Equal or Better: The Story of the Silver Line

It's really perverse that 11 parking spaces are judged to be more valuable than 15,000 riders.

P.S. Why is Gloria Fox interviewing next to a pool?
 
Wow. That was great. Very well done and informative. That map 2 minutes in, of areas of Boston with populations that are 50% or more black, is really striking. And compare that map to this one here of half-mile radii from rapid transit stations: http://www.somervillestep.org/files/map_Tservice.jpg

Someone unfamiliar with the system and its history might conclude that the T was designed to avoid neighborhoods with high percentages of minorities. Of course that's not what happened, but you could see how one might think that.

To be fair, the map from Somerville Transportation Equity Project does not take into account the fact that all services are not created equal. For instance, it'll take about 25 minutes according to Google to go the 3 miles from Packard's Corner to Downtown on the B line, while it'll take half that time to go an equivalent 3 miles from Harvard Square.

But still, you look at those maps, and you see the primarily upper-middle class, predominantly white Brookline inundated with rail transit, and you see a complete rail no-man's-land between the Orange and Red Lines in predominantly black, less affluent Roxbury.

This map here: http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/picture-1.png further illustrates the above point. Coincidentally, there happens to be a relatively lightly used, double tracked ROW going right through this no-man's-land. But the Fairmount Line is a long way from being an Indigo Line.

Anyway, off of my soapbox and back to interesting things from the film. It was interesting catching glimpses of the bus alternatives that were considered for replacing the El. For those who are interested (like me), a draft version of that document can be viewed here: http://openlibrary.org/books/OL24638530M/State_transportation_projects_(Washington_street)_draft

Also interesting to hear that the Silver Line Waterfront operates at a cost of more than $9 per passenger. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the Night Owl service suspended for having equivalent costs in the $7 range?

One thing I didn't like was the implied characterization of the Silver Line Waterfront's customer base as being white residents of South Boston. As I understand (which I will gladly grant is not well) the immediately served area, it is primarily a would-be business area that is looking to be developed. And, as I understand it, that development is not quite happening.

In fact, if I recall correctly, SL3 to City Point (which would, as I understand it, be a more residential area) was canceled due to low ridership. I would imagine that people preferred the 7 bus which took them more directly into the core of Downtown? Does that jive with other people's understanding of what happened?

I like how he dwells on how much the El was disliked, though I wish he somehow could have noted that new elevated rail structures these days are nothing like the old Washington Street El. (Which would make sense, since that El was built 100 years ago now.) But since it doesn't sound like anyone in the community is pushing for a new El, I can see how that sort of content would have been seen as irrelevant.

And Matthew, I totally agree with your point about parking spaces. Given the other kinds of sacrifices we ask members of our society to make, a few parking spaces seems a bit insignificant.

BostonUrbEx, where did you find this/how did you hear about it? Thank you for posting it here; really enjoyed watching it!
 
I glanced through that 2007 FTA study. It said that the $9/pax included amortized capital costs, which are pretty large. I presume that the Night Owl did not have significant capital costs.

I remember seeing a document with operational costs broken down by bus route, and the SL4 even came out with a tiny net profit during peak hours. I cannot find the document at the moment, though.
 
(^^^ I had to look up "amortized". :D )

Ah okay, that makes sense. So in time, the operating costs of SL1/2 should decrease? (In theory?)

I would be interested in seeing that second document, if/when you find it.

Such a noobie question, but isn't it unusual for rapid transit in Boston/America to, like, ever, break even, to say nothing about net profit like you describe with SL4?
 
Riverside said:
That map 2 minutes in, of areas of Boston with populations that are 50% or more black, is really striking.
Click to expand...

I found that really shocking, too. I know people cried "transit racism" but I didn't think it was THAT bad. I thought there were more significant populations along the Red Line and Orange Line still. But when you take a look at the higher concentrations of black neighborhoods, suddenly you see this glaring transit hole line right up with it.



Someone shared it with me on Twitter. Not sure how they came across it.
 
It bothers me that Fred Salvucci keeps saying in the film that light rail would require making the sidewalks very narrow and demolishing a building. That's only true if you don't remove any parking. If you removed parking on at least one side, you'd certainly be able to do light rail. It's all about priorities.

