Jump to content
NewOrioleWork

The Official Transit and Urban Development Thread

Recommended Posts

My point is that I think the suggestion that the city big-wigs issue some requirement that it be on at least 2 bus lines won't make much difference. To me, that would be a perfect example of dumb bureaucracy. Whether it should make a difference or not is really beside the point. Because it won't. Because most of the people you wanna get using mass transit just won't ride busses.

I agree the city's probably hosed about mass transit, but I don't see what they can do about it. Subways cost too much. The only reason DC got a good one is because Congress paid for it, and they're not gonna pay for Baltimore to get one unless there's a dramatically different national attitude about mass transit, the federal gov't, etc. Without that, I think the only possible prayer the city has is light rail, and I don't know what those choices might be. I don't know how much old RR R-O-W is left sitting around. If they can't make light rail work, I don't think there's anything they can do, really. I just don't believe bus lines are gonna do it, nomatter how anybody tries to sell it. I think there's zero chance of that working.

The money is there, it's just a question of what the region's priorities are. I don't have time to get into it right now, but right now, decisions are being made about large capital investments over the next 30 years. The region's leaders have formulated their priorities, and guess what? They want to spend nearly three times as much on new highways as on new transit projects. In BALTIMORE. In a region that supposedly believes in "Smart Growth".

Read this for more information. http://www.baltometro.org/content/view/566/401

This region's priorities are just completely backwards. The money is scarce, for sure (and that's why 2009 can't get here soon enough, if you know what I'm saying - and I think you do!). But the money we do have is being wasted on new roads that will create more sprawl and more....gahhh. I give up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The money is there, it's just a question of what the region's priorities are.

Are you sure? Subway-kind of money? I thought subways involved way different kinds of money than just highways require. I thought subways were Moon Shot expensive. I thought you could build a road from here to Timbuktu for what just mile or three of subway cost. Am I wrong about this?

I know politico-planners are goofy about transportation. Jeez, I was in ATL for a long time, I know about building highways willy-nilly and making everything worse. But I thought subways required a much, much larger pile of dollars. I agree it's worth it when you look at the big picture, but I don't think it's an easy thing to do. If you can't get Congress (or, better yet, the Highway Trust Fund, ha-ha) to pay for it, I think it's about impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Detailed coverage of the ICC.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/traffic/bal-icc,0,1189772.storygallery?coll=bal_tab01_layout

It really was the baby of Ehrlich's administration. You couldn't go to MDOT headquaters in 2k6 and NOT hear about the ICC. GBBI was just a bump on the road by comparison.

Everytime I hear a suburbanite complain about their tax dollars going toward public transportation, I think of the ICC, and how my family and I will NEVER use that thing yet so much of our tax money goes toward it instead of the public transportation we use every single day. :002_ssad:

Is this right? I seem to remember the ICC being a big thing long before Ehrlich ever took office.

His baby was slots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know what I'm talking about here, but I don't think busses are gonna do it. The whole point of "mass transit" is getting the masses to transit. I think that, for the most part, only city-folk even think about riding a bus. I don't think folks from the burbs would do it. Trains, sure. But busses? I don't think so. Dunno why, not sure what it is, but I think there's lotsa people who'd ride trains that wouldn't catch a bus nomatter what. (Am I being stupid about this?)

What?! So you don't think Baltimore city residents being able to get to the major arena in their own city should be a priority?!

So you're basically saying screw me and all the other city people as long as it makes sense for the burbanites? Cause it really sounds like you're saying that.

I don't think you know what you're talking about. Baltimore's transit system isn't like NY or Boston or Chicago, where trains are the dominant and preferred mode. Baltimore simply doesn't have the train infrastructure or money to create the infrastructure necessary, hence the backbone of public transit in Baltimore is the BUS.

Unless you take a very select and limited route through specific corridors, its impossible to get around on transit in Bmore without using the bus. For many of us residents, if we can't get there by bus, we often don't get there at all.

Therefore, considering that at least 70% of all MTA buses have routes that run through downtown, and that LR and Metro stops are relatively ubiquitous in that area, requiring that a major arena be on public transportation so that city (and some county) residents may have access to it is quite practical, possible and fair. And simply considerate, both for city residents, county residents who also use public transport (yes, including buses), and for future development options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is this right? I seem to remember the ICC being a big thing long before Ehrlich ever took office.

His baby was slots.

Perhaps I misspoke. It might not have been his baby in the sense that he created the idea, initiated the legislation, etc.

But his administration was very much behind the ICC and considered it their main transportation priority--at least in the final couple of years of the administration--though they gave lip service to the GBBI bus changes whenever the opportunity arose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What?! So you don't think Baltimore city residents being able to get to the major arena in their own city should be a priority?!

