General MBTA Topics (Multi Modal, Budget, MassDOT)

Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

I ran across the changes for fare evasion. From Sen. Will Brownsberger's web site, included with MBTA / RTA funding taken from vehicle inspection fees:
"The legislation also increases fare evasion penalties to $75 for the first offense, $200 for the second offense, and $350 for each subsequent offense. According to the bill, if a fine is not paid within 21 days, the violator’s driver’s license will be suspended until it is paid."

So, still nothing to make out of state or foreign students pay fares, nor anyone riding the T because they don't drive. The thing we can take away is that the RMV is much more efficient than Mass court system, so the preferred enforcement tool for civil infractions.

The RMV is actually pretty damn efficient. They get a bad rap.

Foreign students, yes, but what happens if you're out of state (and they have your SSN or home state license number) is your right to drive in Massachusetts is suspended and your info is added to a national database of suspended licenses. Your home state will suspend in response because of a reciprocal agreement among all states.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

The proof can be found in projects scheduled for funding by the Boston MPO in the TIP listings. The next half mile of Commonwealth Ave headed outbound is on the list. It seems now that "other funding" of $4M is added to taxpayer's $12M. This is new. BU wasn't going to kick in any money before and I'm guessing they are now.

The actual reason for this project is realigning Comm Ave in order to widen station platforms by the MBTA ($5M more from their budget). Consolidating stations doesn't seem to be in the plan. BU has clout, making the previous Kenmore Square portion happen and now this next segment.

Yeah, Ive seen the plans show they plan on just keeping all the stops and making them better.

But theres no proof that the MBTA ever said "we want to cut this" and BU said "hell no".

Maybe its the MBTA that just doesnt care to cut them, and hasnt even asked BU. Maybe its the state.


The MBTA isnt at the forefront of service improvement where we can say without a doubt theyre pushing for faster service and its other parties holding them back.


Remember the signal preemption on beacon street?

Id find it just as likely that BU said "hey, you guys want to consolidate stops?" and the mbta said "nah, wed probably have to do a study or something, if its worked for 100 years, then its good enough for the next 100 amirite?"
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

Consolidating stops is an area where free market forces can be used instead of politics and socialism. The assessment fees made to each community should be based on services provided, including train/bus stops times trips/week. Thus, communities would not always fight the MBTA to keep stops and add more. They would have incentive to reduce less needed ones. Under current assessments, Quincy, Cambridge, Brookline, and Somerville all get more service than their fair share of cost. Boston has the highest multiplier, yet many areas are poorly served. Legislators were all about taking more money from motorists while none wanted to increase or make more fair city/town assessments.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

Yeah, Ive seen the plans show they plan on just keeping all the stops and making them better.

But theres no proof that the MBTA ever said "we want to cut this" and BU said "hell no".

Maybe its the MBTA that just doesnt care to cut them, and hasnt even asked BU. Maybe its the state.


The MBTA isnt at the forefront of service improvement where we can say without a doubt theyre pushing for faster service and its other parties holding them back.


Remember the signal preemption on beacon street?

Id find it just as likely that BU said "hey, you guys want to consolidate stops?" and the mbta said "nah, wed probably have to do a study or something, if its worked for 100 years, then its good enough for the next 100 amirite?"

I guess that's plausible but I figure it's more likely that BU wouldn't suggest consolidation when they are constantly touting the abundance of transit access to prospective students. That's not to say the increased efficiencies (dependable headways, no more expressing or bunching of trains, etc.) wouldn't make sense to BU - they're just not as easily marketable on the surface.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

I think its fairly obvious to any BU student, faculty or staff member that the B line is too damn slow.

"eliminate" may get some opposition but "consolidate and upgrade" I think would be well received, especially if you can throw in "saves 3 minutes every trip!"
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

We're just weeks away from the initial opening of Bostons "newest" line, the Indigo line, as Talbot Station is stated to open in October.


Joe Cosgrove, director of development for the MBTA, told residents that three stations along the line will soon be open; Talbot Avenue in October; Four Corners in April; and Newmarket in June. The fourth station, Blue Hill Avenue in Mattapan is still in the design phase.
http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/roxbury/2012/09/fairmount_indigo_planning_init.html

....and yet....

