The MBTA has a new website, which at first blush is definitely an improvement over the old one. It certainly makes it easier for me to criticize this T!
Let’s face it: Buses suck, because buses are late. Why? Is it just unpredictable traffic? Well, maybe. But mostly it’s just that they’re unnecessarily slow. One improvement would be a simple matter: Take out some of the stops.
Check out the #1 bus route, one of the more heavily-traveled routes, I’d have to imagine. Does it really need to stop at Mass Ave. and Bay St., and then again at Hancock St, hardly a block and a half away? Then it stops again at Sellers, and again at Pleasant. And again, and again.
I suppose there might be a case where there’s a signficant population of physically challenged folks for whom walking a block and a half is a real hardship, i.e. near nursing homes (which there is one near Bay St. in Cambridge). But come on, at least let’s pick our spots. For 99% of everyone, walking that extra block won’t kill us.
I don’t think that cutting stops would shorten trips all that much and would be overly harsh on elderly riders, which I think are a lot more than 99% of riders on most lines.
<
p>
In any case, I think the T is doing a pretty good job of making sure you experience delays regardless which mode of transport you select. đŸ˜‰
Having closely-spaced bus stops helps them keep their independence.
I’m just thinking of high-densities of old folks.
<
p>
Seriously, the two examples that I mentioned are ridiculously close.
Cutting out stops will not make bus route times significantly more predictable. They can already predict the delay caused by stops, for various times of day, pretty well. Having more stops is very very helpful. We’ve already got enough disincentives for people to ride the bus, don’t create another one pointlessly.
“They can already predict the delay caused by stops, for various times of day, pretty well.”
<
p>
How often do you ride the bus, Cos? This absolutely doesn’t square with my experience on a number of bus lines. Some are pretty darned good, some are awful — and it depends on which direction you’re going.
I ride the bus a lot. They are very irregular. That’s not caused by too many stops – stops are not the unpredictable factor. I did not say that busses are running a consistent schedule. I did say that eliminating some of the stops would not cause them to run a consistent schedule.
<
p>
Yes, Boston traffic is very unpredictable. How often do you drive around here? đŸ™‚
<
p>
However, buses that run every 30 minutes or longer, outside of the densely-trafficked core, are usually pretty close to on time. A lot of the bus lines I’ve used a lot (70, 553, 83, 86) have usually been within 2 minutes of their scheduled time even way out in the middle of a long route. The #1, on the other hand, is totally unpredictable. That suggests the main variable is whether they actually send buses out according to schedule for routes that people don’t expect a specific time on.
<
p>
In any case, I don’t understand your assumptions. You assume that since stopping takes time, then a) more stops takes an unpredictably-longer time, and therefore b) this is the main reason why some bus lines can’t keep to their schedule. I’m pretty sure both assumptions are false, based on what I’ve seen.
<
p>
That’s especially the case with stops that are close together, where they’re probably going to pick up exactly the same number of people if they eliminate one, they’ll just make those people walk longer. The amount of time it takes to stop one extra time is perfectly predictable, it’s the number of people at each stop that makes stop times vary. If you have two stops two blocks apart and you eliminate one of them, you haven’t made the bus route time any more predictable than it was already.
with any predictability when they have to contend on an equal footing with other vehicles in varying traffic conditions. That said, there are some steps that can be taken to improve the situation somewhat:
<
p>
Electric vehicles.
Electric buses (like those running in Cambridge/Belmont) are quieter, less polluting, and accelerate more quickly than the diesel and CNG vehicles.
<
p>
Dedicated lanes.
Dedicated lanes remove buses from the general traffic stream, allowing them to move at a more predictable pace. Unfortunately, only a few of Boston’s streets are wide enough to accommodate dedicated lanes, and those that do exist (e.g. Washington St. in Roxbury) are rendered meaningless by lax enforcement.
<
p>
Neck-downs.
Sidewalk neck-downs at stops remove the necessity for the buses to pull over, thus improving traffic safety and reducing dwell time. Neck-downs also improve ease of access for the handicapped and the elderly.
<
p>
Coordinated signals.