It's like when the City or MassDOT says there "isn't room" for bike lanes. Usually this is when there is on-street parking and multiple travel lanes. Sure, there isn't room if you deem maximizing space for cars as more important that accommodating bicyclists. There is almost always room for bike lanes if you're willing to take away some space from cars.

It saddens me that with the Silver Line the electric bus option was thrown out. One of things that really stinks (literally) about the buses now is that they are loud and pump out quite a bit of exhaust. Electric buses with overhead wires like in Cambridge/Watertown/Belmont would have been so much better. Saying you don't want overhead wires in a historic district is really a non-starter as far as I'm concerned. First of all, the wires are hardly noticeable. Second of all, I'm pretty sure traffic lights and parking meters are not historic either, or even cars if you go back far enough. Anyway, I wish sometimes people would just take a field trip over to Cambridge to see the overhead wires and witness how quiet the buses are before they take such a hard position against them.

This also reminds me of when Boston was first looking at putting in bike lanes a few years ago. One of the transportation officials from Boston was brought on a tour of bicycle facilities in Cambridge, and commented that he couldn't believe how many bikes lanes they had. He had never crossed the river once in his long career at Boston City Hall to see what Cambridge had been doing.
 
It's going to take a completely new administration in the city for anyone to seriously consider something more than the Silver Line.

I am very curious to see the impact the Fairmount Line makes on this area since it cuts straight through that giant area. The South End will once again be bypassed but it will do wonders for Dorchester.
 
BostonUrbEx said:
I found that really shocking, too. I know people cried "transit racism" but I didn't think it was THAT bad. I thought there were more significant populations along the Red Line and Orange Line still. But when you take a look at the higher concentrations of black neighborhoods, suddenly you see this glaring transit hole line right up with it.
Click to expand...

Land value is a big part of it, the other is politics.

Political priorities in those neighborhoods steer money away from infrastructure projects and into what is essentially social work busywork projects. Giving people access to jobs would make them less dependent on social services and then the local politicos/hustlers/'community organizers' wouldn't have any way of pocketing money or employing friends off the public teat. Money is consistently poured into 'underserved' communities to no effect because the people directing the expenditure of that money benefit by not fixing the problems. Politically they are arsonists masquerading as firemen. The locals celebrate the frauds for saving the day, but are the ones ultimately that have to live in ever increasing swathes of rubble. How quickly the proposed 28x improvements were killed is a classic example of this. There wasn't enough of a payoff for the local political animals so the public got screwed out of a no brainer and fully paid for transit project.

The only politician I can recall which made of a point of lamenting the loss of the El was Rep. Rushing. Everyone else towed the party line and was more than happy when the Silver Li(n)e was coupled with the Piers Transit-way for the federal $$$ rather than raising Hell over not having a Green Line extension.

Fairmount got money only because it was a commuter rail project. The state will drag its collective feet as soon as it become popular enough to justify DMU/heavy rail operation as the Indigo Line. Even the Green Line extension is tied to highway construction with the Big Dig. The statehouse doesn't give a damn about urban transit aside from token buses unless a highway or federal money is somehow involved to pay for it.
 
Last edited:
I sometimes think Fred has been his own worst enemy in some regards. Just look at how he considers the trolley issue here. He argues that neither taking land from the church or the food market is a palatable option. And he's right about that. But he didn't even think about the possibility of just taking one of the lanes of the fairly wide road. And the funny thing is, the bus lane ended up "taking" one of the lanes anyhow.

Reminds me of his thinking about the Big Dig. "We can't shut down the city while we build this thing." But also "the elevated structure has to go." Both are right, but he never considered the possibility of just removing the damn thing and staying on the surface. And after all that, they did end up building the surface arterial road on top of the tunnels anyhow.
 
It never ceases to amaze me that when talking about transit issues and capacity that traffic lanes and on street parking are almost always treated as sacred cows. Never mind that a bus, bike, or trolley right of way would take hundreds if not thousands of cars off the road, thus alleviating the need for the travel and parking lanes. Can't make a logical argument about that or even entertain the thought. Nope have to keep the suburban mentality where the garage, or other parking spot, is the front door to everything and somehow that extremely limited scope of movement is equated with freedom.
 
