General MBTA Discussion Thread

HelloBostonHi

Active Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2018
Messages
434
Reaction score
124
Until several years ago, the MBTA was regularly reporting 210-230k riders per day on the Green Line. Now it's at 150-160k. Has the Green Line really lost one-third of its riders in just several years, or has their reporting changed?

EDIT: Looks like it dropped from 204k in the APTA 2017 Q4 report, to 155k in the 2018 Q1 report. That sharp a change suggests a change in methodology, not an actual massive ridership decline
The MBTA has a shocking number of different ways they count ridership depending on who they're talking to... Ever seen the variety of commuter rail ridership data? The CTPS counts seem the most accurate but for their yearly NTD reports they use all sorts of conductor estimates and ticket sales combos.

One can hope that in 5 years with a single unified fare system that has tap on tap off data they'll finally be able to count people... That plus all new trains have APCs and all new buses have APCs and there is a project to install them on CR trains too...
 

HelloBostonHi

Active Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2018
Messages
434
Reaction score
124
New renders for B branch consolidation, construction scheduled to start this fall

 

sneijder

New member
Joined
Jul 25, 2018
Messages
62
Reaction score
6
Anyone think they could've been more aggressive with stop consolidation in this area? Going from 4 to 2 is great but the two proposed stations are still only about 0.2miles apart.
 

Arlington

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 10, 2011
Messages
3,800
Reaction score
69
Anyone think they could've been more aggressive with stop consolidation in this area? Going from 4 to 2 is great but the two proposed stations are still only about 0.2miles apart.
I think that with the crush volumes that they do, they needed two stops.
 

HelloBostonHi

Active Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2018
Messages
434
Reaction score
124
Anyone think they could've been more aggressive with stop consolidation in this area? Going from 4 to 2 is great but the two proposed stations are still only about 0.2miles apart.
I'd like to see the closure of:
  • BU east
  • Packards Corner
  • Allston st
  • spofford ped x-ing
  • summit ave grade x-ing
  • Mt Hood rd ped x-ing
  • Reedsdale St grade x-ing
  • cummington mall grade x-ing
  • granby st grade x-ing
  • Chiswick Rd
  • Englewood Ave
  • Tappan St
  • Fairbanks St
  • Hawes st

Every single crossing and station slows trains down, all of these are completely unnecessary crossings and stations within 500ft of other ones. Cars can totally do u-turns. In the south we had the concept of "super-junctions" with the same goal, eliminate the number of median crossing left turns.
 

millerm277

Active Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
202
Reaction score
9
I'd like to see the closure of:
  • BU east
  • Packards Corner
  • Allston st
  • spofford ped x-ing
  • summit ave grade x-ing
  • Mt Hood rd ped x-ing
  • Reedsdale St grade x-ing
  • cummington mall grade x-ing
  • granby st grade x-ing
  • Chiswick Rd
  • Englewood Ave
  • Tappan St
  • Fairbanks St
  • Hawes st

Every single crossing and station slows trains down, all of these are completely unnecessary crossings and stations within 500ft of other ones. Cars can totally do u-turns. In the south we had the concept of "super-junctions" with the same goal, eliminate the number of median crossing left turns.
BU East, Central, Allston St and Packard's Corner are all high ridership stops on the system.

Packard's Corner also functions as both short turn location and bus transfer point with 57 riders. And with Malvern St transit proposals with West Station, could gain additional importance.

Transit priority implemented well will/would make most of the crossings a non-issue, IMO. I'm not necessarily opposed to closing some (to cars, at least), but I also don't feel it's necessary.

-------

No major arguments on Chiswick, Englewood, Tappan, or Hawes.

Although I will note that Dean Rd is the lowest ridership of the Englewood-Dean-Tappan set of stops, so perhaps it's more sensible to close that and leave the other two.

Brandon Hall is a more sensible closure than Fairbanks with the way the street grid works. (or you can just consider it "combining" them).


Some additional proposals for closures, based on ridership counts + spacing:

Blandford St - Especially if the train protection program eliminates a need to stop at the top.

South Street - 214 passengers/day.

Fenwood Rd - 221 passengers/day

Back of the Hill - 35 passengers/day.

-------


With 3-car sets + type 10 + all-door boarding one stop could be plenty. And make the service more like HRT.
Maybe. You've got physical platform space issues as well with how busy those stops can get, IMO.

Perhaps more importantly, neither AFC 2.0 or the GL Transformation were on the table/fleshed out when this set of stop consolidation was worked out.

And we're probably at least a decade from seeing all 3-car sets/type 10s everywhere, so while I agree that their introduction may drastically change things, I think you need to put them in service and then re-evaluate the system, rather than closing things today that will cause problems on the system we have today.

I think there's enough other obvious closure candidates that we don't need to try to get aggressive with consolidation of high usage stops right now, there's lower-hanging fruit.
 

