Silver Line to Mattapan dead?
mbsbusguy
community the Silver Line from Mattapan to Ruggles is dead.
What is interesting, is that when the announced the new line in May,
money hadn't been allocated by the Federal
Government for the new route and worse the MBTA was competing for the
money with other communities.
Did the Massachusetts political types figure by announcing the project
the money would flow here? This
Governor has such little regard for people that he expected both the
community and the Federal Government
to fall into line.
D. Kirkpatrick
<eaa62bc4-159a-425c...@f16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
mbsbusguy <bus...@aol.com> wrote:
Various citizen groups have been against this from the start due to a
wide number of reasons.
These include the blockage of the involved streets with a
center-of-the-road bus lane with inadequate crossings, the inability
to cross the street as you can now to access businesses, the
construction that will exacerbate air quality in neighborhoods that
already have the highest per capita instance of lung disease
(including asthma). The list goes on.
I also don't think all city agencies were on board, among them the
fire depst and EMS who were also concerned about a lack of openings in
the BRT planned roadways for emergency vehicles.
Add to that the hard-core willingness of the EOT to try and shove this
down the throats of people who don't want it, and manipulating
meetings to minimize neighborhood attendance for public input.
I can easily see why this is happening.
These are the people that will ride it, and they don't want it.
Also, prior to the announcement, was there any evidence that this was
a "shovel ready" project. I did not hear about any of this on any
rail or transit boards anywhere.
I'd not declare it dead yet. It may be just resting in the shadows in
its coffin. Until you drive a stake through its heart it could rise
up again.
Jass
> In article
> <eaa62bc4-159a-425c-b728-0eabd2051...@f16g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
I disagree. The people who do ride the 28, and would ride the 28X are
completely in favor, theyre just not represented at the meetings.
Now, please explain how running hybrid buses would increase
pollution?
John F. Carr
D. Kirkpatrick <sun...@sunclad.com> wrote:
>Various citizen groups have been against this from the start due to a
>wide number of reasons.
>
>These include the blockage of the involved streets with a
>center-of-the-road bus lane with inadequate crossings, the inability
>to cross the street as you can now to access businesses, the
>construction that will exacerbate air quality in neighborhoods that
>already have the highest per capita instance of lung disease
>(including asthma). The list goes on.
I noticed the jaywalkers in the Globe picture. It's illegal to
cross a street outside of a crosswalk and within 300 feet of a
traffic signal. A barrier blocking that move would make an
illegal act impossible. In some places, the prohibition on
crossing midblock is no more than American overregulation.
I doubt this is one of them.
(We need a distinction between major and minor urban streets.
Minor streets are close to the European "naked streets" concept
that hits the press here about every year -- no crosswalks,
stop signs, etc., and neither pedestrian nor car has general
right of way over the other. Major streets have the rules you
expect.)
>I also don't think all city agencies were on board, among them the
>fire depst and EMS who were also concerned about a lack of openings in
>the BRT planned roadways for emergency vehicles.
Was it supposed to be a one or two lane facility? Would parking or
car travel lanes be removed?
--
John Carr (j...@mit.edu)
D. Kirkpatrick
<30618631-7c70-454a...@n35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
Jass <jamesi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I disagree. The people who do ride the 28, and would ride the 28X are
> completely in favor, theyre just not represented at the meetings.
>
> Now, please explain how running hybrid buses would increase
> pollution?
The initial construction phase would last a couple of years or more.
It is that construction which is the problem.
I obviously disagree with you on the ridership.
The EOT has called numerous public meetings and those attending who
want a voice have said no. How can you account for people who do not
speak up? I'd expect that of the EOT.
Also let's review that the existing Silver Line, another BRT project
was never wanted by the people in Roxbury. They wanted a light rail
replacement.
Also, who said anything about hybrid busses?
No electrical wiring is in the plan from what I understand.
These will be articulated diesel busses like the surface segment of
the Silver line, or the Rt 39 artics.