-No details on any expanded service! (weekends?)
-No details on pricing!
-No details on fare collection! (no free transfer to subway?)
-No maps showing the new stations!

MBTA is lining up the Indigo line for failure.

They're also missing their court-mandated deadline of 2012 to have all the stations open.


Also...

In 2008, daily ridership on the Fairmount/Indigo Line was close to 1,000 passengers per day, one-way. In 2011, that numbered dropped to just 300-400 passengers per day, one-way.

Someone should be fired.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

There were a lot of construction disruptions on the Fairmount last year as they did bridge replacements. The ridership crash is fully understandable.

While they're a little behind schedule, they are finishing everything. The neighborhood snafus on some of the stations got them off to a late start. But drive by some of the new ones...they are taking shape impressively fast. This isn't nearly as galling a blown deadline as the Haverhill improvements, where new rail, piles of ties, and construction equipment have been rotting for months with no activity.


Yes, they have been negligent on schedule details. And have undercut all the planned step-ups so far. It is going to be artificially capped until they can expand South Station. There simply isn't enough room for a train every 25 minutes. But they have got space for an increase in service...Fairmount and Old Colony use the far platforms, not the NEC/Worcester/Amtrak ones that are really really stuffed.

They're also not done-done and have some minor unfunded items to chase. Mainly, the low platforms at Fairmount and Readville. Those were not covered in the project because they're already ADA-accessible mini-highs, but until those are raised to full-high they can't use the automatic door coaches on the line. That incurs a large dwell time penalty when the conductors have to work all the doors and flip the high/low platform trap doors manually, making it impossible to achieve desired headways. It's not major expense (especially at Fairmount, which is already regulation 800 ft. length), but they have to chase it. At Readville they've also got to plan the platform relocation to a double-track island north of the switch. It's the only way they'll be able to stop or lay over 2 trains at once at the station for headway maintenance, the only way they'll be able to intermingle a substantial increase in Franklin thru-routes on the line (or future Foxboro service), and the only way they'll be able to access the NEC for future extension to 128 station. They're limited if they keep going to the current 300 ft. single-track mini-high platform.


And I do think they're never going to achieve the ridership desired unless they get the commuter rail Charlie'd like was promised years ago then abandoned. For a rapid-er transit line passengers need fast access to farecards and automated proof-of-payment so the conductors don't have to collect tickets. Charlie machines on the platform...tap surfaces at the doors. That may make more of a difference than if the line gets put on subway fares or if it retains a commuter rail fare structure.

I also think they're not firing on all cylinders without a Westwood/128 terminus. Which will be possible without fouling Amtrak or Providence whenever Amtrak restores the 3rd track from Readville to 128 and turns the current outbound platform into an island. Readville itself doesn't exactly set the world on fire with bus connections, and there's massive park-and-ride revenue to tap at 128 with the more frequent service. They've at least got to study a phase-in plan for this and get their Readville platform construction house in order. Note: if/when congestion at 128 makes it hard to short-turn on 3 tracks, there's room on the easterly side to add a turnout with 2 more side platforms. So that's where the stub turnback can be in 12-15 years when it needs to get booted off the thru tracks.


As for the DMU's...that's not gonna happen. There just aren't viable enough models for purchase. The future looked rosier 5 years ago before Colorado Railcar ended up in bankruptcy, but the market is still murky at best and no manufacturer has yet approached the scale to mass-produce FRA-compliant DMU's at a price point that makes them worth it. The T can be a little more nimble than today on start/stop performance if they run the new locomotives (which are...yay!...on-schedule as of last update). Then of course this makes the most sense to be the first additional line they electrify after they go electric with the Providence Line. EMU's of course the perfect ideal, but they probably are going electric push-pull. It still beats the pants off diesel push-pull and gets halfway to DMU performance.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

Then of course this makes the most sense to be the first additional line they electrify after they go electric with the Providence Line. EMU's of course the perfect ideal, but they probably are going electric push-pull. It still beats the pants off diesel push-pull and gets halfway to DMU performance.

I'm curious, why electric push-pull over EMUs? Does it fit in better with existing commuter rail infrastructure and/or practices? Would it be significantly harder/more expensive to go all the way with EMUs?
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

I'm curious, why electric push-pull over EMUs? Does it fit in better with existing commuter rail infrastructure and/or practices? Would it be significantly harder/more expensive to go all the way with EMUs?