Lurker, I think there are glimmers of change. The Mass Ave bike lines from the bridge to Symphony Hall are an example. There was a bit of grumbling from the usual assholes, but overall indifference. The complaints never got traction.

Successful examples like this improve our chances for change in the future.
 
This is worth watching? The first minute makes it out to be "white man laments oppression and racism" and, typical of this type of video, more about the creator than the actual story.

But I'll stick with it!
 
It's pretty level actually. They do try to prove that the numbers show that the Silver Line was the most practical and cost effective way to replace service and that it has increased ridership.
 
The rest of the video dwells much less on the creator than does the first couple of minutes (unlike, for example, Kony 2012). And while we might debate the overall tone of the work, I think a pretty good job is done of getting information from primary sources (ie. interviews with the people involved).

So, yes, I think it's worth watching. I'd be interested to hear what you think of it once you finish, JohnAKeith.
 
I loved it. Not much more to say, I guess. I think the creator should edit out his bike ride because it throws off the flow at the beginning. And, his first couple of interviews are with people who seem to support the Silver Line, which confused me. (Later, they give much-more nuanced opinions.)

A couple things:

1) Boy, Fred Salvucci has a potty mouth.
2) Love to hear the reasoning about not narrowing Washington Street at the Cathedral (in Salvucci's opinion, the Archdiocese wouldn't agree to it and Salvucci didn't want to force the closure of ABC Market / Foodies across the street).
3) Consensus of interviewees: You can't please everyone.
4) Consensus of interviewees: You should at least listen to everyone.
5) The rebirth of Washington Street (in the South End) has been amazing. The additional, street-level stops were responsible for this, as was taking down the El, since it made residential development more appealing. Without a gentrifying South End, however, there'd be no one willing to build down there. Even now, I can't believe they had enough faith to build Wilkes Passage, back in 2000 or whenever it was.
6) Why didn't Dudley Square prosper once the El was taken down. The "opened up" space should have encouraged more development. Why didn't anyone jump at the opportunity?
7) Is government stepping in to fill the role of private developers in Dudley Square really a good idea?

Some screen grabs below, some then and nows.

There's a screen shot from the movie of Washington Street with a grassy space to the right (where the Walgreens building is now) and the Allen House upper left corner. In the movie, I think he reversed the image on this because the way it was filmed, it just doesn't make sense.

washst640x350.jpg


invert_wash_st.png


wash_st640x282.jpg


A Foodies / ABC Market then and now

1994f.png


foodies632x344.jpg


I forget, what is this? Madison Park? It doesn't look like any part of Boston I've ever seen.

serox-1.png


And, 1313 Washington Street looking north/east

1997.png


2005.png
 
JohnAKeith said:
forget, what is this? Madison Park? It doesn't look like any part of Boston I've ever seen.

serox-1.png
Click to expand...

Looks like the clearing of the inner belt looking towards ruggles, no? I guess that would be madison park.
 
That is, well was, Madison Square. Melnea Cass Boulevard, Madison Park "Village", BWSC's garage, etc. are all suburban abominations built well after those responsible should have known better.

"Why didn't Dudley Square prosper once the El was taken down. The "opened up" space should have encouraged more development. Why didn't anyone jump at the opportunity?"

Three major reasons:
1. It was and still is only linked by buses after the El.
2. Crooked politicians and self interested activists chased any business not willing to be robbed blind away.
3. Drug dealing and use was incredibly blatant in the square until very recently.
4. South Bay along with items 1 & 2 drew away major retailers and cut into the margins for any small businesses to operate in a potentially high loss risk environment.
 
"Why didn't Dudley Square prosper once the El was taken down. The "opened up" space should have encouraged more development. Why didn't anyone jump at the opportunity?"

Three major reasons:
1. It was and still is only linked by buses after the El.
Click to expand...

Equally true for the rest of Washington Street, but look how SoWa has bloomed in the last few years. Mostly through reuse of existing buildings rather than new construction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top