The only difference from the existing Rt 28 is bigger busses and a
dedicated bus lane.
They could acheive the same thing by adding more service.
D. Kirkpatrick
j...@mit.edu (John F. Carr) wrote:
> I noticed the jaywalkers in the Globe picture. It's illegal to
> cross a street outside of a crosswalk and within 300 feet of a
> traffic signal. A barrier blocking that move would make an
> illegal act impossible. In some places, the prohibition on
> crossing midblock is no more than American overregulation.
> I doubt this is one of them.
You need to spend more time in other parts of the city.
I agree about the jaywalking but this is a commonplace thing along
this route.
You'd be creating a major disruption to business as well as access to
many homes. Not all have driveways and some people have to seek
on-street parking *across the street* from their homes. You'd be
taking access away from both businesses and people's homes.
This is one of the gripes being voiced.
> (We need a distinction between major and minor urban streets.
I'll defer to the fire, EMS, and police on this. From what I have
heard thus far they are not in agreement and do not agree with EOT on
every crossing.
I remember something similar when the State rebuilt upper Washington
Street in West Roxbury about two decades ago (give or take). They
killed off all of the crossings except for major streets. They
expected that the parallel street on the map they referenced would be
used by emergency vehicles rather than Washington Street.
The problem of course was the map was wrong, and the parallel street
was never built - it didn't exist. So the State had to go back and
open up just about every cross street for emergency vehicles.
Duh!
> Was it supposed to be a one or two lane facility? Would parking or
> car travel lanes be removed?
Try to find some historical images of the PCC trolleys from Mattapan
to Egleston Sq.
This route follows the same roadways, specifically Blue Hill Ave,
Geneva Ave. to Egleston Sq, and then Columbus Ave. to Ruggles Sta.
The bus lane will be decicated and run the center of the road - same
as the trolleys that were decommissioned over 50 years ago.
We come full circle in seems.
The bus lane will have an impact on these roadways and may decrease
available travel lanes and/or parking.
After the trolley tracks were removed the roads were widened and a
small narrow "island" divider was installed. If you add a 2-lane
busway you will loose one travel lane easily. These are all 2-lane
major arteries through that area.
Jimmy
> These include the blockage of the involved streets with a
> center-of-the-road bus lane with inadequate crossings, the inability
> to cross the street as you can now to access businesses,
Would the BRT line be fenced? If not, it wouldn't have to be any
worse than the existing curbed median.
> the
> construction that will exacerbate air quality in neighborhoods that
> already have the highest per capita instance of lung disease
> (including asthma).
Well, if all construction is forbidden because it will cause
pollution, I guess we'll never have any new rail transit in eastern
Massachusetts, and we'll be stuck with polluting buses instead.
Jimmy
John S
> In article
> <30618631-7c70-454a...@n35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
> Jass <jamesi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> I disagree. The people who do ride the 28, and would ride the 28X are
>> completely in favor, theyre just not represented at the meetings.
>>
>> Now, please explain how running hybrid buses would increase
>> pollution?
>
>
>
> The initial construction phase would last a couple of years or more.
> It is that construction which is the problem.
Only in Massachusetts could "construction" for a diesel bus line running
down an existing street take years.
Jass
The ridership of route 28s i not affluent. The bus runs through a
poorer area of town and is used by those of a lower income
demographic. I dont intend for this to be a political statement. This
is a fact.
As such, these folks are trying to get to work. They dont have time to
go to meetings. They may not even be aware that these meetings exist
(look at the globae article). Have you ever been to a community
meeting? Theyre full of older people with too much time who are scared
of change.
What they should have done is conducted surveys ON the 28 bus. Not at
the station, but ON the bus. These people are trying to get from point
A to B, they will not miss their bus for a "stupid" survey.
Talking about light rail is a red herring. There is no "light rail OR
bus". Its BRT or nothing. I'd like a brand new 4 track subway myself.
It isnt happening.
