Baltimore Development News

[LtBk]

The problem is that Baltimore has bad mass transit, but it's not universal.It's true that public transportation has disadvantages, but the same can be said for all forms of transportation.

[jamie_hunt]

Originally Posted by LtBk

I don't get how having kids, the elderly, medical problems etc would have to do with mass transit.

Can't use mass transit to get kids to Saturday games or Thursday night band practice or Dad to the dentist or ...

[jamie_hunt]

Originally Posted by LtBk

The problem is that Baltimore has bad mass transit, but it's not universal.It's true that public transportation has disadvantages, but the same can be said for all forms of transportation.

London has great mass transit, but 1 -6 in my list applies to it as well.

[Clipper123]

Cars give people flexibility.


Cars give people flexibility. So does transit. Transit gives people the flexibility to work or play on smart devices en route, flexibility to arrive at your destination without parking, the flexibility to not drive in traffic, the flexibility to get places when you are age 90 or age 15.
As for performing multiple errands, that is what transit oriented development is all about. Accomplishing more right around key transit nodes without having to do multiple separate trips.
As for kids, that is a great reason for transit. I desperately want an efficient transit system so I don’t have to cart my kid everywhere. Statistically speaking, he is safer on transit than in a car as an earlier poster noted the 32788 traffic fatalities in 2010.
Cars add a certain type of flexibility, but they do not have the flexibility market cornered.

[PeterSmith]

Originally Posted by jamie_hunt

Can't use mass transit to get kids to Saturday games or Thursday night band practice or Dad to the dentist or ...

I think this is where we may be ships passing in the night. I think you’re viewing the situation as mass transit being introduced into our current lifestyle. I, and I imagine others, are viewing the situation as mass transit being part of and a mechanism for transitioning to a new lifestyle.

I attended a conference at Department of Transportation over the summer. A woman gave a great presentation on the issues we’ll face as our aging population comes head-to-head with the built environment we’ve created. A survey had been taken: eighty-seven percent of Baby Boomers in America currently live in a place where the automobile is the primary or sole means of transportation. When this population was asked the question “How will you get around when you are no longer able to drive?” Eighty-five percent of them answered “My children will drive me.” THAT.IS.INSANE.

Mass transit is a piece of the overall strategy that moves us to a society where getting the kids to Saturday games or to Thursday band practice or taking Dad to the dentist does not require getting into a car. The kids and dad can walk or ride their bike or take a train.

[scando]

Originally Posted by PeterSmith

You're right, six floors. So far, what has been built follows this rendering to a T. It has those slanted beams on the corner. Hopefully, it goes to the full six. I should know when I pass it this afternoon. They've been doing about a floor every two days.

From the construction, which above the first floor is the sheet-steel equivalent of two-by-fours, it can't go up very far. It doesn't appear to have any balconies, but then there isn't much to look at there. I'd definitely have to give it a C- for appeal....but better than a vacant lot and better than what's around it.

[jamie_hunt]

Originally Posted by Clipper123

Cars give people flexibility. ...

A lot of city kids (like me) grow up riding the bus and can use it to get to a lot of places.

But it takes time to get used to the system and one's fellow riders, and most people don't want to make the investment in time and energy to do so.

I can understand that.

There's a lot not to like about mass transit and if the question is: more taxpayer money for roads or buses, the vast majority are going to vote for roads.

Which, as it happens, the buses need anyway.

[Mirage52]

Originally Posted by jamie_hunt

Probably goes back to the "omnibuses" of the 1840s.

C'mon fellow mass transiters, let's face it ... to embrace mass transit, you gotta be okay with:

1) dealing with all kinds of weather;

2) waiting (you can't be in a huge hurry);

3) walking (a lot);

4) not carrying anything you couldn't run (at least) a block with;

5) the smell and idiosyncratic behavior of your fellow human beings;

6) customer relations that largely suq.