So you're basically saying screw me and all the other city people as long as it makes sense for the burbanites? Cause it really sounds like you're saying that.

Well, you can relax because that's not what I'm saying at all...

I don't think you know what you're talking about. Baltimore's transit system isn't like NY or Boston or Chicago, where trains are the dominant and preferred mode. Baltimore simply doesn't have the train infrastructure or money to create the infrastructure necessary, hence the backbone of public transit in Baltimore is the BUS.

Unless you take a very select and limited route through specific corridors, its impossible to get around on transit in Bmore without using the bus. For many of us residents, if we can't get there by bus, we often don't get there at all.

Therefore, considering that at least 70% of all MTA buses have routes that run through downtown, and that LR and Metro stops are relatively ubiquitous in that area, requiring that a major arena be on public transportation so that city (and some county) residents may have access to it is quite practical, possible and fair. And simply considerate, both for city residents, county residents who also use public transport (yes, including buses), and for future development options.

I'm aware of the diff between mass transit it NYC and BOS vs. what they laughingly refer to as mass transit in Baltimore. I ain't saying you shouldn't have better bus service. I agree that better bus service would be helpful to people who rely on the existing mass transit system. I agree that putting major facilities on routes for the existing mass transit system would be considerate of current users of mass transit. I ain't disagreeing with any of that. I was talking about something else.

I was talking about the issue of building a big arena and using mass transit to help solve the problem of how you get a ton of people in and out of there in a hurry, in light of all the traffic mess that big crowds imply. I don't think putting in some requirement about 2 bus lines is gonna make a dent in that. Maybe a very tiny dent, but not one that you could notice in terms of the traffic mess. The main problem with moving lots of people in and out in a hurry is about getting people out of their cars and into mass transit. And bus lines ain't gonna do that. They just aren't. Sure, it would be nice for meeting the needs of people who already use busses, but that ain't the main problem with big crowds going to big arenas.

This is just a micro example of the generic mass transit problem. To do it right, you gotta spend a fortune on some kind of rail. Because if you don't, you're not gonna get people to stop clogging everything up with their cars. Their not gonna make the huge investment just to serve existing bus users. They didn't build the DC subway to give better service to the folks who were already using the pre-subway DC mass transit system. They did it to get people who were *not* using mass transit to use it. They did it to get people to not use their cars. Busses ain't gonna do that. That's all I was trying to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, you can relax because that's not what I'm saying at all...

I'm aware of the diff between mass transit it NYC and BOS vs. what they laughingly refer to as mass transit in Baltimore. I ain't saying you shouldn't have better bus service. I agree that better bus service would be helpful to people who rely on the existing mass transit system. I agree that putting major facilities on routes for the existing mass transit system would be considerate of current users of mass transit. I ain't disagreeing with any of that. I was talking about something else.

I was talking about the issue of building a big arena and using mass transit to help solve the problem of how you get a ton of people in and out of there in a hurry, in light of all the traffic mess that big crowds imply. I don't think putting in some requirement about 2 bus lines is gonna make a dent in that. Maybe a very tiny dent, but not one that you could notice in terms of the traffic mess. The main problem with moving lots of people in and out in a hurry is about getting people out of their cars and into mass transit. And bus lines ain't gonna do that. They just aren't. Sure, it would be nice for meeting the needs of people who already use busses, but that ain't the main problem with big crowds going to big arenas.

This is just a micro example of the generic mass transit problem. To do it right, you gotta spend a fortune on some kind of rail. Because if you don't, you're not gonna get people to stop clogging everything up with their cars. Their not gonna make the huge investment just to serve existing bus users. They didn't build the DC subway to give better service to the folks who were already using the pre-subway DC mass transit system. They did it to get people who were *not* using mass transit to use it. They did it to get people to not use their cars. Busses ain't gonna do that. That's all I was trying to say.

Rollie is right, in that you aren't saying much.

I mean, yeah, IF we had a million, trillion bucks then sure, we could build various rail infrastructure across the city and finally solve Bmore's transit problem within a decade.

But we don't. We have to use what we have. We have buses. And while buses may not be as efficient for moving people as rail is, I disagree with your premise that having an arena near multiple bus lines (and, as I mentioned, preferably with near subway, LR, MARC, etc. access, all of which is quite possible and reasonable when building downtown) won't have an effect on congestion and traffic. Its not the cureall for THAT particular issue we might like, but its a lot better then doing nothing and building it somewhere out the way where absolutely EVERYONE going there--from patrons to vendors to press--will have to go by car or bust.

