The mayor said the surface Red Line plan is part of a larger community development effort that would reroute much of the commuter traffic that now uses U.S. 40. By narrowing the avenue and slowing traffic, city officials hope to move many of the commuters onto the Red Line as transit riders or onto the Beltway and Interstate 395 as drivers.
"What we want to do is bring back Edmondson Avenue into a neighborhood that's greener," said Dixon, who lives in Hunting Ridge. "My house is three doors off Edmondson. I believe it's going to enhance my community."
Many residents of West Baltimore, as well as some in East Baltimore, favor an alternative that would have put the light rail line underground for much of its 14.6-mile length, including stretches along Boston Street and Edmondson Avenue.
But MTA officials said months ago that studies showed that those alternatives, because of their extensive tunneling, would almost certainly be too costly to win approval under federal cost-benefit standards.
Angela Bethea-Spearman, president of the Uplands Community Association, testified in favor of the maximum-tunnel option during public hearings last month. But she said she's been warming up to the 4C plan "with modifications" since the adoption of a Red Line "community compact" specifying how the city and the MTA would work with residents.
"There must be some community benefits and there must be some assurances, and they have to be documented," said Bethea-Spearman, who also heads the Southwest Development Committee.
Bus rapid transit, dedicated bus lanes with various levels of tunneling, is an alternative that is on the table, but recent public hearings revealed little support for it. Aides said Smith and Dixon prefer light rail because it offers a greater sense of permanence that would better encourage transit-oriented development along the route.
"There's enough challenge in getting people to turn to mass transit, and buses are not exactly the most attractive modes of transportation in the minds of many people," Smith said.
Some transit advocates, dissatisfied with the relatively slow speeds of light rail, continue to hold out hope for a heavy-rail alternative similar to the Metro. They contend that the MTA has rejected that alternative without giving it sufficient consideration.