Tallguy

New member
Joined
May 2, 2018
Messages
56
Reaction score
1
BU East, Central, Allston St and Packard's Corner are all high ridership stops on the system.

Packard's Corner also functions as both short turn location and bus transfer point with 57 riders. And with Malvern St transit proposals with West Station, could gain additional importance.

Transit priority implemented well will/would make most of the crossings a non-issue, IMO. I'm not necessarily opposed to closing some (to cars, at least), but I also don't feel it's necessary.

-------

No major arguments on Chiswick, Englewood, Tappan, or Hawes.

Although I will note that Dean Rd is the lowest ridership of the Englewood-Dean-Tappan set of stops, so perhaps it's more sensible to close that and leave the other two.

Brandon Hall is a more sensible closure than Fairbanks with the way the street grid works. (or you can just consider it "combining" them).


Some additional proposals for closures, based on ridership counts + spacing:

Blandford St - Especially if the train protection program eliminates a need to stop at the top.

South Street - 214 passengers/day.

Fenwood Rd - 221 passengers/day

Back of the Hill - 35 passengers/day.

-------




Maybe. You've got physical platform space issues as well with how busy those stops can get, IMO.

Perhaps more importantly, neither AFC 2.0 or the GL Transformation were on the table/fleshed out when this set of stop consolidation was worked out.

And we're probably at least a decade from seeing all 3-car sets/type 10s everywhere, so while I agree that their introduction may drastically change things, I think you need to put them in service and then re-evaluate the system, rather than closing things today that will cause problems on the system we have today.

I think there's enough other obvious closure candidates that we don't need to try to get aggressive with consolidation of high usage stops right now, there's lower-hanging fruit.
I agree that Back of the Hill is useless as a stop, but I am reluctant to get rid of such a cool name.
 

curcuas

Active Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2015
Messages
286
Reaction score
5
Murals won't help Sullivan. What would help it is an entrance on the East Somerville side. I now commute through there a couple days a week and it always pisses me off how much it completely turns its back on the dense residential neighborhood it's right next to.
Fun fact, that side of the station is still City of Boston for 2 blocks. That entrance is sorely needed.
 

JeffDowntown

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
2,851
Reaction score
29
And we're probably at least a decade from seeing all 3-car sets/type 10s everywhere, so while I agree that their introduction may drastically change things, I think you need to put them in service and then re-evaluate the system, rather than closing things today that will cause problems on the system we have today.

I think there's enough other obvious closure candidates that we don't need to try to get aggressive with consolidation of high usage stops right now, there's lower-hanging fruit.
One thing to keep in mind about delaying consolidation/closure, is many B and C stops need to be lengthened for Type 10's to be fully deployed.

So you really want to get the stop configurations right before spending all the money on stop expansion for Type 10's. It would be really wasteful to expand a stop, then decide to close it.
 

ceo

Active Member
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
182
Reaction score
8
Fun fact, that side of the station is still City of Boston for 2 blocks. That entrance is sorely needed.
Yup, not a lot of people know about that little sliver of Charlestown on the west side of I-93. I park near the station and have to be careful about which city I'm in.
 

F-Line to Dudley

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
5,315
Reaction score
128
I have a post in the Green Line Reconfiguration thread about this, though I was leaning towards scrapping BU Central rather BU East (in hindsight my consolidated station idea makes the most sense to me).
What makes most sense is if MassHighway stops dicking around about whether it's going to reconfigure the BU Bridge/Mountfort/Carlton intersection clusterfuck, now that the Comm Ave. bridge replacement is done.

If that gets re-done as a single-point intersection with left-turn lanes they can close the Carlton grade crossing and move BU Central to BU Bridge, squared up with that intersection. As it stands there's going to be a longish station gap between Central and the first combo stop west of the bridge. This relocation would make the distribution pretty much spot-on.


Closable grade crossings are Cummington and Blandford (probably needed for that platform lengthening)...not Granby, since that's the only outlet from the end of Bay State Rd. All they need to do is recalibrate where the U-turns are and that whole stretch from Blandford portal to BU Bridge can probably live on 2 signalized grade crossings.
 

F-Line to Dudley

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
5,315
Reaction score
128
BU East, Central, Allston St and Packard's Corner are all high ridership stops on the system.

Packard's Corner also functions as both short turn location and bus transfer point with 57 riders. And with Malvern St transit proposals with West Station, could gain additional importance.
Agree. Although Allston St. is so awkwardly placed vs. Warren that something has to give. I think if Comm Ave. Phase III reconstruction stops wasting time kicking the can and actually commits to redoing the roadway with a center reservation and unified carriageways, the layout can go something like this:


  • Packards (stet)
  • Harvard Ave. (stet)
  • Harvard Ave. turnback yard (i.e. Blandford Yard-like setup). Whack Griggs.
  • Long Ave./Redford St. Reanimate old stop location as a block-shifted Allston St. + Griggs replacement. Shift Griggs median curb cut here as grade crossing, offset platforms around crossing.
  • Warren St. (stet). Try to make platforms offset if curvature allows.
The offset platforms take some of the sting out of Allston St. being a major cross street, as the platforms from Long IB and Warren OB would both be visible from the Allston intersection for wayfinding purposes.