Who said anything about hybrid buses? The plan documents did. 10 new
hybrid buses will be arriving next year on the silver line because of
the new south station service. Hybrid means prius style, not trackless
trolley. Youre thinking dual mode electric/diesel. The plan called for
buses with batteries to supplement the diesel.
"They could acheive the same thing by adding more service."
No. They cannot. Throwing ten new buses at the line will not increase
service, headways are already very good. What needs to improve is
SPEED, and the only way to do that is via EXCLUSIVE lanes. The lanes
that silver line uses are a failure. The state knows this. You know
this. Thats what people bitch about. So they proposed TRUE exclusive
lanes.
And the NIMBys complained.
Theres no way to win.
Well, actually, there is. It's called pushing the plan through anyway,
and ignoring the crybabies.
"The bus lane will have an impact on these roadways and may decrease
available travel lanes and/or parking. "
And this is a bad thing, why? Why should the eot cater to those rich
enough to have a private car? How many people that ride the 28 own a
car?
Jimmy
> Throwing ten new buses at the line will not increase
> service, headways are already very good. What needs to improve is
> SPEED, and the only way to do that is via EXCLUSIVE lanes. The lanes
> that silver line uses are a failure.
Are the lanes really a failure? Is traffic a big cause of delays on
the part of Washington Street with bus lanes?
On the bus routes I ride, most of the delays come from fare collection
and stupidly-programmed traffic lights.
Jimmy
D. Kirkpatrick
<6c352df4-cab6-4ff9...@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
Jimmy <JimmyG...@mailinator.com> wrote:
> Would the BRT line be fenced? If not, it wouldn't have to be any
> worse than the existing curbed median.
Think "Jersey Barriers"
Final plans are not complete but the general plan is to create
something akin to a trolley reservation with as few crossings,
automobile and pedestrian, as possible.
> Well, if all construction is forbidden because it will cause
> pollution, I guess we'll never have any new rail transit in eastern
> Massachusetts, and we'll be stuck with polluting buses instead.
"Unnecessary" construction.
I advocate for public transit myself.
However not all public transit plans are sound.
We need to question motive, and whether the plan serves the need.
As noted they can gain the same results by simply adding more service.
As it is, the MBTA already moves articulated busses to Rt 32 and Rt 16
during peak afternoon hours to accommodate the need. We don't see
them trying to create a BRT there do we?
And much of Columbia Rd (Rt 16) could easily accommodate a center-road
busway. And about 2.5 miles of Hyde Park Ave (Rt 32) could as well.
D. Kirkpatrick
<9480a9d2-14ec-4b66...@l13g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
Jimmy <JimmyG...@mailinator.com> wrote:
> Are the lanes really a failure? Is traffic a big cause of delays on
> the part of Washington Street with bus lanes?
>
> On the bus routes I ride, most of the delays come from fare collection
> and stupidly-programmed traffic lights.
My rides on Silver on Washington Street see all kinds of double-parked
or misparked cars. Even with enforcement by T police or BPD it is a
problem. The lanes are marked but not honored.
Jass
As the comment above me says, the washington street bus lanes are a
failure. The new ones on essex street are being well respected,
partially because they are 100% exclusive and partially because theyre
painted.
What I mean by exclusive is that the washington st lanes are ALSO for
cars parking and right turns.
The 28X route also was to include off board fare collection and
traffic lights that detect buses.
"Final plans are not complete but the general plan is to create
something akin to a trolley reservation with as few crossings,
automobile and pedestrian, as possible. "
None of the plans showed any fencing to stop pedestrians. Theres
nothing dangerous about crossing an exclusive bus lane on foot.
mbsbusguy
new route.
The buses are scheduled to arrive in March. Maybe to #39 Huntington
Avenue
as the remaining Neoplan articulated buses can go to Silver Line 4 and
5.
Bad blow for his governorship as it looks bad on his transportation
resume.
