MBTA Buses & Infrastructure

The pre-blizzard AM rush is so light that buses are running early everywhere. Just heard central control ask all buses serving Kenmore to hold their time *before* arriving since all berths at Kenmore are now full of other buses holding their time. A bit "manual" for my tastes, but shows that as far as terminals are concerned, they have the right insticts (holding time to prevent bunching)

My own 80 bus, scheduled for 37 minutes Arlington Center to Lechmere (7:40 -> 8:17) took just 23 minutes! Arriving at 8:03. That's some serious bunch inducing speed (and, indeed, there was another 80 holing time at Kenmore when we arrived.

(I plan a GL->NS->Lowell Line to get home at midday)
 
Last edited:
I know there are people whose brains are perfectly hardwired for scheduling things like buses and trains but damn that seems like stressful job.
 
The pre-blizzard AM rush is so light that buses are running early everywhere. Just heard central control ask all buses serving Kenmore to hold their time *before* arriving since all berths at Kenmore are now full of other buses holding their time. A bit "manual" for my tastes, but shows that as far as terminals are concerned, they have the right insticts (holding time to prevent bunching)

My own 80 bus, scheduled for 37 minutes Arlington Center to Lechmere (7:40 -> 8:17) took just 23 minutes! Arriving at 8:03. That's some serious bunch inducing speed (and, indeed, there was another 80 holing time at Kenmore when we arrived.

(I plan a GL->NS->Lowell Line to get home at midday)

On a 37 minute bus route, there should be several intermediate stops that are designated hold points, to keep a bus on schedule. They are sort of doing the right thing, by terminal holds, but being that far ahead of schedule helped no one trying to catch that bus near the end of that run.
 
On a 37 minute bus route, there should be several intermediate stops that are designated hold points, to keep a bus on schedule. They are sort of doing the right thing, by terminal holds, but being that far ahead of schedule helped no one trying to catch that bus near the end of that run.
Technically true, though if the bus 20 minutes behind (by schedule) is also running 14 minutes ahead (today) that's just a 6 minute wait. I guess in the middle it could be pretty bad as the 20 min behind bus might only have gained 10 mins and so appear 10 mins later than the expecte bus (which people at the stop had missed by 10 mins (read that slowly, I think I got it right ;-)

I did well because my stop is just 2 minutes from the start of the run (and at a place with neither road congestion nor boarding congestion). Google Maps did warn me it'd be 1 minute early (which is "100% faster"/"50% sooner" on the 2 minute trip from the route's start to my stop.

A question for Winstonboogie, but the natural schedule holds on a morning like this would seem to be the intermediate times listed in the printed schedules. These tend to be major intersections and busy stops.

I know there are people whose brains are perfectly hardwired for scheduling things like buses and trains but damn that seems like stressful job.
I'm not one of those people, but I've worked with them and I can keep up when they explain what they do ;-) The good news is that they experience flow in conditions like this.
 
Last edited:
Re: 89, 101, and 85

The 89 (branching to Clarendon Hill and Davis) and 101 should have clock-facing, 15 minute headways for each of the three routes during rush hour. They should be scheduled so that the shared portion of their routes (East Somerville and Winter Hill on Broadway) are served every 5 minutes. Something similar should be done off-peak, just with a 45 min to 1 hour individual line headway.

Or maybe we should rationalize the bus network to focus on a smaller number of routes that provide more frequent service in something closer to a straight line.

101 is a C shape going from the Orange Line to the Orange Line, which is not really optimal. It might be better to extend 85 along Central to Highland to Lowell to Medford and once it gets far enough north on Medford to be on 101's route, have it continue all the way along 101's route to Malden Center, and then get rid of 101 as we know it and increase frequency on the 85 and 89. The expanded 85 would then connect to the Red Line at Kendall, the Green Line at Union Sq, the Green Line again at Lowell St, and the Orange Line at Malden Center. (Although the right turn from Highland to Lowell is kind of tight, and a careful investigation into how well a 40' bus can make the turn would be needed. And you'd lose service on Avon St and Somerville's Main St; Somerville's Main St is not really terribly major, and it's close to Medford St and Broadway bus service horizontally, although the vertical terrain in that area is a bit challenging.)

Also, to make 89 work more as a straight line, it would be good to get the Red Line extended to Arlington Center, and extend the 89 past Clarendon Hill to Arlington Center, after which getting rid of 89's Davis L leg might make sense.