No major arguments on Chiswick, Englewood, Tappan, or Hawes.

Although I will note that Dean Rd is the lowest ridership of the Englewood-Dean-Tappan set of stops, so perhaps it's more sensible to close that and leave the other two.

Brandon Hall is a more sensible closure than Fairbanks with the way the street grid works. (or you can just consider it "combining" them).
Brandon Hall is #1 above all else elimination candidate on the C. Both for spacing, and because its staircase from Beacon St. WB is much more dangerous than the traffic light-protected one at Fairbanks.

Dean Rd. suffers from over-proximity to both the adjacent Englewood and Tappen stops as well as Beaconsfield on the D. If you whacked it and simply put some good wayfinding signage at the intersection for Beaconsfield you'd have it covered. But you do need to keep Englewood and Tappen if Dean goes. Tappen's not bad because there's a bit of a hill after Washington Sq., and Englewood being in Brookline vs. Cleveland Circle being in Boston means there's a more divergent audience split re: the associated side streets.

Hawes is another one where putting wayfinding signage to nearby Longwood on the D makes it pretty expendable, moreso than Kent.

Some additional proposals for closures, based on ridership counts + spacing:

Blandford St - Especially if the train protection program eliminates a need to stop at the top.
Too busy, and Kenmore violates the fire code on a Sox game day if Blandford isn't there to take some of the hit. If you closed the grade crossing for the platform extension, you could put this stop + Blandford Yard under the subway signal system and not need to give way to street signaling until the Granby St. crossing. That's a nifty win for dispatching sanity into Kenmore if they can get it.

South Street - 214 passengers/day.
Horrible location...BUT, stop spacing between Chestnut Hill Ave. and BC is far too wide to leave without a spacer. And there's a little bit of hill to climb, so it's an accessibility issue as well. Much better would be to relocate the stop to Foster St., relocate the grade crossing from South to Foster, and do offset platforms around the crossing.

Fenwood Rd - 221 passengers/day

Back of the Hill - 35 passengers/day.
Dear God yes. Also, put it this way:

In the unlikely event that the City would be willing to trade Mission Park Apartments front parking spaces for a Huntington Ave. widening, you could make the reservation reappear at the Mission Park stop for full ADA platforms. The roadway would be exactly as wide--for 1 block only--as the reservation section, and trains would only have to span a short street-running distance from Brigham between stops. With Fenwood and BotH whacked, that means Riverway is the very last street-exiting non-ADA stop left to brainstorm a solution for.
 

whittle

Active Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2017
Messages
217
Reaction score
4
Closable grade crossings are Cummington and Blandford (probably needed for that platform lengthening)...not Granby, since that's the only outlet from the end of Bay State Rd.
Eh, I don't think it'd be a huge deal if traffic coming from Granby/BSR has to U-turn at St. Mary's, and closing Blandford will prevent any possibility of turning left out of Cummington/Blandford (but that should be low priority unless BU's funding things).

Somewhat related question: what are the rules regarding ped x-ings on the green line? Is there a lower speed limit around them?
 

F-Line to Dudley

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
5,315
Reaction score
128
Somewhat related question: what are the rules regarding ped x-ings on the green line? Is there a lower speed limit around them?
Rules of the road when it comes to crossings of the reservation. Every time I've been on the B in Allston the train's always blown at full speed through the Fordham Rd. crossing and others. Maybe caution gets warranted when sightlines are restricted, but they don't have any special rule.

Woodland Golf Club ped crossings on the D might have an ease-up from otherwise max-speed territory, but that's a different case because it's out in subway signalized territory.
 

Equilibria

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
3,938
Reaction score
155
Woodland Golf Club ped crossings on the D might have an ease-up from otherwise max-speed territory, but that's a different case because it's out in subway signalized territory.
There aren't any crossings at grade in the Woodland GC. The only at-grade ped crossing on the D is at Hammond Pond.
 

KentXie

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
3,864
Reaction score
8
Honestly the problem with the B line isn't over congested platforms. The green line runs the B train frequently enough to handle picking up passengers before it becomes overcrowded. The problem is the excess number of stations lining Commonwealth Ave, including the BU portion and the number of intersections it passes through which results in too many stoppage, for example, train stopping at a station and then sitting at the station for 3 additional minute because it has to wait for the next green light. This clogs the whole section, fucking up the headway between each train, and resulting in trains going express frequently.
 

Top