General Infrastructure

[statler]

Not sure if this is the right thread for this or if it deserves it's own thread...

The Globe is doing 3-part Spotlight story on the transportation crisis in Greater Boston.

Seeing Red: A Boston Globe Spotlight Team report on traffic in Massachusetts

Can Greater Boston continue to thrive — or even function — without fundamentally rethinking its relationship to the car? A Globe Spotlight report.

apps.bostonglobe.com

 

[Lrfox]

Not sure if this is the right thread for this or if it deserves it's own thread...

The Globe is doing 3-part Spotlight story on the transportation crisis in Greater Boston.

Seeing Red: A Boston Globe Spotlight Team report on traffic in Massachusetts

Can Greater Boston continue to thrive — or even function — without fundamentally rethinking its relationship to the car? A Globe Spotlight report.

apps.bostonglobe.com

Good stuff so far. Taking a lot of what we've discussed here and putting it out to the average (non-transit/urban planning geek) reader.

I'm not the biggest Curtatone fan, but I like this quote from him: “If we want to get people out of their cars, we have to make public transportation the easy choice.”

Really, that's what it'll come down to in Greater Boston. For all of the talk about successful congestion tolling, the article generally omitted the fact that both examples (London and Stockholm) have better public transit and cycle infrastructure in place to support the people who are deterred from driving as a result of the congestion charges. We don't have that here. The people who can least afford it would be impacted the most as there isn't a viable, safe alternative for many of them.

 

[Ruairi]

Good stuff so far. Taking a lot of what we've discussed here and putting it out to the average (non-transit/urban planning geek) reader.

I'm not the biggest Curtatone fan, but I like this quote from him: “If we want to get people out of their cars, we have to make public transportation the easy choice.”

Really, that's what it'll come down to in Greater Boston. For all of the talk about successful congestion tolling, the article generally omitted the fact that both examples (London and Stockholm) have better public transit and cycle infrastructure in place to support the people who are deterred from driving as a result of the congestion charges. We don't have that here. The people who can least afford it would be impacted the most as there isn't a viable, safe alternative for many of them.

who are these people? It's not cheap to own, maintain, insure, tax, and fuel a car that you need to drive in to the city center at peak times.
Obviously we need to improve public transit reliability, frequency, and affordability because right now it's the people who can least afford it that are being impacted the most, not the solo car driver who's driving down town at peak hours.

 

[Lrfox]

who are these people? It's not cheap to own, maintain, insure, tax, and fuel a car that you need to drive in to the city center at peak times.
Obviously we need to improve public transit reliability, frequency, and affordability because right now it's the people who can least afford it that are being impacted the most, not the solo car driver who's driving down town at peak hours.

Sure it's not cheap to own a car and commute into the city. But some people, like many service industry folks, hospital staff, lower level office staff, etc. have no viable alternative and can't readily afford a new daily congestion charge. They also can't afford to live in or near central Boston. Commuter rail is not currently a viable alternative for them either. It's expensive and infrequent and the cost of the pass does not negate the cost of car ownership as they likely need it for almost all of their other transportation needs (including getting to the station).

 

[Equilibria]

Sure it's not cheap to own a car and commute into the city. But some people, like many service industry folks, hospital staff, lower level office staff, etc. have no viable alternative and can't readily afford a new daily congestion charge. They also can't afford to live in or near central Boston. Commuter rail is not currently a viable alternative for them either. It's expensive and infrequent and the cost of the pass does not negate the cost of car ownership as they likely need it for almost all of their other transportation needs (including getting to the station).

And that's before you consider that neighborhoods around transit stations are gentrified and very expensive, and that the hammer is coming for Revere and the Blue Line (Boston's last affordable transit catchment) in the next 10 years.

 

[Ruairi]

Sure it's not cheap to own a car and commute into the city. But some people, like many service industry folks, hospital staff, lower level office staff, etc. have no viable alternative and can't readily afford a new daily congestion charge. They also can't afford to live in or near central Boston. Commuter rail is not currently a viable alternative for them either. It's expensive and infrequent and the cost of the pass does not negate the cost of car ownership as they likely need it for almost all of their other transportation needs (including getting to the station).

I have no doubt that plenty of service industry people drive in and need to drive in. Untill a reliable affordable public transit system funded by a congestion charge is in place, the state should work with large companies to offer some means of exemption for service industry employees or, perhaps there could be a tax credit if your income is below x and you have to pay a congestion toll.
Most of the area that would be inside a congestion zone is served by reasonable public transit. Way more people drive in for convenience rather than necessity.

