Late night T service take 2

If this is the only cut they are making its unsustainable. Cut more service now and get this thing to a sustainable base that can't be built from.
 
The T actually is budgeting $10 million for Late Night for FY16. Current operating costs are ~$14, so these (rather smart) cuts are designed for that budget to help sustain the service as a whole. I'm pleasantly surprised by this announcement. I was fully expecting the next news about Late Night T to be that it was cancelled. The article also says the T is encouraged to release a RFP for sponsors ASAP in order to maintain/boost service.

Bus routes No. 15, No. 22, No. 71, No. 73 and No. 77 will be eliminated.

I was happy to see the 116/117 survive because of the heavily minority blue collar workers that need this service to get home from their jobs in the service industry. I honestly don't use it late night on a regular basis, but when I do, I've seen the constant crowds of this demographic at all hours. Sometimes 11 PM can look like rush hour at Maverick.

http://www.wbur.org/2015/04/15/mbta-scaling-back-late-night-service
 
one thing that has continued to baffle me is why they aren't running late night service down Washington in Roslindale. If there weren't 9 bus lines sharing the same route I'm sure at least one of those lines would be one of the busiest in the entire system.

The T's failure to do something about the redundancy on that stretch is mind-boggling - you typically see 8-10 buses all bunched up together immediately after Roslindale square - 4 or 5 of them completely full - in the evenings good luck trying to get on a bus heading south on washington if there's long time between buses - over half the people get off between FH and Roslindale Square.

It makes me frustrated that expansion in the system is all politically motivated (costly south coast rail project) when they have inefficiencies with the existing system that could be solved by doing things like, say, run the 39 bus down to Roslindale Square... or extend the orange line south...
 
datadyne007 said:
Sometimes 11 PM can look like rush hour at Maverick.
Click to expand...


forest hills waiting for a bus heading south on washington - jam-packed with people around that time. Usually at least once or twice a month I witness bus drivers having to turn people away - I've complained to the T about it but they don't seem to think there's a problem. maybe they're getting kickbacks from the taxis...
 
datadyne007 said:
The article also says the T is encouraged to release a RFP for sponsors ASAP in order to maintain/boost service.

l]
Click to expand...

They are thinking about issuing an RFP to have a private contractor run late night service as an alternative to running the service directly themselves. I would assume rail service would be replaced by buses or vans under such a contract.
 
winstonoboogie said:
They are thinking about issuing an RFP to have a private contractor run late night service as an alternative to running the service directly themselves. I would assume rail service would be replaced by buses or vans under such a contract.
Click to expand...

Night Owl all over again? Wasn't that a colossal failure?

Thank you for the clarification, btw.
 
Cutting it back to 2am is so vague. Currently if I don't catch either the 2:10am or 2:25am 39 bus from Back Bay, I know the last one won't leave until the last Orange Line train has arrived, usually around 3am. This change seems to make the last bus the only option for those who head home after 2am.

Also, when buses routinely "wait for last train" for 20 or more minutes past their scheduled departure time, they should change the schedule so people can rely on them.

Then again, we're headed into the warm weather now, so I'll be Hubwaying home anyway.
 
^ It will probably be the same as the 2:30 end works now. They'll release schedules once it's implemented I'm sure.

While I'm glad that they're not getting rid of it completely, I worry that this is just a step towards that conclusion. A 2:00 end will result in lower revenue. People who stay out till the bars close will revert back to cabs and ubers rather than rushing out for the last train. Maybe they're actually a negligible part of the late-night ridership, I don't know. But I'm concerned that, if revenue drops when they pare back to 2:00, and if they don't find other money from sponsors, they'll just end the experiment all-together.
 
It's also tough to get into a commuting pattern that relies on taking a late night train when you don't know if it will be there in a year or not. I didn't see initially that they cut a few of the bus routes and cut back headways, I think this helps a lot. $10M is a lot but I think it's key for keeping the service going, if they can keep it under that mark I think it's a small enough pill to swallow to keep the service.

A few other fixes that Id like to see:

Eliminate service on certain holiday weekends. (It's somewhere around 50% of "normal" ridership.)
Skip half the Green Line surface stops. Terminate D at Reservoir.. Use the decreased travel time to maintain shorter headways on Branch lines.
 
I'm happy to see they are making some cuts according to ridership, but keeping the program going.

I examined some of the late-night data that's available and pored over some schematics that datadyne provided. Here is the late-night system I would propose (running as late as possible on Friday and Saturday, so that high-traffic routes see super-late service):

My Proposal - Late Night Service:

Green Line: "B" service from Boston College to Park Street, "C" service from Cleveland Circle to North Station, and "D" service from Riverside to North Station. Notes:
  • The 39 bus would provide replacement "E" Branch service beyond Copley.
  • No late-night service between North Station and Lechmere.

Red Line: Broadway to Alewife. Notes:
  • No late-night service between Broadway and Braintree.
  • No late-night service between Broadway and Ashmont.
    • The 23 bus provides service to Ashmont.

Orange Line: Ruggles to North Station. Notes:
  • No late-night service between North Station and Oak Grove.
  • No late-night service between Ruggles and Forest Hills.
    • Bus service to Roxbury Crossing is still provided by the 23, 28, and 66 buses.
    • The 39 bus provides service to Forest Hills.

