Baltimore Transit: Prudent Pragmatism or Bait & Switch?

Recently it became public that MDOT is considering to scale the Red Line back from what was presented to the public as the preferred alternative, Light Rail and would consider either a phased approach with light trail first built on the west side with other phases deferred to later or change the mode from LRT to BRT, short for bus rapid transit. At this point these options are not yet an official position.

Governor Moore announcing the revival of the Red Line in 2023 
(Photo: Philipsen)

The online public debate  is hefty. Is this just a pragmatic step that is inevitable in light of the fact that there is no federal funding and that the cost estimate for a tunneled LRT as envisioned and funded in 2015 has since grown from $3bn to nearly 7bn? 

Or is switching to bus just another another step in the long line of underinvesting in transit in the Baltimore region or worse, a bait and switch by a Governor that should have known all along that the prospect of clawing the federal funds back after the ill conceived cancellation in 2015 was dim at best and who should never have promised its resurrection with the big words he used in West Baltimore on that memorable June 15, in 2023? 

 
It one thing to say that currently we can only afford a bus and we will enhance bus service on the Red Line corridor as a "proof of concept" now with the prospect to build later what we really now and it is another entirely, to say "sorry, your Red Line will now be just a bus". The former option keeps it open to build a really efficient east-west transit line later, especially if the proof of concept is successful, whereas the latter will close the door for a long time. People will say: "Redline? Yep, that's that bus! Let's no longer talk about it."

There are a few footnotes needed to give some more context:

• The proof of concept approach was what Republican Governor Ehrlich and his MDOT Secretary Flanagan did in a way when they introduced the Quickbus 40 which largely ran on the Red Line route but was never completed as envisioned and it was later abandoned. It came back as QuickLink 40 in 2023 and operates today. This is to say, improvements on this service would be easy to do by simply completing what was left off before, namely signal priority, designated bus lanes and improved stations. 
• BRT is a chameleon which operates under many colors. Everyone imagines something different. The concept came from Curitiba (Brazil) and Bogota (Columbia) where the mayors there decided that a fully expedited bus network would be much preferable than one or two expensive subway lines. Those systems were a huge success because they radically changed the way buses operate and look. They used double-articulated (longer) high capacity buses, that were boarded from platforms level with the bus. Riders pre-paid their fare and boarded through all doors. Some buses had doors on both sides so they can also serve center platforms. The buses ran exclusively on their own lanes which were taken away from cars and they have signal priority at all lights. There is no system in the US that has fully implemented all these functions, although some came close. However, the system became popular and has been adopted in Mexico City, in Istanbul and several other cities. 

Cleveland Health Line BRT with center platform and doors on both
sides of the bus (Photo: NACTO)

Transportation for America defines a world-class transit system as one that gets people where they need to go and is accessible, frequent, reliable, and convenient. T4A’s new report identifies 17 global cities that meet that standard. None of them are in the US. (Brian O'Malley, CMTA)

• Some transit experts believe that LRT and bus technology converge in a product that ultimately may look and operate almost indistinguishably. This could be so because both could be battery powered (eliminating the overhead wires), both could use long, multi-articulated low floor bodies similar to the most modern subways and both would be automated and able to run on tight right of ways, i.e. a guided bus with rubber wheels on a smoothly paved lane could run almost as if on tracks. (Todays buses need more maneuvering space than track guided trains). Those vehicles are already in service in some cities in China. 

Rubber tire bus/train in Zhuzhou, China (Interesting Engineering)

This sounds like so much transit geek stuff, but these points make clear why it is hard to imagine a true BRT in Baltimore that is supposed to be cheaper than LRT. Fully designated lanes are pretty much fiction in downtown where parking, deliveries  and right turns compete and interfere with those lanes. Baltimore's blocks are fairly short, longer trains on the surface would interfere significantly with pedestrian, bike and vehicular traffic which is why the original Red Line design chose tunnels for downtown and Fells Point. Running buses in the center is pretty much out for many segments. And as bus riders know, running on curb lanes in Baltimore as today is a bumpy journey in no way as smooth as light rail. 

What about phasing?

Not having the money for an end to end light rail system (so far the officially preferred mode) it makes great sense to phase the system. As Governor Schaefer ("do it now") knew, once you start, you create facts. The original light rail was built in phases and Schaefer also managed to build without federal funds using only State and local funds. Initially he used federal funds only to buy the vehicles, a clever trick that worked beautifully. The idea of building the Red Line from Security Square Mall (destined to be redeveloped as a mixed use TOD) to a preliminary terminus at the redesigned West Baltimore  MARC station using State funds has appeal and would be proof  that Baltimore is serious about serious transit. 

It is widely understood that underperforming public transportation is holding the Baltimore region back economically and socially.

An ambitious, sustained investment in transit by 2050 would improve Maryland’s economy, health, and environment. (Brian O'Malley, CMTA)

 Not that the region doesn't have a pretty robust fleet with some 700 buses, 100 commuter buses, 149 Commuter rail coaches, 40 subway cars (currently being replaced with new ones) and some 20 functional light rail vehicles. But the service area is large, fairly dense and full of congestion; the fleet size too small to maintain a reliable schedule in adverse conditions. The MTA is a political football and the Maryland transportation trust fund also funds all the other transportation modes plus, has to contribute heavily to transit in the DC area. It is time to end the wallflower status and instead of aiming for the lowest common denominator we should do something bold for transit. 

Klaus Philipsen, FAIA

See also this commentary in Maryland Matters