In the long run, maybe even expand the ferry terminal at Charleston Navy Yard and build a ferry terminal at Lo Presti Park, and have a ferry route between those locations that carries buses, bikes, and pedestrians, with the ferry departing as soon as a bus boards; then 89 could be extended along 93's route from Sullivan to Charleston Navy Yard, and then continue to Maverick and the Logan Airport loop, and perhaps on the west end of 89's route it could duplicate the 77 from Arlington Center to Arlington Heights, and maybe even be extended all the way to Hanscom. 89 could potentially turn into a route serving Logan Airport, the Blue Line at Maverick, the Orange Line at Sullivan, the Green Line at Ball Sq, the Red Line at Arlington Center and Arlington Heights, and Hanscom.

(To make a route from Logan to Hanscom actually work, if the 60-90 minute rule of thumb metioned at http://humantransit.org/2013/08/translink-high-and-low-performing-routes.html is accurate, it might be necessary to have a bus arriving at Logan make the full loop in discharge only mode, have a short layover, and then go through the loop again to pick up passengers, perhaps with an exception of mixing the end of route discharge with the start of route loading when the vehicle is making up time.)
 
On a similar note, the MBTA needs to spend some time identifying effectively scheduled bunching on lines that run concurrently for much of their routes. I'm specifically thinking of the 89(C)/89(D)/101 from Sullivan.

The 89 (branching to Clarendon Hill and Davis) and 101 should have clock-facing, 15 minute headways for each of the three routes during rush hour. They should be scheduled so that the shared portion of their routes (East Somerville and Winter Hill on Broadway) are served every 5 minutes. Something similar should be done off-peak, just with a 45 min to 1 hour individual line headway.

That is essentially how it works on Washington St. in Roslindale where there are 9 overlapping routes. When done correctly, it means never waiting more than 2-3 minutes for a bus. But in practice, what happens is four or five buses come in a minute's time, and then it's 10-15 minutes before the next one. I think it's difficult to tightly coordinate where the different routes converge on Washington.
 
Glad to see that BTD is getting on board, and that they're zeroing in on Washington Street approaching Forest Hills:

“We want to work hand-in-hand with the community to see if we could implement an Everett-style exclusive bus lane during peak times,” Gupta says. “We’re definitely looking for a pilot, much like Everett did, which we hope will give us the ability to evaluate.”
 
Re: 89, 101, and 85

101 is a C shape going from the Orange Line to the Orange Line, which is not really optimal.
I think there's evidence that even a C shape can work well.

Any line with a transit hub on both ends is going to be better balanced than one that has a dangling end at an un-dense place. A straight shot between hubs would be best, but a C-shape may be better than leaving a dangling end.
 
Nice writeup in CityLab about the Everett bus lane, with an eye to future bus lanes in the region

Two pictures from the article:

How important the Everett lane is:
dea8c87ac.png


I love the Barr Foundation's work, and like their choices for Boston, but think that since they missed such an obvious need as Everett, that we should not be surprised that they also missed
- Boston: Seaport from the North (Silver Line Gateway and/or Congress St)
- Boston: N. Wash St bridge to Haymarket
- Camb: Mass Ave Porter to Harvard
- Camb: Mass Ave Central to Back Bay
- Camb: Kendall (CT2 route)
- Smvl: Msgr O'Brien (Union Sq to Lechmere)
- EBos: Meridian St to Maverick


But here's Barr Foundation's Boston-centric Map, study [PDF], and write-up in City Lab
a54339f45.jpg
 
Broadway bus lane and School St bulb-out

If you watch this video roughly 7 minutes after the start, you can see that the bulb-out at School St required the buses to briefly merge into the general traffic lane, which seems to have caused about a 40-50 second delay in this particular trip.

Has this bulb-out already been rebuilt to make the bus lane continuous to eliminate the need for the bus to merge into the general travel lane? If not, are there at least plans to do so?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDhYKBwGgEo
 
Lower Broadway Bus Lane

Having now seen the TransitMatters video, I'm convinced that southbound traffic volumes on lower Broadway exceed what could be accomodated by simply converting one southbound travel lane from general purpose to bus only with no replacement for that southbound general travel lane if we don't want to drastically reduce the amount of single occupancy vehicle traffic that can travel through the area. (Reducing SOV traffic might well have some merit, but it's probably very politically difficult.)

However, given the existence of the northbound-only Bow St and the possibility of having some Broadway to Beacham traffic go via Dexter to Robin or Mystic to Robin, I suspect that dropping northbound Broadway to one travel lane along the length of Bow St would work.

The bridge across the Mystic only has two northbound lanes. If you have three lanes north of the bridge (one on Broadway, one on Bow St, and one on Dexter to Robin), then the two lanes of the bridge are going to be incapable of carrying enough traffic to fill the three lanes to the north of the bridge, assuming that the time those three lanes are stopped by red lights is reasonably minimal, and thus those three lanes should flow freely.

