When will "native" Baltimoreans take responsibility for the death of this city? (Dundalk: how much, buy)

[MDguy99]

Originally Posted by End-User

But isn't that the whole point of city living as opposed to rural living? Having large populations of people that can easily move from one area to another?

Once the groundwork is laid in Baltimore, it will spead across the state. And, no, just because one happens to live in a city doesn't mean he wants to be around people 24/7. I like car commutes to work - city or otherwise. It is a nice time to mentally reflect without annoyances.

Also, some people do not want the character of their neighborhoods changed with a damn train plopped right in the middle of it. It's not right to people who purchased a piece of real estate purposely away from these types of things and then local government just decides to plop it in their neighborhood. Many more problems exist with the proposed lines.

[jonjj]

Originally Posted by MDguy99

Once the groundwork is laid in Baltimore, it will spead across the state. And, no, just because one happens to live in a city doesn't mean he wants to be around people 24/7. I like car commutes to work - city or otherwise. It is a nice time to mentally reflect without annoyances.

Also, some people do not want the character of their neighborhoods changed with a damn train plopped right in the middle of it. It's not right to people who purchased a piece of real estate purposely away from these types of things and then local government just decides to plop it in their neighborhood. Many more problems exist with the proposed lines.

You are one lucky guy. I get so annoyed in traffic it's unreal and choose to either walk to work or use transit. You are also assuming that your driving your car is not annoying to others. Guess what? It is. That train running near your home isn't anymore annoying than the cars whizzing by throwing out their McBags and blasting the tunes.

I wish I could somehow find EarthMother or God when I drive. Unfortunately, it's usually not either.

[MDguy99]

Originally Posted by jonjj

isn't anymore annoying than the cars whizzing by throwing out their McBags and blasting the tunes.

LOL - I don't know where you live, but that is not the way cars are unless you live on a main thoroughfare in the ghetto. Everyone uses vehicles for transportation where I live, and where I lived in the city - Not one street was ever as you describe - the closest would be some congestion on Merritt Boulevard and Eastern Avenue at rush hour.

My point is- people KNEW there would be cars passing their houses when they bought them because, obviously, a house is on a street. HOWEVER, no one expected a damn TRAIN to run through their neighborhood when they purchased their property. This is the point I am making when defending people who use the "not in my backyard" approach. It is valid.

[atariwhizkid]

Originally Posted by MDguy99

My point is- people KNEW there would be cars passing their houses when they bought them because, obviously, a house is on a street. HOWEVER, no one expected a damn TRAIN to run through their neighborhood when they purchased their property. This is the point I am making when defending people who use the "not in my backyard" approach. It is valid.

People who purchase property do so at their own risk. Buyers should not assume that their neighborhood won't change over time. That's ludicrous. If you buy land along a major thoroughfare, it is safe to assume that said thoroughfare could be altered over time -- the road could be widened, narrowed or even converted into a dual mode corridor.

It's just the way of things. The "not in my back yard" argument used by city dwellers is the worst kind because it indicates that they want a service (light rail, subway, etc.) but they aren't willing to make a sacrifice to get it.

[are you kidinme?]

Originally Posted by MDguy99

LOL - I don't know where you live, but that is not the way cars are unless you live on a main thoroughfare in the ghetto. Everyone uses vehicles for transportation where I live, and where I lived in the city - Not one street was ever as you describe - the closest would be some congestion on Merritt Boulevard and Eastern Avenue at rush hour.

My point is- people KNEW there would be cars passing their houses when they bought them because, obviously, a house is on a street. HOWEVER, no one expected a damn TRAIN to run through their neighborhood when they purchased their property. This is the point I am making when defending people who use the "not in my backyard" approach. It is valid.

I think you have to ask what is reasonable to expect. I agree MOST people who buy in a certain area don't have a reasonable expectation there will one day be a train running past their front door.

[MDguy99]

Originally Posted by atariwhizkid

People who purchase property do so at their own risk. Buyers should not assume that their neighborhood won't change over time. That's ludicrous. If you buy land along a major thoroughfare, it is safe to assume that said thoroughfare could be altered over time -- the road could be widened, narrowed or even converted into a dual mode corridor.

It's just the way of things. The "not in my back yard" argument used by city dwellers is the worst kind because it indicates that they want a service (light rail, subway, etc.) but they aren't willing to make a sacrifice to get it.

PLEASE! So you are telling me that someone who buys a home in the city for its urban setting should be fine if someone bulldozed the buildings across the street and laid a field of corn or if someone in Somerset County built their home in the woods for peace and quiet and someone decided to build a shopping center right next to them or tear down the woods for an industrial park? It is ridiculous to run a frikken high-speed train through someone's neighborhood above ground.

Originally Posted by are you kidinme?

I think you have to ask what is reasonable to expect. I agree MOST people who buy in a certain area don't have a reasonable expectation there will one day be a train running past their front door.