 

[Ruairi]

And that's before you consider that neighborhoods around transit stations are gentrified and very expensive, and that the hammer is coming for Revere and the Blue Line (Boston's last affordable transit catchment) in the next 10 years.

Right, so look at rent control.

There's a whole mind set that needs to change here.
America is still addicted to the idea that everyone in the family should have a car and should be able to drive it where ever they want.
Gas prices haven't budged in over a decade. 300,000 extra cars on the roads in the last 5 years.
Straight up addiction that'll choke the city.

 

[Equilibria]

Most of the area that would be inside a congestion zone is served by reasonable public transit. Way more people drive in for convenience rather than necessity.

I'd be interested in seeing whether survey data would back that opinion up.

Also, no part of Boston has "reasonable public transit" by the standards of Paris and London. No part has "reasonable" access at by anyone's standard unless you're going Downtown. Fixing that will cost $50 billion or more and several decades.

Right, so look at rent control.

There's a whole mind set that needs to change here.
America is still addicted to the idea that everyone in the family should have a car and should be able to drive it where ever they want.
Gas prices haven't budged in over a decade. 300,000 extra cars on the roads in the last 5 years.
Straight up addiction that'll choke the city.

But you're proposing immediate taxes alongside benefits that will take decades to pass or build.

It wasn't choking the city until people like us decided we wanted to live and work Downtown. 15 years ago, jobs were much more distributed than they are now. Every time you see the headline "company X moves Y employees to Kendall/Seaport/Cambridge Crossing" read "Y new cars added to Downtown commute." People who bought homes believing they were commuting to Marlborough for the rest of their working lives suddenly need to get to Assembly, and they simply can't without driving.

The problem is that the mindset has already changed, but it's changed unevenly and among people who haven't yet made irrevocable investments in housing.

 

[Ruairi]

I'd be interested in seeing whether survey data would back that opinion up.

Also, no part of Boston has "reasonable public transit" by the standards of Paris and London. No part has "reasonable" access at by anyone's standard unless you're going Downtown. Fixing that will cost $50 billion or more and several decades.



But you're proposing immediate taxes alongside benefits that will take decades to pass or build.

It wasn't choking the city until people like us decided we wanted to live and work Downtown. 15 years ago, jobs were much more distributed than they are now. Every time you see the headline "company X moves Y employees to Kendall/Seaport/Cambridge Crossing" read "Y new cars added to Downtown commute."

The problem is that the mindset has already changed, but it's changed unevenly.

i take that point, the cart was definitely put ahead of the horse when it came to centralizing everything.
Bureaucracy also has a huge part to play. Yes, I'd propose immediate taxes but some of the benefits would be immediate.
There'd be an immediate reduction to unnecessary car travel. Traffic would improve immediately, air quality would improve and carbon emissions would decline.

The whole infrastructure situation needs to be fast tracked. I've only lived in Greater Boston for 12 years. But I'm shocked at the time it takes to get civil projects approved, financed, and built.
If it's a private casino or a pharma HQ, it goes up in 20 mins, if it's the GLX it takes 30 years.

I'm not sure how you sort the bureaucracy issue out but we should be able to approve, finance, design and build west station, grand junction, NSRL, red/blue connector, and make a good start on CR electrification all in the next 5 years.
You might laugh but that level of transit infrastructure in such short time but it happens in cities all over the world.

 

[Arlington]

Did we cover the demographics of Boston's car-commuters in the Congestion Charge thread? IIRC, the car-drivers were from high(er) income households. Parking prices of $20/day already function as a 1/8th tax on the guy who earns $20/hr for 8 hours, and actually "long ago" nudged these people out of the SOV commuting market, leaving more like the people making $40/hr+ (or getting parking as an employer benefit) as the ones still doing SOV commutes.

Heck, the union carpenter who lives next door to me (in West Medford) has *always* driven to someplace near the core (where he's scoped out free parking) and then he (at age 60) bikes the rest of the way (a "last mile") to his job sites (usually at Greater MIT or Greater MGH)*

*this is partly because he's not a bus guy and partly because we don't have good a 1-seat bus to MIT

 

[Equilibria]

You might laugh but that level of transit infrastructure in such short time but it happens in cities all over the world.

Crossrail faces further delays and will cost more than £18bn

TfL says aim is for London rail link to open ‘as soon as practically possible in 2021’

www.theguardian.com

It happens in China and Dubai, because those places are autocracies with slave labor and no environmental protection laws.

 

[Ruairi]

Crossrail faces further delays and will cost more than £18bn

TfL says aim is for London rail link to open ‘as soon as practically possible in 2021’

www.theguardian.com

It happens in China and Dubai, because those places are autocracies with slave labor and no environmental protection laws.