7) a planning process for expansion and route changes that largely favors those with the biggest mouths and the largest bowels, because they're the ones who can sit through endless meetings and make themselves heard.

8) sub-optimum results from said process, wherein an actual subway system gets value-engineered into three different modes with half-assed connections.

What's not to hate?

If I didn't hate circling parking garages even more, I'd never get on the bus.

I view mass transit as a convenience-based experience. I don't use it every day and I feel for those who do, at least in Baltimore. That said, I use it for nearly every Ravens and Orioles game I attend, which can be a lot throughout the year, and I have rarely had bad experiences with the LR or bus. If I lived near Baltimore, and worked downtown, I would use it when it was feasible for me and my schedule. On days where I don't have any extra stuff planned, I would take the train. If I had to get home quickly, I'd drive and hope traffic wasnt bad. If it was raining or I didn't feel like standing in extreme temps, I'd drive. All other times, I would take transit as long as it was effective for a majority of the time. I understand that stuff breaks down, traffic gets snarled or things get behind schedule. The same can be said of driving. Accidents, weather, car problems exist as well.

I'm not advocating using mass transit all the time. I think that is totally unrealistic. But when it can be convenient for you, try it out.

I doubt many people will trade in their car for the LR or a bus or even a subway in Baltimore. That is not what people are arguing for, at least not me.

[jamie_hunt]

Originally Posted by PeterSmith

I think this is where we may be ships passing in the night. I think you’re viewing the situation as mass transit being introduced into our current lifestyle. ...

Not really. A lot of oldsters spent a lot of time on mass transit when they were younger. Most just don't want to deal with it anymore.

These are the people with memories of the "Better Take a Cab" days.

And, really, the MTA isn't much better and the prospects of it getting better -- given the bureaucracy and rules and so on -- are not great.

And, I kin tells ya -- living in an apt. complex with a lot of old folks -- their kids either drive them or hire someone to do it.

[scando]

Originally Posted by Clipper123

Cars give people flexibility.


Cars give people flexibility. So does transit. Transit gives people the flexibility to work or play on smart devices en route, flexibility to arrive at your destination without parking, the flexibility to not drive in traffic, the flexibility to get places when you are age 90 or age 15.
As for performing multiple errands, that is what transit oriented development is all about. Accomplishing more right around key transit nodes without having to do multiple separate trips.
As for kids, that is a great reason for transit. I desperately want an efficient transit system so I don’t have to cart my kid everywhere. Statistically speaking, he is safer on transit than in a car as an earlier poster noted the 32788 traffic fatalities in 2010.
Cars add a certain type of flexibility, but they do not have the flexibility market cornered.

All true, but Baltimore (speaking regionally) is just so decentralized, that transit will never realistically carry much more than a sizable minority of people. I ride the light rail to work, mainly because, by dumb luck, I live and work within a couple blocks of it and it's cheaper than parking. If I changed jobs to central Towson or Parkville or Charles Village or Locust Point or the vast majority of other destinations around town, riding the train would be a burden and not an asset.

Unfortunately cars and cheap gas built this decentralized ecosystem where it's fairly easy to go anywhere and people can bear the cost of the steel beasts. I can only see transit conquering around here in our lifetimes if we somehow get about 25 billion to spend right now and start digging tomorrow. In addition, high milage vehicles have to be a failure and gas has to go up to about $6 per gallon. Then we will get out of the cars.

[kacross]

http://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore...ion-paves.html

The developers of the proposed 25th Street Station project in Remington say the project is looking to move forward with “construction and completion.”
The Court of Special Appeals in Annapolis dismissed a pair of lawsuits challenging the development of 25th Street Station on Feb. 1. Jon Laria, the attorney for the project’s developer, Rick Walker of WV Urban Development, said his client is now ready to build the 329,000-square-foot retail project along Maryland avenue.

“We are gratified by the Court’s decision to affirm these dismissals, and by its strong language in doing so,” Laria said. “The court’s quick action confirms and validates our view that these appeals were frivolous and groundless from the start.”