Rozzie02131
That's a really good point. I almost never run into traffic delays
when I drive down Blue Hill Ave. or Columbia Rd. The only delays are
caused by traffic lights that turn red for almost every intersection,
and double parkers.
Put a transponder that can turn red lights green in the window of an
ordinary bus, on an ordinary traffic lane, and you've got your rapid
transit.
Rozzie02131
> As it is, the MBTA already moves articulated busses to Rt 32 and Rt 16
> during peak afternoon hours to accommodate the need. We don't see
> them trying to create a BRT there do we?
I think the artics on Rt. 16 are just Rt. 39 buses going home. They
don't seem to be scheduled for any strategic peak passenger needs.
Jimmy
> Jimmy <JimmyGeldb...@mailinator.com> wrote:
> > Would the BRT line be fenced? If not, it wouldn't have to be any
> > worse than the existing curbed median.
>
> Think "Jersey Barriers"
>
> Final plans are not complete but the general plan is to create
> something akin to a trolley reservation with as few crossings,
> automobile and pedestrian, as possible.
That would be totally unnecessary. The C line trolley has no fences
for much of its route, so this busway doesn't need one either.
Why don't local residents lobby for a barrier-free reservation,
instead of no reservation?
Jimmy
D. Kirkpatrick
Rozzie02131 <rozzi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think the artics on Rt. 16 are just Rt. 39 buses going home. They
> don't seem to be scheduled for any strategic peak passenger needs.
I get them all the time... not extras or headed to Southampton for the
night.
Rt 16 seems to see them late afternoons through about 5-6 PM.
Rt 32 sees them run in tandem with a regular CNG at times. They fill
up the arctic than use the CNG for the overflow then run them almost
back to back up the Ave.
The arctics on Rt 32 are th eresult of numerous comsumer complaints
that there was a lack of service at peak times.
For a while I used to take a 32 to the hills around 2 PM in the
afternoon. I live just a mile or so up from the station. I'd have to
wait 2-3 busses because the inbounds were so full with kids and people
headed to work that in the last mile they would just pass waiting
people by and not stop.
Rather than add busses the solution (how do they think these things
up) was to divert some arctics to that route for rush hour.
D. Kirkpatrick
<a6267688-c905-4212...@g31g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>,
Jimmy <JimmyG...@mailinator.com> wrote:
>
> Why don't local residents lobby for a barrier-free reservation,
> instead of no reservation?
Why build a reservation when the community it will serve doesn't want
it?
I think that some of us are presuming that because this project says
(or rather "claims") it will better public transit in that area that
it is automatically a good thing to be backed.
Unfortunately, I have to hold the Silver Line up as an example of a
BRT that was not wanted by the community it serves and which has
functionality issues.
And add to that it is a turtle.... a big slow one.
Karen Okland Wepsic
The Rt. 39 artics are CNG.
Karen Wepsic
Jimmy
> Jimmy <JimmyGeldb...@mailinator.com> wrote:
> > Are the lanes really a failure? Is traffic a big cause of delays on
> > the part of Washington Street with bus lanes?
>
> > On the bus routes I ride, most of the delays come from fare collection
> > and stupidly-programmed traffic lights.
>
> My rides on Silver on Washington Street see all kinds of double-parked
> or misparked cars. Even with enforcement by T police or BPD it is a
> problem. The lanes are marked but not honored.
But does it matter? Is traffic a cause of delays on that stretch of
Washington Street?
Jimmy
D. Kirkpatrick
<c0455a81-de6c-4c74...@r31g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>,
Jimmy <JimmyG...@mailinator.com> wrote:
>
> But does it matter? Is traffic a cause of delays on that stretch of
> Washington Street?
>
> Jimmy
What's the point of a dedicated bus lane if you cannot use it?
Rozzie02131
> I get them all the time... not extras or headed to Southampton for the
> night.
But (in the evening, anyway), aren't they always headed from Forest
Hills to Andrew? I never see them in the other direction, which makes
me think they're just picking up some revenue on the way from Forest
Hills to Southampton, which is right around the corner from Andrew.