You can find a happy medium between here and dubai. Look how fast the casino went up.

 

[FK4]

Not sure if this is the right thread for this or if it deserves it's own thread...

The Globe is doing 3-part Spotlight story on the transportation crisis in Greater Boston.

Seeing Red: A Boston Globe Spotlight Team report on traffic in Massachusetts

Can Greater Boston continue to thrive — or even function — without fundamentally rethinking its relationship to the car? A Globe Spotlight report.

apps.bostonglobe.com

This was a good article but it could have done more. The Globe notes that this “part I” is on political gridlock, yet there’s not really an any analysis of what’s stymying major projects or significant expansions of the transit / rail system... it basically just focuses on bus lanes and congestion pricing. Nothing on the NSRL, electrification, or the need for some serious change in vision on major expansion of the whole system... and what is holding that back. I’d like to see an analysis of why the pols don’t vote for funding the T more, as well as looking into which people outside of metro Boston fight stuff like that, and perhaps break down the state transit dollars spent per citizen in each county. I’m quite sure the transit systems out in western mass have to be operating at massive losses given the lack of density. Anyway, maybe they will treat the transit issues in the two subsequent parts of this series, but they should have done so here.

 

[stefal]

You can find a happy medium between here and dubai. Look how fast the casino went up.

With private money, and lots of it.

But yes, we can be better at construction, public and private. Construction costs have doubled in the past 20 years, faster than healthcare, as a result of, but not limited to:

• The permitting process is highly bureaucratic and years long in some instances
• Productivity within the sector is dropping
• Skilled workers are sometimes hard to come by, delaying work and increasing budgets
• Materials are more expensive
• Lack of oversight by larger agencies

Are there solutions? Yes, but they are rather drastic in some cases, but its what's needed if you want change:

• (Public Sector) Streamlining and centralizing the permitting process
• (Private and Public) Modernize the construction process and introduce efficiency-conscious solutions where necessary to combat productivity issues
  • Also look at new materials and building processes currently being developed in academia
• (Public) Decentralizing overseeing agencies, letting those more familiar with the project/context handle it

This was a good article but it could have done more. The Globe notes that this “part I” is on political gridlock, yet there’s not really an any analysis of what’s stymying major projects or significant expansions of the transit / rail system... it basically just focuses on bus lanes and congestion pricing. Nothing on the NSRL, electrification, or the need for some serious change in vision on major expansion of the whole system... and what is holding that back. I’d like to see an analysis of why the pols don’t vote for funding the T more, as well as looking into which people outside of metro Boston fight stuff like that, and perhaps break down the state transit dollars spent per citizen in each county. I’m quite sure the transit systems out in western mass have to be operating at massive losses given the lack of density. Anyway, maybe they will treat the transit issues in the two subsequent parts of this series, but they should have done so here.

I will agree that the Globe Article did well outlining the transportation crisis right now, but it didn't really conclude anything, other than saying our politicians take cars to work and are incentivized to do so, and they also might like bus lanes. Even if they weren't given parking spots, I'm not entirely sure we'd see our policy change that much.

The T is generally on a good path, with new Red and Orange Line cars and signal systems, Green Line Transformation, Better Bus, and even the recent push for regional rail, but those are only to get us up to barely-where-we-should-have-been-already. They need some serious and robust planning for expansion, management, and maintenance if we want less people to drive and more people to take the T. No politician is going to willingly tell or encourage their voters to take the T until its robust enough to handle taking them on.


----

I think I recall reading on here a good argument as to why Boston couldn't physically implement congestion charging, even if all the political dumpster fires were put out. This article doesn't seem to question the practicality of such a system, but if London and now NYC are able to do it, what are the constraints holding us back?

 

[Equilibria]

Seeing Red: Free parking perks are feeding Boston’s traffic nightmare

A Boston Globe Spotlight Team report: Employers say they want more transit spending, but employee perks undercut those words and entice workers to drive.

apps.bostonglobe.com

I'll post Part II, I guess. Adam Vacarro says this is some of the best transportation research he's seen from beat reporting - I don't know.

I think this whole part can be summed up in two paragraphs:

There’s also a perception that driving is usually cheaper. But that’s because drivers often conveniently forget the “sunk cost” of the vehicle price itself, as well as maintenance and repair bills, insurance premiums, registration fees, taxes, and finance charges. Add in the price of gas, and, according to AAA, the average annual cost of vehicle ownership hit a new high this year of $9,282, or $773.50 a month. That’s nearly twice the cost of the most expensive MBTA commuter-rail pass. And compare it to a mere $90 a month for a CharlieCard.