Laria said the appeals cost the developer “precious time and money.”
The project, which will also include 70 apartments, will be anchored by a Walmart (NYSE: WMT). It was originally also going to have a Lowe’s as one of its tenants, but the hardware store pulled out of the project in October.
Laria said the 25th Station project will move forward without Lowe’s (NYSE: LOW).

“25th Street Station is a huge investment in Baltimore and in an important city neighborhood, and the court’s decision removes a major impediment to moving it forward,” Laria said. “We are particularly grateful to our community partners who stood by us through the litigation, and to the City which worked with us to get these appeals dismissed. We hope the appellants will finally acknowledge how much the project benefits the community, and will now support its construction and completion.”

[PeterSmith]

Originally Posted by jamie_hunt

Not really. A lot of oldsters spent a lot of time on mass transit when they were younger. Most just don't want to deal with it anymore.

These are the people with memories of the "Better Take a Cab" days.

And, really, the MTA isn't much better and the prospects of it getting better -- given the bureaucracy and rules and so on -- are not great.

And, I kin tells ya -- living in an apt. complex with a lot of old folks -- their kids either drive them or hire someone to do it.

I guess the real questions are (1) will self-driving cars get here before the boomers get senile? and (2) will they be accepting of self-driving cars or will they reject them like old people tend to do with new technology?

If the self-driving cars do not get here soon, we have in no small way set ourselves up in communities that are unsuitable for a vast segment of our population.

[Gsol]

Originally Posted by scando

All true, but Baltimore (speaking regionally) is just so decentralized, that transit will never realistically carry much more than a sizable minority of people. I ride the light rail to work, mainly because, by dumb luck, I live and work within a couple blocks of it and it's cheaper than parking. If I changed jobs to central Towson or Parkville or Charles Village or Locust Point or the vast majority of other destinations around town, riding the train would be a burden and not an asset.

Unfortunately cars and cheap gas built this decentralized ecosystem where it's fairly easy to go anywhere and people can bear the cost of the steel beasts. I can only see transit conquering around here in our lifetimes if we somehow get about 25 billion to spend right now and start digging tomorrow. In addition, high milage vehicles have to be a failure and gas has to go up to about $6 per gallon. Then we will get out of the cars.

If Baltimore built a btter transit network like DC, businesses would start to locate more conveniently to transit. In DC businesses and other activities pride themselves, even sell themselves as being located near transit. It's sort of, you build it, they will come. Look how DC changed from a dying city to a more prosporous town, with population growth rather than loss. look at how neoborhoods are developing near transit lines. I think cities that rely solely on cars are going to die.

[Hood]

Originally Posted by jamie_hunt

Who supplanted us as most powerful? Why does it matter, anyway?

Cars give people flexibility. College grads are being told now that they should expect to have something like nine careers (and multiple jobs within those careers) in their lives.

No way could mass transit ever support that level of job flexiblity.

And, again, if you don't have kids, or elderly parents, or any sort of medical problem that requires regular treatment by specialists, or a job that requires you to be anywhere but one location all day, every day, etc. etc. etc. ...

... then, sure, a car-free lifestyle would be great.

And, again (again): I like mass transit and use it regularly. But (a) it's run by people who for the most part are indifferent to the needs of the customer and (b) if one were contemplating building a transit system, Baltimore would be a prime example of how NOT to go about it.

Better Take a Cab.

The debate over public investment in public goods is great. I love it. In one corner we have the investment in the road system, the cost of licensing, policing and regulating drivers, the cost of pollution, loss of human live in accidents, insurance costs, traffic and loss of natural habitat. The benefits: the convenience, the freedom from a schedule, the ability to choose from more places where you want to live, work and shop etc.

In the other side, public transportation – inconvenient, fewer choices in where you can live work and shop, impact of adjacent property owners, is having to be around other people whom you may not want to be around for whatever reason.

