ONE BENEFIT of the $1.7 billion budget deficit in Maryland is that it has forced Gov. Bob Ehrlich to slash state budgets and eliminate wasteful and inefficient projects. The proposed Baltimore to Washington “magnetic levitation train” would be a good place to start. Maryland is currently competing with Pittsburgh for a $950 million federal grant to build the nation’s first MagLev train. A decision from the Federal Railroad Administration is expected in the fall. If chosen, cash-strapped Maryland will be expected to throw in $475 million for the construction costs, with the first bills due next year.
The prospect of MagLev is alluring for its novelty and its potential to closely link Baltimore and Washington. The 200-mph train would carry passengers from one city to the other in just 18 minutes, with one stop at the BWI Airport along the way. The trip sounds unbeatable. (Normally the commute takes about 75 minutes driving, 50 minutes on the commuter train, or 35 minutes on Amtrak.) But when you look at the details, MagLev becomes much less appealing.
Amtrak offers $28 roundtrip tickets between Baltimore and Washington and the MARC commuter train roundtrips are just $10.25. The MagLev would cost $48.
How many people would pony up nearly $50 per commute? The Maryland Transit Administration estimates 30,000 to 33,000 people every day. To determine these figures, MTA photographed cars traveling on I-95 between Baltimore and Washington. Then they surveyed drivers who lived within a few miles of each town’s train station and asked them how much they’d be willing to pay for a super-fast train that would get them out of traffic. According to the Baltimore Sun, the consultants working for the administration that came up with the figures say they “used proven techniques to determine the total number of trips made between the two cities, the likelihood those travelers would use the train, and their proximity to the train station.”
Transportation expert Wendell Cox sees a number of reasons to doubt these figures. First, he says, the consultants are not describing the actual trip. For example, someone who lives in Guilford, Roland Park, or Homeland, three upscale Baltimore neighborhoods about four miles from downtown, and wishes to use MagLev to go to Washington, would still have to drive 20 minutes to Camden Station, walk through security (a 200 mph train that crosses state lines will likely have airport-level security), take the MagLev to Union Station, and then spend another 15 to 20 using taxis or mass transit to get to their destination. In other words, the trip from Baltimore to Washington would still take well over an hour.
“This method is dishonest,” Cox says. “This train is only a better option for people who live right at Camden and Union Stations.”
In Baltimore most of the area around Camden Station consists of bars and restaurants, bordered by the harbor. The closest residential neighborhoods, Federal Hill and West Baltimore, are farther away than the quarter mile most people are willing to walk to a transit stop.
But ease-of-ride issues aside, the numbers don’t add up. According to the 2000 census, only 3,038 people a day commute from Baltimore City to Washington; only 3,700 come from Baltimore County; and only 1,500 come from Anne Arundel County (near the airport). And a mere 830 people commute from D.C. to Baltimore. (These numbers include people using all forms of transportation.)
So why is there so much traffic on the highways between the two cities? Most of the traffic on the Baltimore/Washington Parkway and I-95 is from cars going to jobs in suburban Maryland, just outside of the District. Since the 1950s the country has been suburbanizing–only 10 percent of the nation’s employment remains in downtown areas–and jobs in the suburbs are spread too thin to be serviced by rail transit.
An article in the Baltimore Sun describing the MagLev suggests that “plenty of [people] . . . would use the MagLev: tourists who would take a day out of their Washington trips to visit Baltimore, travelers getting to the airport, commuters who live in one city, and work in another, and professionals whose jobs require shuttling between the two cities.”
While the MagLev will probably garner riders from all of these categories–the Sun quotes a CEO and a lawyer who say they’d ride it all the time–it’s unlikely the high-speed train would find enough tourists, well-heeled professionals, and people going to the airport to make even minimum ridership projections. “A few curious people would ride the MagLev,” Cox says, “but I’d be surprised if it gets 5,000 a day; shocked if it gets 10,000.”
It wouldn’t be the first high-speed line to miss the mark. The original estimates for the London-to-Paris EuroStar projected at least 15 million riders yearly. In 2001, only 9 million people got onboard.
Aside from the lack of potential ridership, another problem for MagLev is the costs of building it. Estimates for transit projects “tend to be low,” says transportation consultant Alan Pisarski. Often, after transit projects are commissioned, the costs double or triple. And then there are the maintenance and operating costs, which bite taxpayers year after year, regardless of how low ridership is. Maryland should cut loose of the MagLev now; let Pittsburgh have the headache.
Rachel DiCarlo is an editorial assistant at the Weekly Standard.