Also, the bus rule is to help ensure that Baltimore natives have public transit access to one of the most important entertainment buildings in their city. Do you not understand this? In Baltimore, primary transit = buses. Build off the buses and you SCREW over Baltimore people like me, my friends and my family. That's actually my primary concern, and for that alone I think hooking up the arena to the current transit infrastructure is very much worth the effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dan Rodricks thinks we should go "big league": http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bal-md.rodricks15nov15,0,1696021.column

I often disagree with him, but I agree on this point.

Great article, and thanks for posting it (I didn't catch it when I checked baltimoresun.com this morning).

He's right. A city the size of Baltimore, when making decisions that will last for decades, should NEVER close off options that are realistic. Getting a new major league team (maybe not even NBA or NHL, but a new league in one of those, or a new sport altogether) is a realistic option, let alone the other things mentioned like college tournaments, political conventions, international events (*cough*Olympics*cough* ;)), etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great article, and thanks for posting it (I didn't catch it when I checked baltimoresun.com this morning).

He's right. A city the size of Baltimore, when making decisions that will last for decades, should NEVER close off options that are realistic. Getting a new major league team (maybe not even NBA or NHL, but a new league in one of those, or a new sport altogether) is a realistic option, let alone the other things mentioned like college tournaments, political conventions, international events (*cough*Olympics*cough* ;)), etc.

The Olympics are a pipe dream and frankly, we shouldn't want to host them anyway. They're generally a huge waste of money. We just do not have the infrastructure in place to handle it.

We should definitely be trying to put ourselves in the mix for things like NCAA basketball first and second rounds, conventions, arena football, the biggest arena concerts, and events of that nature. And if we do a good enough job on it, NBA is not out of the picture. I can't see the NHL in Baltimore, but that's not to say that couldn't happen either. The NHL has shocked me before (really, Phoenix?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Olympics are a pipe dream and frankly, we shouldn't want to host them anyway. They're generally a huge waste of money. We just do not have the infrastructure in place to handle it.

We should definitely be trying to put ourselves in the mix for things like NCAA basketball first and second rounds, conventions, arena football, the biggest arena concerts, and events of that nature. And if we do a good enough job on it, NBA is not out of the picture. I can't see the NHL in Baltimore, but that's not to say that couldn't happen either. The NHL has shocked me before (really, Phoenix?).

C'mon, Phoenix is your example before Nashville and Columbus? :P

I think the goal should be NBA (major basketball city) and AHL/IHL, with arena football, although we already have that (at least temporarily :P).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
C'mon, Phoenix is your example before Nashville and Columbus? :P

I think the goal should be NBA (major basketball city) and AHL/IHL, with arena football, although we already have that (at least temporarily :P).

I picked Phoenix just because it's hot, it's sprawled out, it's full of old people, and I think it has more cars than humans.

And honestly, I forgot about Nashville and Columbus. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rollie is right, in that you aren't saying much.

I mean, yeah, IF we had a million, trillion bucks then sure, we could build various rail infrastructure across the city and finally solve Bmore's transit problem within a decade.

But we don't. We have to use what we have. We have buses. And while buses may not be as efficient for moving people as rail is, I disagree with your premise that having an arena near multiple bus lines (and, as I mentioned, preferably with near subway, LR, MARC, etc. access, all of which is quite possible and reasonable when building downtown) won't have an effect on congestion and traffic. Its not the cureall for THAT particular issue we might like, but its a lot better then doing nothing and building it somewhere out the way where absolutely EVERYONE going there--from patrons to vendors to press--will have to go by car or bust.

Also, the bus rule is to help ensure that Baltimore natives have public transit access to one of the most important entertainment buildings in their city. Do you not understand this? In Baltimore, primary transit = buses. Build off the buses and you SCREW over Baltimore people like me, my friends and my family. That's actually my primary concern, and for that alone I think hooking up the arena to the current transit infrastructure is very much worth the effort.

Again, we're just talking about different stuff. You're talking about what is good for regular people who use buses. I don't disagree with a single thing you said. I'm just saying that I don't think anybody makes huge investments to address the things you said. Maybe they should, but I don't think they really do. I don't think they will. I ain't saying that's "right", I'm just saying that AFAIK that's how it works, that's all. I'm not defending it.

I'm talking about something else: the challenge of getting people out of their cars so they don't clog up the whole place with them. I'm not so sure that buses are less efficient than trains. They might be more efficient. The only reason why I think trains/subways is such a big deal is because that's what it seems to take to get people out of their cars. Whether it's more-or-less efficient than buses is secondary. Everything is more efficient than everybody using his or her own car. (Except, time-wise to the individual who's standing there waiting for "rapid transit". They call subways "rapid transit", but there's nothing rapid about standing on the platform waiting 20 minutes for the next train.)