I am not for public transportation because it’s better than a car. I am for better land use, and the government stop facilitating the wasteful way we have been settling our country. The same can be said for water and sewer, schools, police forces etc. Spread out develpooment costs much more than dense development on so many levels. But if someone wants to live up in the exurbs and drive to downtown in their Tahoe, the awesome, that is great, but pay the true value to support your lifestyle choice. Nice summary on the problem.

http://www.strongtowns.org/the-growth-ponzi-scheme/

Mass transit does not pretend to outdo the car in what a car is great at. It facilitates living in densely populated areas. But until the true cost of living over the border in PA and driving down 83 is absorbed by the household that chooses to live that way, land use patterns won’t change because people respond to economics, that’s it. It’s the same reason we buy goods from China. If you asked any of the forum members if we like the fact that our toys are made by 12 year olds working all hours of the day and never getting to live the lives our kids do, I would be willing to bet that the answer would be of course not. But how can we resist that low low price tag? We can’t, and that is the same problem with land use patterns in our country. So once that starts to change, and O’Malley’s gas tax is one way that it is starting to get some momentum, ban on septic tanks, the plan Maryland master plan, people will start to respond economically to choose to eliminate costs in their lives that they don’t feel are vital. And it’s my believe in this change in the country that makes me so bullish on Baltimore.

[jamie_hunt]

Originally Posted by Mirage52

... I doubt many people will trade in their car for the LR or a bus or even a subway in Baltimore. That is not what people are arguing for, at least not me.

Hmmm. I thought that's what was being argued for.

At any rate, mass transit should be tailored to those for whom it makes the most sense.

Re-routing the 11 from Towson to Canton was, in fairness to the MTA, a good first (baby) step.

If we could dial back the planning a few years, a strong argument could've been made for pursing a subway system -- as the backbone of a regional transit system -- that links all the area's colleges and research parks, since those places are major blue- and white-collar employment centers.

And they're growing.

And, with all the dorms etc., they're naturally-occurring TODs.

And the neighborhoods around them are perking up.

Students, faculty, staff (white and blue-collar) ... these are natural mass transit constituencies. And with more and more schools sharing programs, the links would be ideal.

Even now, the Red Line could (and should) be reconceived as a heavy rail link heading out to UMBC on the RR ROW (instead of SS, where employment is steadily declining) and extending from Hopkins Hospital to Hopkins Bayview, again largely using a RR ROW.

And using the existing tunnel through downtown.

The Yellow Line should connect the harbor and Charles Center station to Peabody, UB/MICA, Hopkins (spur to Morgan and, eventually, White Marsh), Loyola, ND, Towson and possibly Goucher, with some sort of garage out that way to suck people off the Beltway.

Start talking about system that moves people quickly, that's reliable, that's appealing to commuters who'd otherwise take the car all the way into town, and more people will sign on.

WANNA HELP THE CBD? MAKE THE CHARLES CENTER STATION THE REGIONAL HUB IS WAS CONCEIVED AS AND BUILT TO BE.

Sorry for the ALL CAPS. Gonna go for a run now.

[Eerik]

Originally Posted by 30 Floors Up

Then I suppose government should keep its nose out of the road business too. Lets level the playing field. No more Intercounty Connectors. No more widening of existing roads. Then, let the people decide when every major road becomes a parking lot 24/7.

The fact is the car is so popular because government made it that way by providing cheap gas and building free infrastructure.

Before government became involved in the road business, mass transit was the predominate mode of transportation and MOST MASS TRANSIT IN THE COUNTRY WAS RUN BY PRIVATE INDUSTRY. Remember the privately owned Baltimore Transit Company which ran the street car system here? Government killed that when the citizens used all the subsidized gas and free infrastructure instead of the streetcars. Furthermore, the large increase of cars on city streets clogged the streetcar rails so much that the level of mass transit service actually went down.

