley and the other Communist Left Extremist Stole last years local state selections, its no suprise that white collar businesses are now fleeing the state for business friendly regions like Northern Virginia.

I don't agree with naming one half of the beltway a different name than the other. Forty years ago that may have made sense because the terms "inner loop" and "outer loop" were indeed new. But then again no one was familiar with the terms "I-Pod or PC back then either. Culture changes and all these terms are now well understood by everyone.

Beltways circle almost every American city of size. Originally designed for interstate travel, most of todays users are local. Changing the names of the roads would only create confusion.

Harlem,
Which white collar business have pulled up their skirts and left the state or decided to since January? I think you are missing the points of the article and people's responses. Opinions are opinions, and people are entitled to them, but then you swoop down and create a very hostile and unfriendly environment and it makes people not want to contribute to otherwise intelligent conversation. It is not about one side vs. the other. Politics is not supposed to be a game in this country, but a representation of the majority of people's opinions. Unfortunately it has become the former. You are also entitled to your opinions, but I think there are better ways to present them to make your point seem plausible.
In my opinion, the beltway will not go away and I don't necessarily believe that by changing the numbers to create longer N/S roadways will really create much of a change. A circle is a circle and what is done is done.
I do not feel the lack of roadways in Maryland has been the demise of business and growth in Maryland. There are too many factors that come in to play, and comparing it to Northern Virginia is not really relevant at the moment either. They have horrible traffic in both direction of every road stretching into their suburbs for many hours a day. Poor traffic condition do not necessarily hinder white collar business either. Baltimore was part of the rust-belt. Washington was not part of that, it has always been white collar based and Baltimore had to transition from Heavy Blue Collar and is now becoming white collar. It takes time to make that transition. Manufacturing companies had to pack up and leave, office spaces had to be redefined and new companies need to be wooed into the city. There are too many factors in the history and structure of business and economy, education, etc. in Baltimore than just not having enough highways. I think that is a poor crutch on which to place your weight. Now I await the blasting response from you and perhaps others as well.

This has already been done...in Washington. When it was decided not to build I-95 thru D.C., the Beltway's SE and S sides were renumbered I-95 while the N and W sides remained 495. But no matter what you call it, it's still a Beltway...the same as Baltimore's would be if it is renumbered.

Barnes should get some credit for improving Baltimore's traffic, but not all. A major part of Baltimore's traffic woes thru the 50's was caused by geography. The Bay and Patapsco River forced interstate travelers to pass thru town either on US 1 or US 40. The opening of the Harbor Tunnel took most of the interstate trucks and cars off the downtown streets.