Blue Line: Bowdoin to Maverick. Notes:
  • The Silver Line and Massport Shuttle would serve the Airport.
  • The special "118" late-night bus would serve Wonderland.

Silver Line: Full route(s).

Bus routes: 1, 23, 28, 39, 57, 66, "73A" (special late-night route that runs along Mount Auburn Street from Harvard to the Belmont Street split), 111, "118" (special late-night route that runs the combo 116/117 route to Revere Center, then loops Revere Street/Beach Street where they split). Notes:
  • No late-night 15 bus service, although it's partially duplicated by the 23 and 28.
  • No late-night 22 bus service, although it's partially duplicated by the 28.
  • No late-night 32 bus service.
  • No late-night 71 or 73 bus service beyond Mount Auburn & Belmont Street.
  • No late-night 77 bus service.

EDIT: More up-to-date track maps were posted in the other thread. I'll have to pore over those as well.
 
^ Oh NOW I see why you wanted that turnback info ;)

After examining the maps, it looks like I was wrong about Broadway. No crossovers between it and SStation. Probably better to turn at JFK.
 
BussesAin'tTrains said:
^ Oh NOW I see why you wanted that turnback info ;)

After examining the maps, it looks like I was wrong about Broadway. No crossovers between it and SStation. Probably better to turn at JFK.
Click to expand...

You caught me!

It appears there is a single crossover, though, just beyond Broadway, between Broadway and Andrew. That could theoretically act as the southern terminus of Red Line service.

On the other hand, JFK/UMass is more frequently used, has access to the yard, and provides more flexibility.
 
bigeman312 said:
You caught me!

It appears there is a single crossover, though, just beyond Broadway, between Broadway and Andrew. That could theoretically act as the southern terminus of Red Line service.

On the other hand, JFK/UMass is more frequently used, has access to the yard, and provides more flexibility.
Click to expand...

Has to be JFK. Changing ends mid-tunnel is just too slow and cumbersome, and anything that needs extra dispatch or inspector attention because of its unorthodoxy is going to be extra cost they don't need to be taking on on the overnight. If the train doesn't start when they change ends, they've got a mess to clean up.

You can burn 3 disabled trains at JFK before you're down to your last turnback track. And you have one to burn at Alewife without fouling the other bi-directional berth, with the yard just behind the station wall to tow a disablement away. Those have to be the turnback pairs.
 
bigeman312 said:
Orange Line: Ruggles to North Station. Notes:
  • No late-night service between North Station and Oak Grove.
  • No late-night service between Ruggles and Forest Hills.
    • Bus service to Roxbury Crossing is still provided by the 23, 28, and 66 buses.
    • The 39 bus provides service to Forest Hills.
Click to expand...


  • In this scenario, it almost seems as though OL passengers (without the extensions to Oak Grove and Forest Hill) could be handled by the Green Line from North Station to Copley + the 39. Of course, it means users of DTX, Chinatown, Tufts Medical, Back Bay and Massachusetts would have a walk a couple blocks to a GL station, but I wonder if being able to consolidate those lines wouldn't be an important savings...
 
The more different late night service is from the regular map, the fewer people will use it. That's part of why the Owl service a decade ago failed - even replacing a train with a bus is confusing especially to casual riders. The reason the late night pilot used the key bus routes rather than other corridors was because they were already on the map.

The places with successful late-night service that doesn't match the daytime map are those like NYC or Zurich where there is a separate, highly visible night map. That works best for 24-hour service.
 
^True. Also, I thought about it more, and now I hate my proposal.

I realize my folly in examining the data the MBTA released - it was only boardings after midnight. Obviously boardings are going to be extremely low that time of night at stations like Forest Hills, Alewife, Maverick, Malden Center. That doesn't mean they aren't heavily used - as many people would (theoretically) be disembarking at these stations, having boarded there earlier in the day. People aren't entering neighborhood stations or park n' rides at that hour, they are entering at stations like Park Street and going back to their homes or cars in Forest Hills/Malden Center. I should have taken that into account.

So, yes, the orange line and red line should probably be end to end to accommodate to accommodate the service workers datadyne mentioned, or the bar-hoppers, that are returning home to stations like Maverick.

I wish the data also reported the number of people leaving a station during late-night, which I cant think of a way to do without having someone standing there, taking a head count. I'm sure the numbers would be very high at a Maverick. Right now, the data shows very few boardings at Maverick and that is all.
 
Even if the T doesn't have an estimate, they should be able to pick up anecdotally on which end stations are worth the trip. They can also try to infer late night origin stations by comparing 2014 vs 2013 data.

Regardless of the data issue - I think the overall theme of your post was on point. Cut back service to core stations, give these stations reasonable transit and try to contain costs as much as possible.

The problem is that passenger revenue doesn't even cover their overhead costs to turn the lights, so it will be an uphill battle to get the fare recovery in-line with normal service.

I don't know why the T isn't going external for resources on this. There are ~200,000 College students. Asking each college to chip in $25 per student per year wouldn't even go noticed in the huge tuition increases most of these places hand out annually but would raise around $4.5M. Colleges that don't play ball may find it harder to develop their campuses or find less frequent service for their students.

Also - It wouldn't hurt to go back to the well and ask Cities and Towns to pay up. $1M from Boston, $200k from Cambridge $50k from Brookline, Newton etc would be fair considering the benefits to residents and businesses in these cities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top