Let this please end the absurd argument that we "subsidize" driving and not transit in MA. These transit passes are subsidized and artificially cheap, and it's limiting the quality of the T.

They see people with a savvy urban perspective: They worry about MBTA mishaps, but view them as among the imperfections of all old, big-city transit systems. Boston is a thriving city moving lots of people, so they expect snags in the system. They love their “green” credentials, and as they begin or end a workday, they can take a mental break, with zero neurons devoted to gripping a steering wheel and navigating through horrifying traffic.

Given the Globe's typical hyperventilating approach to covering the T, this paragraph is hilarious. Also, the exact same could be said about a good portion of those who drive into the city: they're savvy urban dwellers who understand that traffic is a part of living in a city. They accept some crowded roads as the cost of a strong economy and their own need for privacy to decompress on the way in or the way out from work.

Lots of people are reasonable and understand that cities are crowded and chaotic sometimes? What a concept! If only the Spotlight team and their editors had been told that sooner, we could have been spared all the 'tude in this series!

 

[FK4]

Crossrail faces further delays and will cost more than £18bn

TfL says aim is for London rail link to open ‘as soon as practically possible in 2021’

www.theguardian.com

It happens in China and Dubai, because those places are autocracies with slave labor and no environmental protection laws.

CrossRail is not a good example. You’re talking about a two branch de novo rail project that has a tunnel component underneath the entire city of London, east to west... that’s like the equivalent of a line from Aquarium to Framingham.

London (and other cities) have executed numerous infrastructure projects in the last two decades. I’m not sure how the timelines compare exactly but they’re definitely better than here. More importantly, though, is the fact that they actually are constantly expanding, whereas in Boston we have grown our population without ever making a single transit expansion (GL doesn’t count, since it was approved in the 80s).

EDIT: I type this after arriving at Back Bay, where I just waited 10 minutes (in peak morning rush hour) for a subway to arrive... and of course, nobody could get on since it was too packed. Yes, we have let the entire system completely deteriorate. To the people who point to the changes that have been implemented, such as maintenance and new cars, yes, that’s good and will eventually make a difference. But maintenance is just. Not. Enough. We need to simultaneously expand. I’ll hold my breath on the Globe pieces until I see that they actually are advocating for more than a congestion charge. You need alternatives to transportation (beyond buses) before you solve the problem of accommodating 300,000 more commuters.

 

[Equilibria]

CrossRail is not a good example. You’re talking about a two branch de novo rail project that has a tunnel component underneath the entire city of London, east to west... that’s like the equivalent of a line from Aquarium to Framingham.

By miles of tunnel, I actually think that's a pretty good description of the subway construction that would allow Boston to commute by train like London, Paris, Moscow... you'd need in the dozens of miles of tunnel, at least.

It's true, though, that London and Paris are constantly building new subway and new subway stations. It's absolutely stunning from an American perspective, where the opening of a one-station extension is a once-in-a-generation event.

I completely agree with your take on the Globe piece.

 

[Ruairi]

Let this please end the absurd argument that we "subsidize" driving and not transit in MA. These transit passes are subsidized and artificially cheap, and it's limiting the quality of the T.

I don't think anyone is arguing that Transit is not subsidized.
The cost of driving here is a fraction of what it is in other western cities (outside the US)
where, auto taxes, gas taxes, tolls, and congestion fees all contribute to financing public transit to a much higher level than we do here.
The commuter rail system feeding Boston is an antiquated embarrassment.
We can fawn over pages of photos of shiny new buildings but all the people who don't drive to them are expected to travel in on ancient dinosaurs of rail cars pulled by diesel locomotives, all of it dating back to the last millennium. New orange or red line cars shouldn't be news, it should be matter of course.
We should be able to commute from Providence, Worcester or even Portland in half the time for half the price.
The car is the problem and taxing the car is the solution.

 

[Equilibria]

I don't think anyone is arguing that Transit is not subsidized.
The cost of driving here is a fraction of what it is in other western cities (outside the US)

Again, please support that assertion with data.

The car is the problem and taxing the car is the solution.

Our inadequate transit is the problem, and taxing the car should be tied specifically to projects to improve transit transformatively. Otherwise, you're penalizing people for living.

 

[Lrfox]

I only skimmed Part II and will read in depth later, but did it mention anything about how many city and state employees and contractors can seemingly cram their cars onto any sidewalk, plaza, pedestrian way, fire lane, "loading zone," bike lane, etc.? This is a very Boston thing, and it's certainly not helping those of us commuting on foot or by bike.