In the spirit of debate, I say this. All the republican free market capitalists here should be on mass transit's side because it was once, and could be again, privately run. Oh, but I forgot. That would effect YOUR entitlement and everyone knows that your own personal entitlement isn't an entitlement at all. That word should just be reserved for welfare mothers and programs for the poor!

Let the people decide if they want or need mass transit in Baltimore; leave biased policy decisions out of the process. Last time I checked, we're still a federation; a constitutional republic and representative democracy where majority rules.

As to the government providing cheap gas and free infrastructure? No such thing. We pay taxes on the federal, state and local level. This is the major sticking point between those who want these systems and those who tend to be more cautious: there is no such thing as free anything from government; somebody has to pay for it. It's our taxes, our collective money.

I have no opposition to government enabling a mass transit system to be constructed, but I do object to government making unfounded policy mandates, and especially if the cost far outweighs benefit. But again, if the people want it, sure why not.

Streetcars, as you point out, were run by businesses and existed first and foremost to make money. Be it the Baltimore City Passenger Railway, Baltimore Traction Company, Baltimore & Hall's Springs Railway, et al. to the eventual consolidation into the United Railways and Electric Company and then the Baltimore Transit Company they all started out as private endeavors and all were taxed on profit.

But as with all companies, profit is important and over time the Baltimore Transit Company along with many similar systems across the country went bankrupt -- and well before the often mis-cited attempt of National City Lines -- which came onto the scene some forty to fifty years later.
As to the automobile -- to dismiss it as part of the evolutionary process in transportation would be equally crazy. At the time it offered an innovative means of getting around. It served its purpose. While I too would argue the automobile helped erode communities, and would question exactly what kind of "progress" did the automobile bring us, it was part of the evolutionary cycle: people wanted it and were willing to pay for it.

Sure, today we have greater congestion spread over a larger area, higher fuel prices, etc. But getting around in an automobile is still relatively convenient and the associated cost still fairly low. Until we see costs increase, I just don't see the public motivated to demand change. Even if you account for inflation, it's still relatively cheap to move by car, be it drive to work or transport the goods we consume. Inflation overall is very low.

While one might want to dismiss the economic model, you have to admit it was amazing to see the cost of fuel decrease there for a couple of years as consumption fell due to the economy. How can you downplay the market?

So for now, I would beg to differ that currently we need an expensive transit system in the Baltimore area (and the nation as a whole). Until the costs to move people and goods increase significantly, people will prefer their cars.

If you really want to be "dernier cri" with the green movement/low carbon footprint movement, then I suggest folks ride a bike, walk or take the bus. While we do not have the original streetcars in service to use, our current coverage in mileage by bus far exceeds the original coverage by streetcar.

[KLynch]

Originally Posted by kacross

http://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore...ion-paves.html

So basically in a 10 day window we've seen big news or progress at

-25th Street Station
-Super Block
-Harbor Point
-Marketplace at Fells Point

Pretty good things going on, If Wesport, the Casino, Gateway at Washington Hill, and Canton Crossing get going.... could be a pretty awesome year.

[jamie_hunt]

Originally Posted by Hood

... ban on septic tanks ...

Off topic, but the septic tank on me former residence -- like most tanks these days -- was made of thick, non-leaking concrete and the leach field next to it worked as it was supposed to.

Meanwhile, the city sewerage system leaks hundreds of thousands of gallons of untreated sewerage into the streams every year.

As our mate in the high rise is wont to aver: just sayin'

[LtBk]

Originally Posted by jamie_hunt

London has great mass transit, but 1 -6 in my list applies to it as well.

London itself is on whole different scale, like several levels above Baltimore when it comes to transit.

[Eerik]

Originally Posted by jamie_hunt

London has great mass transit, but 1 -6 in my list applies to it as well.

I'd even say #8 from your list also applies. While a system that does its job, there are some really bizzare connections within their system: strange dark and narrow tunnels, old winding staircases, etc.

I say it lends character to their system, but as you know, it's not just their autos that drive on the "wrong side" of the motorway, but also their subway cars.