Post-Covid Travel Patterns and Solutions

FK4 said:
This thread asks: what has changed in travel and commuting patterns pre- to post-pandemic? Ridership remains 60-70% what it was pre-Covid, and yet at the same time, traffic all across the city is worse than it's ever been. Why is this? I haven't really seen any satisfactory analyses of either problem. It's been long enough that there should be at least some early research and data on what commuter patterns and work patterns are going to look like in the future, and what impact WFH will have. What do we know at this point? But, what I really have not seen any good analyses on is: why is the traffic so bad? The only stories I've seen on this issue blame low-hanging fruit like the dysfunction of the T, but I'm not buying it. Surely, there is more to it than that... especially since the Commuter Rail has suffered far less than the subways have, so that should not explain the 30-40% drop in ridership if the number of cars has increased—even if we account for the fact that many CR riders change to a subway upon arrival at terminus.

Anyway, I would like to see this thread be a place be a place where people can share info and centers that are researching these issues, and opinions on why things are the way they are, and where they are going. I know there's another thread about the "crisis" in ridership but this is more broad, focusing on what is happening in the travel patterns today and how and why it differs from 2019 and before.
Click to expand...

Here you go:

mobility-massdot.hub.arcgis.com

MassDOT Mobility Dashboard

The MassDOT Mobility Dashboard is an interactive roundup of key indicators that reflect how much people are traveling, how they are getting around, and where they are going. This data is updated weekly unless otherwise noted.
mobility-massdot.hub.arcgis.com
 
dshoost88 said:
Here you go:

mobility-massdot.hub.arcgis.com

MassDOT Mobility Dashboard

The MassDOT Mobility Dashboard is an interactive roundup of key indicators that reflect how much people are traveling, how they are getting around, and where they are going. This data is updated weekly unless otherwise noted.
mobility-massdot.hub.arcgis.com
Click to expand...
Great site, didn’t know it existed. Still, really I want to know what the travel and commute patterns are, and # of cars on the road can only tell so much. Surely people are actively researching this somewhere…
 
FK4 said:
Great site, didn’t know it existed. Still, really I want to know what the travel and commute patterns are, and # of cars on the road can only tell so much. Surely people are actively researching this somewhere…
Click to expand...
If I ever want to know such things, then I reach out to the regional planning agency staff for the respective region(s) I’m looking to find it. They staff the MPO and perform the transportation research you’re speaking of, for all modes.
 
I'm seeing things similar to what folks have noted:
  • Traditional car commutes are "back" Tuesday-Wednesday-Thursday, but, less congested Mondays and Fridays
  • Local arterials and highways seem to be pretty crowded during commuter hours
Other things that I've noticed
  • Busy roads from leisure trips seem more common than in 2018 or 2019 definitely affecting travel on Thursday afternoon and evening and Friday middays - it seems like three-day weekends have been enabled by hybrid work schedules (or have that many companies trialled 4-day work weeks?)
  • Weekend commuter rail travel seems to be as, if not busier, than 2018 or 2019 - i think maybe people really know about the $10 weekend pass now? or perhaps it is similar to the things affecting highways and expressways.
  • Local MBTA buses seem to be almost "normal" - the ones connected to traditional business/professional commutes, tho - they still seem quite off - though - it might also just be the bad quality of service
  • Commute trips on the Red and Orange are crowded - but - i think the total volume of people are still much below before 2019, they just don't run the trains as often with all the slow zones.
  • As an example - I popped out into Kendall on a working day that I had off in October - that morning commute time used to make the sidewalks awfully busy - but in October it was really not that crowded. The gush of people leaving the station has come down to a relative trickle. The new headhouse looks amazing tho.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FK4
I think one of the big opportunities for transit with this shift is to provide better service for the occasional supercommuter. The Downeaster, Northeast Regional, and H2H already sort of serve this purpose, as will East-West/Compass. Commuting 50+ miles twice a week isn't so bad, but doing it in a car can be grueling especially if you're going on the peak traffic days. I think there's the opportunity to have similar services to Cape Cod, New Hampshire, more functional SCR, more destinations in Rhode Island, more destinations in Western Mass, etc.

Also, CR fare rationalization. They've had a lot of success with the $10 weekend program. The current fares are just too high at most times, especially when they don't include a transfer to Rapid Transit or bus and many people have given up their passes that included transfers.
 
737900er said:
Also, CR fare rationalization. They've had a lot of success with the $10 weekend program. The current fares are just too high at most times, especially when they don't include a transfer to Rapid Transit or bus and many people have given up their passes that included transfers.
Click to expand...

Problem is, the CR runs at a bigger loss per rider than the subway or bus. And encouraging supercommuting (compared to, say, living closer) really isn't in Boston's best interest.

If anything MA should be cracking down on the "move farther and farther away because cheaper SFH" crowd. Not sure how though.
 
jklo said:
Problem is, the CR runs at a bigger loss per rider than the subway or bus. And encouraging supercommuting (compared to, say, living closer) really isn't in Boston's best interest.

If anything MA should be cracking down on the "move farther and farther away because cheaper SFH" crowd. Not sure how though.
Click to expand...
There's certainly a bit of TOD around commuter rail stops, and the new MBTA communities act will help accelerate it.

It's certainly a positive if we get more "super commuters" to ditch a drive in for transit.

The subway system (and tbh most bus routes) aren't comprehensive enough a large portion of people commuting into Boston.
 
jklo said:
Problem is, the CR runs at a bigger loss per rider than the subway or bus. And encouraging supercommuting (compared to, say, living closer) really isn't in Boston's best interest.