You need entirely new maintenance facilities to service EMU's.

You need to upgrade the power draws on the NEC a lot more than you would running electric push-pull because EMU's are much power-hungrier.

Electric push-pull lets you use the normal coach fleet for much lower start-up cost.

There are no FRA-compliant bi-level EMU's in production, so they would have to commit full-bore to Providence Line schedules frequent enough for all-singles to absorb even the heaviest rush hour loads.


No question, EMU's perform way better for commuter rail and if they can take that plunge it's the way to go. But the startup costs are so high, if it comes to a dilemma of "we can't afford EMU's for another 30 years" it'll end up being way better to take the managed-risk buy of some push-pull electrics rather than stubbornly shackling themselves to diesel until the new diesels are as falling-apart as the oldest ones. And you know if presented with too many variables they'll just put their heads in the sand and run 80 MPH diesels to Providence forever.

So I think we've got to be realistic. It IS expensive to change modes like that and maintain a very different kind of fleet. Metro North, Long Island RR, SEPTA, Metra, and (some of) NJ Transit run EMU's because their predecessors have been running EMU's since the 1920's. There hasn't been a new adoption since for very good reason (not even MARC, which runs on the NEC). So that's not just institutional stubbornness. And electric push-pull still does beat the pants off diesel push-pull and get halfway to DMU performance. So in a choice between electrics now or diesel forever...take the good-enough option.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

Boston.com - September 21, 2012
Downtown Crossing gets countdown signs, becomes 3rd MBTA station to display status of incoming trains

By Matt Rocheleau, Town Correspondent

The MBTA activated countdown signs Thursday at Downtown Crossing Station telling riders when the next trains will roll in, according to T spokesman Joe Pesaturo.

The station became the third in the public transit system, following the activation of electronic countdown displays at Park Street Station and South Station.

The MBTA began activating the signs last month, as the start of a pilot program that could be extended to all 51 Red, Orange, and Blue Line stations by the end of the year.

To read more about the countdown sign program, click here.

E-mail Matt Rocheleau at mjrochele@gmail.com.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

I just noticed the clocks at Park Street the other day. They work pretty good and are nice to have.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

http://www.boston.com/community/blo...t_door_frustrations_and_downtown_jam-ups.html

Pesaturo told me that customers have actually pushed the agency to put these [front door-only boarding] policies into place at public meetings across the city and state.

So...when was the last time any reporter in this town actually lobbed the Iraqi Transit Information Minister a non-creampuff question to answer? Or asked any sort of follow-up question picking out the stream of contradictions...bullshit, if you will...continually spewing out of his mouth?

The dude may make it to retirement without ever once breaking a sweat in front of a person with a notebook.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

Yes, people did complain about fare evasion. But they didn't say to institute this policy specifically. That was the T being lazy. I bet they're losing more money from the front door policy than anything they might be recouping from some fare evasion prevention.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

Pesaturo told me that customers have actually pushed the agency to put these [front door-only boarding] policies into place at public meetings across the city and state.

What I don't understand here is how "across the state" could have any relevance to Green Line boarding policies. Aside from Boston, the Green Line only directly serves Brookline, Newton, and Cambridge. That's hardly "across the state" in any meaningful sense.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

I had to wait for 7 trains to go by before finally pushing my way onto the 8th going inbound from sullivan today....
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

After several meetings in which customers demanded the MBTA address fare avoidance issues, the MBTA decided to cancel all service on the green line, to ensure no more free rides.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

I had to wait for 7 trains to go by before finally pushing my way onto the 8th going inbound from sullivan today....

The Orange Line is getting pretty ridiculous. Even during midday the trains are pretty crowded. In contrast, many Red and Blue line trains can be found empty.
 
Re: Driven By Customer 'Service' Parte Dos

http://wgbhnews.org/post/101-million-discrepancy-discovered-mbta-fare-collection-records

Clearly the answer to this is: ONE-FAREGATE BOARDING!

If Joe Pesaturo says we demand it, who am I to question?

classic_facepalm.jpg
 

Back
Top