Plus, I never see them going to JFK/UMass, which is what most route
16's do at that hour. I doubt if tight corners are the reason for
this, because UMass uses artics all the time in their shuttle service
from JFK to the university.
> Rather than add busses the solution (how do they think these things
> up) was to divert some arctics to that route for rush hour.
I think the reason they prefer artics to extra buses is there's no
labor cost for an extra driver. That's got to be the most expensive
component to adding a new bus to a route.
D. Kirkpatrick
Rozzie02131 <rozzi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> But (in the evening, anyway), aren't they always headed from Forest
> Hills to Andrew? I never see them in the other direction, which makes
> me think they're just picking up some revenue on the way from Forest
> Hills to Southampton, which is right around the corner from Andrew.
>
> Plus, I never see them going to JFK/UMass, which is what most route
> 16's do at that hour. I doubt if tight corners are the reason for
> this, because UMass uses artics all the time in their shuttle service
> from JFK to the university.
No, both ways.
I've picked them up at Andrew and at South Bay Shopping Center headed
to Forest Hills on more than one occasion.
It is hard to tell however if these are extras added in to deal with
regular scheduled busses that have fallen off the schedule.
i'm actually glad they do that. The #16 can get pretty crowedd in the
late afternoon and rush hour. I was on a CNG unit one time that had
so many baby strollers on it that people would swipe their card at the
fare box then exit and walk to the back door to just get on the darn
thing. That raises serious safety questions, but I have memorized the
operation of how to unbutton the windows.
> > Rather than add busses the solution (how do they think these things
> > up) was to divert some arctics to that route for rush hour.
>
> I think the reason they prefer artics to extra buses is there's no
> labor cost for an extra driver. That's got to be the most expensive
> component to adding a new bus to a route.
Exactly. One driver and more passengers.
On the UMASS leg... good point. I have only taken the #16 to UMASS a
couple of times and usually at off hours.
My usual route there is either Red Line to their shuttle at JFK
station or on occasion Orange Line to Ruggles then #8.
mbsbusguy
> In article <007e8102$0$8192$c3e8...@news.astraweb.com>,
Why don't they use them on #111 which is one of the heavier lines in
the system. It isn't
unusual to see 200 people waiting for a #111 most afternoons. All
#111 buses run in bunches.
D. Kirkpatrick
<050badd6-24e9-4e97...@d21g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
mbsbusguy <bus...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Why don't they use them on #111 which is one of the heavier lines in
> the system. It isn't
> unusual to see 200 people waiting for a #111 most afternoons. All
> #111 buses run in bunches.
Best guess... broader logistics.
The articulated units are CNG powered, so they are garaged out of
location sthat have CNG refueling depots, specifically Forest Hills,
Southampton St. and to a lesser extent, Cabot. All are on the south
side of the downtown district.
There are no CNG refueling stations on that side of the city where the
111 runs within Boston limits and none of the other communities in
that area are interested in offering a license to set one up.
There is limited refueling of CNG from a vendor with a truck at the
Everett Shops and yard but that is mostly for training busses and
units under repair there.
The dual powered units (Silver Line) are diesel and electric and those
are committed to that service.
I doubt that they will purchase any more CNG busses given the
limitations of refueling stations. The last couple of purchases were
low-floor diesel. Those are the 0400 through 0800 series I believe.
DMK
Rozzie02131
> The dual powered units (Silver Line) are diesel and electric and those
> are committed to that service.
>
> I doubt that they will purchase any more CNG busses given the
> limitations of refueling stations. The last couple of purchases were
> low-floor diesel. Those are the 0400 through 0800 series I believe.
One of the biggest problems at the T is that so many elements of their
rolling stock are incompatible with everything else. Part of that is
due to the age of the system, of course. But they continue to make
things worse with every new service.