So the idea is to convert the left hand northbound lane along Broadway to the new left hand southbound lane, and then the right hand southbound lane could be converted to a full time dedicated bus lane.

To make this work, from the perspective of looking at the two northbound lanes of Broadway at Horizon Way, the lines would be repainted so that the right hand northbound lane of Broadway at Horizon would continue only onto Bow St, and the left northbound lane of Broadway would then continue onto what would become the only northbound lane on Broadway. I'm not sure what the best way to deal with the bike lane crossing the automobile traffic traveling from Broadway onto Bow St would be there.

Also speaking of bikes, since there are few road and driveway conflicts on the west side of lower Broadway, maybe we could have a bidirectional cycle track on the west side of Broadway, possibly negotiating with the private landowers to take small chunks of their landscaping to get the space to make that work?

Before reconfiguring Broadway, it would probably be a good idea to declare the speed limit along the entire length of Bow St to be 20 MPH (or maybe 25 MPH) and then put in traffic calming measures along Bow St so that drivers will actually end up driving at about that speed limit.
 
Last edited:
Re: Broadway bus lane and School St bulb-out

If you watch this video roughly 7 minutes after the start, you can see that the bulb-out at School St required the buses to briefly merge into the general traffic lane, which seems to have caused about a 40-50 second delay in this particular trip.

Has this bulb-out already been rebuilt to make the bus lane continuous to eliminate the need for the bus to merge into the general travel lane? If not, are there at least plans to do so?

That bulb out has to go. On a 24:20 minute trip, a 40 seconds is nearly 3% of the trip, and the pinch is bad both for the bus and all cars.
 
Re: Broadway bus lane and School St bulb-out

That bulb out has to go. On a 24:20 minute trip, a 40 seconds is nearly 3% of the trip, and the pinch is bad both for the bus and all cars.

Its not quite 40 seconds because of the bulbout. About 20 were spent waiting for a ped to cross.
 
Re: Broadway bus lane and School St bulb-out

That bulb out has to go. On a 24:20 minute trip, a 40 seconds is nearly 3% of the trip, and the pinch is bad both for the bus and all cars.

They could do that, but then it would look much less like a penis, which I'm pretty sure is its primary purpose since it's not actually shortening the crosswalk.

https://goo.gl/maps/ViLWxCNxv9r
 
Psyched to see that a priority bus is in the Boston 2030 plan at #6 (page 195)

Good News: it runs North Station-Haymarket-POSq-Atlantics Ave @ South Station-Seaport (D St)

Bad News: they've pegged implementation at $21m and 6 years.

Hello? Just slap some paint down and drop some friggin' traffic cones on Congress Street. Call it 1 year, $2m, and $1m/yr in police detail work.

Hire the Mayor of Everett as a consultant.
 
going to be hard to put BRT between State St and PO Sq.
Its only about 38' curb to curb right now, not nearly wide enough for the 4 existing lanes.
switch 2 of those lanes to BRT lanes at a minimum of 11' (but more likely 12' and some even ask for 13') and it leaves 14' for 2 travel lanes in opposite directions.

It'll need more than just paint. And the sidewalks are already pretty tight (ie, not meeting complete street standards) so it probably cant be done even if the City was willing/able/had the money to move the curbs.
 
Or just recognize that 12 or 13 foot lanes are not entirely necessary as buses already use the narrower lanes just fine. I would do what others suggested and just take the two outer lanes for buses by plopping down some cones. If it is 38 feet of space to provide lanes that is enough space for two 10 foot wide lanes and two 9 foot wide lanes which 10 feet isn't ideal for a bus lane but it is doable.

oqQf0Kj.png


Based on streetview I don't think the sidewalks are actually too narrow or anywhere close to being as narrow as my diagram above.

GtmYCqW.png
 
going to be hard to put BRT between State St and PO Sq.
Its only about 38' curb to curb right now, not nearly wide enough for the 4 existing lanes.
switch 2 of those lanes to BRT lanes at a minimum of 11' (but more likely 12' and some even ask for 13') and it leaves 14' for 2 travel lanes in opposite directions.

It'll need more than just paint. And the sidewalks are already pretty tight (ie, not meeting complete street standards) so it probably cant be done even if the City was willing/able/had the money to move the curbs.

I would take out the south bound general traffic lane there, and route south bound general traffic on Devonshire. They have both Water and Milk Streets to connect back over.

Make Congress: BRT south/general traffic north/BRT north from PO Square to State.
 

Back
Top