Agreed.

[atariwhizkid]

Originally Posted by MDguy99

PLEASE! So you are telling me that someone who buys a home in the city for its urban setting should be fine if someone bulldozed the buildings across the street and laid a field of corn or if someone in Somerset County built their home in the woods for peace and quiet and someone decided to build a shopping center right next to them or tear down the woods for an industrial park? It is ridiculous to run a frikken high-speed train through someone's neighborhood above ground.

It's not my problem whether people are "fine" or not with what happens on private property that they do not own. If the zoning permits it, then it's fair game. That's not really germane to this discussion anyway.

As for the train discussion: what are we talking about again? I thought we were generally considering urban transit, and light rail in particular. Obviously, there are real bureaucratic barriers to building a "frikken high-speed train through someone's neighborhood above ground." If we're talking about light rail, then we're talking about quiet and mostly slow moving modern streetcar-style transit system.

@are you kidin I'm not sure what should be defined as a reasonable expectation. Personally, I don't think that altering a roadway to include a light rail system is unreasonable. I think that a full size train, elevated heavy rail or some other noisy, large train system would be. Historically, Baltimore has already had light-rail-esque transportation in its former streetcar system. Is it unreasonable to think that another system like streetcars could be implemented in the future?

[14thandYou]

Originally Posted by MDguy99

I'm not a fan of public transit. I do not like to be around people every waking minute of my day. Sorry.

So don't take public transit. Even people who never set foot in a subway or bus benefit from those that do via less congestion on streets and roadways, denser developments surrounding transit centers, and so on.

Personally, I'm not a fan of intracity freeways, and yet they still exist.

[jonjj]

Let's get specific. The only reason this is an issue here is the proposed Red Line. And the only people criticizing it are some folks along Boston street in Canton. By the time that train gets at ground level, there isn't going to be any front door facing it. What are the real reasons you object MDguy99? And your comment about the wooded cabin in the county makes absolutely no sense. Just ask anyone who lived in the counties fifty or sixty years ago. Urban sprawl has demolished much of the peace and quiet and beauty that existed in the counties.

[MDguy99]

Originally Posted by atariwhizkid

It's not my problem whether people are "fine" or not with what happens on private property that they do not own. If the zoning permits it, then it's fair game. That's not really germane to this discussion anyway.

As for the train discussion: what are we talking about again? I thought we were generally considering urban transit, and light rail in particular. Obviously, there are real bureaucratic barriers to building a "frikken high-speed train through someone's neighborhood above ground." If we're talking about light rail, then we're talking about quiet and mostly slow moving modern streetcar-style transit system.

@are you kidin I'm not sure what should be defined as a reasonable expectation. Personally, I don't think that altering a roadway to include a light rail system is unreasonable. I think that a full size train, elevated heavy rail or some other noisy, large train system would be. Historically, Baltimore has already had light-rail-esque transportation in its former streetcar system. Is it unreasonable to think that another system like streetcars could be implemented in the future?

LOL! It has EVERYTHING to do with it- eminent domain is complete bull! Even if it is built on a public roadway (which obviously it would be)- it is still not right to those people living along that road who may have picked that particular location because they like how it is at present. That is just not fair and not right. Thank God Barbara Mikulski opposed the highway that was going to be built right through Fells Point! If that would have happened, we would not even be discussing a rail in Southeast Baltimore. I say, take a survey of those living along the road and see what they think. I will remain personally opposed to it, but that doesn't matter since I don't live along the proposed trail.

Originally Posted by jonjj

Let's get specific. The only reason this is an issue here is the proposed Red Line. And the only people criticizing it are some folks along Boston street in Canton. By the time that train gets at ground level, there isn't going to be any front door facing it. What are the real reasons you object MDguy99? And your comment about the wooded cabin in the county makes absolutely no sense. Just ask anyone who lived in the counties fifty or sixty years ago. Urban sprawl has demolished much of the peace and quiet and beauty that existed in the counties.

That is the real reason I object. There WILL be trains going past people's front doors. If there weren't I wouldn't care (except for my tax dollars going to it- but complaining about that is worthless). I wouldn't use it because I do not like mass transit, but I still wouldn't care if it were built. I am not one of those people bitching because it will "bring crime". If someone wants to perform a crime, they can get on the bus and get there just as easily. My comment makes plenty of sense. I feel for people who lived in the country and have had it turn into a suburb in their lifetime. I am against these kind of changes around people's neighborhoods and personal spaces and communities if we can avoid them. That is my point. What's yours?

Oh, and just because the rail isn't built doesn't mean there will be worse suburban sprawl- that is a myth! It will do nothing to help that. If it does get built... probably in 2025, come back to me so we can agree that barely anyone uses it and it didn't do a damn thing to curb suburban sprawl. Baltimore's suburban sprawl is extending into northern Harford and Howard counties now- this line wouldn't do a thing to quell Baltimore's sprawl.