All I'm saying is that any honest-to-God solution to reduce cars is gonna be based on something that's not-buses, that's all. And it's gonna take a zillion dollars. AFAIK, it costs so much to do that that there's no way the city can do it. I think it takes the feds, just because of the huge scope of expense. Arguing for buses might make sense, in terms of the best available option in a world that's fair and just. But I just don't believe anybody's gonna do much about that, just because it won't get people who use cars to get out of their cars. I ain't saying it's right. I ain't saying it's fair and just. I'm not defending it. I think that's just how it happens (or doesn't).

I think one way to understand it is that planners are (or should be) mainly worried about getting people out of their cars. I don't know if it's their job to worry about treating existing transit users fairly in the existing system, I think they're focused on future systems. But I could be wrong, I'm not a planner. If you want fairness, my hunch is that the only place you have even a prayer of getting that is from politicians. Politicians might not be the best bunch in the world, but who else is gonna be responsive to what normal people think is fair? Nobody. I might be completely wrong about this, but my guess is that politicians might get you more buses, but I don't think planners will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This argument is a little silly, honestly.

All of these sites have decent bus access AFAIK except for the Canton, Port Covington, Westport, and Gateway South sites. The latter two will have bus access as soon as those areas are actually built. There's no development at all there right now. When they build something, buses will go there. And they aren't that far from Camden Yards anyway.

Canton and Port Covington, as I already said, should not even be considered for this arena. They are not easily reached by bus and they are not even remotely close to the metro or light rail, nor will they be any time soon (except that Canton will get hooked up with the red line when it's actually built in, oh, I don't know, 2123 :rolleyes: ).

You're both right. NewOrioleWork is right that you have to plan with the transit you have in mind. That's just reality. Rshack is right that you have to plan for your future transit as well, and that the goal in everything we do has to be to get cars off the streets.

As for rail being too costly, which both of you have said, it's time for this city and state to man up and deal with it. We spend so much money on so much useless crap, and we're sitting around waiting to build an actual transit system because it's expensive. Meanwhile it gets more expensive by the day and the traffic gets worse and worse.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, we're just talking about different stuff. You're talking about what is good for regular people who use buses. I don't disagree with a single thing you said. I'm just saying that I don't think anybody makes huge investments to address the things you said. Maybe they should, but I don't think they really do. I don't think they will. I ain't saying that's "right", I'm just saying that AFAIK that's how it works, that's all. I'm not defending it.

I'm talking about something else: the challenge of getting people out of their cars so they don't clog up the whole place with them. I'm not so sure that buses are less efficient than trains. They might be more efficient. The only reason why I think trains/subways is such a big deal is because that's what it seems to take to get people out of their cars. Whether it's more-or-less efficient than buses is secondary. Everything is more efficient than everybody using his or her own car. (Except, time-wise to the individual who's standing there waiting for "rapid transit". They call subways "rapid transit", but there's nothing rapid about standing on the platform waiting 20 minutes for the next train.)

All I'm saying is that any honest-to-God solution to reduce cars is gonna be based on something that's not-buses, that's all. And it's gonna take a zillion dollars. AFAIK, it costs so much to do that that there's no way the city can do it. I think it takes the feds, just because of the huge scope of expense. Arguing for buses might make sense, in terms of the best available option in a world that's fair and just. But I just don't believe anybody's gonna do much about that, just because it won't get people who use cars to get out of their cars. I ain't saying it's right. I ain't saying it's fair and just. I'm not defending it. I think that's just how it happens (or doesn't).

I think one way to understand it is that planners are (or should be) mainly worried about getting people out of their cars. I don't know if it's their job to worry about treating existing transit users fairly in the existing system, I think they're focused on future systems. But I could be wrong, I'm not a planner. If you want fairness, my hunch is that the only place you have even a prayer of getting that is from politicians. Politicians might not be the best bunch in the world, but who else is gonna be responsive to what normal people think is fair? Nobody. I might be completely wrong about this, but my guess is that politicians might get you more buses, but I don't think planners will.

Just make an announcement that unless the feds agree to pay for a full subway system in and around Baltimore, we will eliminate all road access and utility service to the Social Security Administration. All we have to do is squeeze...

(Why do I suddenly feel like banging my shoe on the table?)

I would assume that, still using some federal money, it could be possible to build new rail-based mass transit in the region. Throw some of the road-construction budget that way, make some other cuts, increase taxes on gas and vehicles that don't have certain mileage standards, toll the hell out of the harbor crossings, etc. Then, once it is all paid-for, reduce all of the taxes involved and let things work themselves out.

It is something that needs to happen yesterday, so the cost shouldn't be an issue. Just get it done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






×
×
  • Create New...