Why couldn't they have run simple trackless trolleys to Logan Airport
on the Silver Line? Then they'd be compatible with Cambridge and make
for a much simpler connection to the other Silver Line. I know, the
denizens of the Back Bay would shriek at trolley wires, which haven't
kept San Francisco, Vancouver, or Seattle from being some of the most
beautiful cities in North America. But no, they have to order up
expensive hybrids that can't be used anywhere else and might not be
shared with any other city in the world.
CNG buses might have been a good idea but if that's now a dead end for
the T, what's going to happen to that infrastructure over the next 10
years?
Jimmy
> Why couldn't they have run simple trackless trolleys to Logan Airport
> on the Silver Line?
Can trackless trolleys run at highway speeds? On my last trip on the
73, the driver sure kept the speed low (under 25) the whole way, even
where there was no traffic and no wire junctions.
> But no, they have to order up
> expensive hybrids that can't be used anywhere else and might not be
> shared with any other city in the world.
Trackless trolleys couldn't be used anywhere besides the Silver Line
or the 4 Cambridge routes, while the existing Silver Line dual-modes
could theoretically be used elsewhere.
Hybrid diesel-electric trackless trolleys are very common, as are
articulated trackless trolleys. It's just the combination of diesel-
electric *and* articulation that's unique to the T.
> CNG buses might have been a good idea but if that's now a dead end for
> the T, what's going to happen to that infrastructure over the next 10
> years?
Since merely overhauling the CNG buses is going to cost far more per
bus than buying brand new low-emissions diesel buses, and the CNG
buses have terrible performance, I wish the T would scrap the CNG
project.
Jimmy
Rozzie02131
> Rozzie02131 <rozzie02...@hotmail.com> wrote:�
>
> Can trackless trolleys run at highway speeds? On my last trip on the
> 73, the driver sure kept the speed low (under 25) the whole way, even
> where there was no traffic and no wire junctions.
Sure, they run a lot faster than that on the 4 lane main roads in
Vancouver. I don't know if they could go as fast as the current
hybrids go in the tunnel to the airport. They might make up some
slower-speed time by not having to change modes at Silver Line Way.
>
> Trackless trolleys couldn't be used anywhere besides the Silver Line
> or the 4 Cambridge routes, while the existing Silver Line dual-modes
> could theoretically be used elsewhere.
I can't see them using Silver Line hybrids on other routes, but as long
as you're talking theoretically, why not build more trackless trolley
routes in Boston? Less pollution, quieter, faster acceleration,
longer-lasting vehicles. Perhaps building trackless trolleys would
cost less than the CNG era will end up costing.
> Hybrid diesel-electric trackless trolleys are very common,
Really? I know Seattle has some, but where else?
Kurt Hackenberg
Rozzie02131 <rozzi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Why couldn't they have run simple trackless trolleys to Logan Airport
>on the Silver Line?
Because the Ted Williams Tunnel[1] isn't high enough inside to have
room for overhead wires without interfering with tall trucks.
Why isn't it high enough? Dunno. Too expensive? Designed before the
feds started preferentially funding "bus rapid transit", so the Big
Dig designers had no idea anybody would want to run a pseudo-subway
through that new road tunnel?
------
[1] For non-Bostonians: that's the Big Dig tunnel under the harbor,
connecting South Boston to the airport in East Boston. It's the new
east end of I-90. It's not the main Big Dig tunnel under downtown
Boston, which is I-93.
Jass
diesel (with electric battery, like the prius). As such, they will be
able to run on all routes (althought I'd expect the majority will be
painted silver). Besides the CNG fueling stations limiting the current
artics to runs from CNG garages, some areas have restrictions on CNG
vehicles.
The problem with running random artics on routes and not having them
be dedicated to one line involves the stops. Current MBTA "no stopping
bus stop" zones are designed for a 40 foot bus. Artics don't fit.
So instead of adding an artic to the 111, one to the 66, one to the 1
etc, it's best to isolate them to one or two lines and make sure the
infrastructure is in place for them (such as along route 39)