Coordinated signals that give precedence to transit vehicles reduce unnecessary stops and starts along the route, improving speed and reliability. Controlling signals via vehicle mounted transponders allows the transit vehicles to act as de facto regulators of the traffic “pulse” at intersections, helping to relieve over-all congestion.
<
p>
Light rail.
Of course, along with the above measures, the ideal scenario would be to convert lines to light rail wherever possible. While light rail vehicles and infrastructure cost more up front, they quickly pay for themselves in terms of durability, reliability and increased ridership. There are three immediate light rail opportunities in Boston that could vastly improve the T system over-all: conversion of the ghastly “Silver Lie” and full restoration of the old A and E Green lines.
<
p>
Don’t hold your breath waiting for any of these improvements. Unfortunately, Mayor Menino and his car-centric transportation department have an attitude to public transportation that could, at best, be described as openly contemptuous. He has resisted every effort to implement the measures listed above, and is especially hostile to electric vehicles and light rail. The reason? who knows? Though I did once hear him say “I don’t like to look at them wires.” (No, I’m not kidding.)
<
p>
Guess we’ll just have to hope the next mayor has a brain.
I think the Green Line also needs to use lose some stops as it fans out on the surface streets. It stops every block!
<
p>
How much would it cost to put in a system with a timer to alert you to the time when the next bus arrives? A lot of other modes of transit have this system. The T should definitely add it for their trains.
The problem isn’t the number of stops. In fact, fewer stops makes loading and unloading slower when coming inbound because you can only load in the front door.
<
p>
If you want to make the green line go faster, you have three choices:
<
p>
1. Bury more line, which allows for underground stops. Why is this better? In addition to being warmer and dryer, it means that inbound lines can open all the doors, which results in far shorter actual stop times. Incidentally, with the exception of the D which is a dedicated track with no intersections that I can think of, it also reduces the number of intersections with cars, and hence, traffic lights.
<
p>
For the B line, burying the line until the BU Bridge (Blandford, BU East, BU Central) would not only allow for opening all the doors which is faster, but it would reduce the number of BU students who just hop on for a stop or two because they can see the train and its handy… thereby also reducing total stop time. Heck, they could even make two stops out of the three, which, with all doors open, might be a smidge faster.
<
p>
For the C line, you could bury from St Marys (first after Kenmore) all the way out pretty easily, or even just sections, like say Coolidge Corner to Washington Square. Again, in addition to warmer and dryer stations, you’d get faster stop times and not have to wait on traffic lights. As an added bonus, you’d even get some extra parking spots since Beacon has center-of-street parking, which is the same location as the T stops. Fewer above ground T stops, more room for parking.
<
p>
2. Synchronize the lights. Why in the hell does a street car with as many as 100 people have to wait at a light for six cars with six passengers to make left turns? Its asinine. When the streetcar is near the light, the main thoroughfare (for example Comm Ave or Beacon) should get the green along with the streetcar. It would do wonders to reduce variance on trip length, which is the real frustration.
<
p>
3. Trench the roads between Kenmore and Park or Gov’t Center and make the green line 4 tracks wide instead of two so that some cars can be expressed, traffic doesn’t jam as much, and the occasional disabled train doesn’t shut down all traffic in one direction. It would also allow for track repair without requiring busing. Since green line underground is the busiest line, making a double up on the lines would be a big speed booster.
<
p>
Of course 1 and 3 are huge capital projects, and 2 requires a shift in cultural priorities. I’m not holding my breath for any of them, but its worth noting that reducing the number of green line stops above ground won’t really reduce time. It’s the traffic lights and the only-front-door-open that make it slow.
yes, yes, yes! if i knew how long i had to wait, i woudln’t mind waiting so much for the unpredictible lines. it’s standing there not knowing if you’re going to be the frozen chump waiting for a bus that wont come for 20 min, or the warm chump who hid out in the nearest coffee hut 2 minutes before the bus whisked by, leaving you behind to wonder some more.
and far fewer commuter rail and subway stops. How about we even start there? Washington DC does a fantastic job with ETAs at their rail stops… we can do it too!