If anything MA should be cracking down on the "move farther and farther away because cheaper SFH" crowd. Not sure how though.
Click to expand...
Unless we have another 2008 (knock on wood that we don't), housing just isn't going to magically get cheaper. The biggest reform we have going is just a zoning reform - zoning reform isn't housing production. We can run more trains for more communities resulting in more trains for more people - as a short and medium-term support for getting people feasible options for a healthier, safer, and more comfortable work commute.
 
tysmith95 said:
There's certainly a bit of TOD around commuter rail stops, and the new MBTA communities act will help accelerate it.
Click to expand...

You can build all the TOD you want, but the people we are talking about aren't interested. They want an SFH. Perhaps they could be... uh... convinced? to give in and live in a MUD closer to work. Seems these supercommuting ideas are just enabling them.

Apparently this is not a small number either.
 
jklo said:
Problem is, the CR runs at a bigger loss per rider than the subway or bus.
Click to expand...

The marginal cost of each rider is negligible. I'm just talking about getting people onto all the trains that are operating under capacity.
I think many people have more flexibility in working hours than they used to, which could open up space on the highest-demand trains if the pricing encourages them to move to times with less demand.
If people are choosing to drive instead of take an empty train because the train fare is too high that's a policy failure.

Also, one of the elephants in the room is that there are a lot of highly-paid 95+% WFH people who live inside 128. These people are making everything much worse.
 
jklo said:
You can build all the TOD you want, but the people we are talking about aren't interested. They want an SFH. Perhaps they could be... uh... convinced? to give in and live in a MUD closer to work. Seems these supercommuting ideas are just enabling them.

Apparently this is not a small number either.
Click to expand...
Better regional rail plus zoning reform might bring people to MU TOD who would otherwise choose to live closer but for affordability. It's not so much convincing people who prefer exurban single unit housing, as much as it is offering an opportunity for those who only prefer it for cost reasons.
 
737900er said:
Also, one of the elephants in the room is that there are a lot of highly-paid 95+% WFH people who live inside 128. These people are making everything much worse.
Click to expand...
I feel like this comment is a little tongue in cheek but I don't think it's a reasonable expectation, or even necessarily desirable, to push everyone out to the sticks just because they work from home most/all of the time now, and certainly not for all these people to have uprooted lives over such a short span of time. I liked living in Quincy when I was in-person 5 days a week for reasons beyond work proximity. I continue to like living in Qunicy now that I'm in person only 2 days a week.
 
737900er said:
…

Also, one of the elephants in the room is that there are a lot of highly-paid 95+% WFH people who live inside 128. These people are making everything much worse.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything else you said, but this opinion is well, pretty braindead.

Somebody who works remotely, lives in Boston, and does everything that commuting citizens do, except commute (such as patronizing local retail establishments, paying taxes, sending their kids to school here), but because they aren’t using transportation resources for commuting purposes they are making things worse? That’s, frankly, a really really bad take.

There is a shortage of housing supply. I urge you to rise above pointing at those who are or aren’t worthy of living in the city in a tribalistic game of musical chairs. Recognize that a city for all of us should be the end goal, not some purity line of “if your job site isn’t required to be in Boston, your kind isn’t welcome around here.”
 
bigeman312 said:
I agree with everything else you said, but this opinion is well, pretty braindead.

Somebody who works remotely, lives in Boston, and does everything that commuting citizens do, except commute (such as patronizing local retail establishments, paying taxes, sending their kids to school here), but because they aren’t using transportation resources for commuting purposes they are making things worse? That’s, frankly, a really really bad take.

There is a shortage of housing supply. I urge you to rise above pointing at those who are or aren’t worthy of living in the city in a tribalistic game of musical chairs. Recognize that a city for all of us should be the end goal, not some purity line of “if your job site isn’t required to be in Boston, your kind isn’t welcome around here.”
Click to expand...

I think it's a big problem in an environment where we're not meaningfully building more housing inside 128 or transit services. It shouldn't be, but it is. There's nothing wrong with WFH, but I think it's a problem when a growing share of the limited housing we do have close to transit services is increasingly consumed by people not using those services, and those people are disproportionately high income.

This should be a region financially accessible to people of all income levels, but I do believe that WFH has exacerbated the consequences of not building.

Disclosure: I WFH within a 10 minute walk of a rapid transit stop
 
737900er said:
I think it's a big problem in an environment where we're not meaningfully building more housing inside 128 or transit services. It shouldn't be, but it is. There's nothing wrong with WFH, but I think it's a problem when a growing share of the limited housing we do have close to transit services is increasingly consumed by people not using those services, and those people are disproportionately high income.

This should be a region financially accessible to people of all income levels, but I do believe that WFH has exacerbated the consequences of not building.

Disclosure: I WFH within a 10 minute walk of a rapid transit stop
Click to expand...

Rather than painting yourself as a villain who is “making everything much worse” by simply living your life, keep your eye on the prize of the systemic issues that are the actual root of the problem. We aren’t going to solve this problem through you beating yourself up enough for simply, and I repeat, choosing to live here.

That self-flagellation is entirely divorced from solution-oriented thinking and only further divides by assigning blame to those simply for living here as a way to justify your self-hatred. A better path would be to remember that you do belong. You are welcome here. You are not “making everything much worse” by existing and there should be enough housing for you and for your plumber, neighbor’s teacher, and local retail worker.
 
bigeman312 said:
Somebody who works remotely, lives in Boston, and does everything that commuting citizens do, except commute (such as patronizing local retail establishments, paying taxes, sending their kids to school here), but because they aren’t using transportation resources for commuting purposes they are making things worse? That’s, frankly, a really really bad take.
Click to expand...
Right? My company changed to mostly remote work for the people in my department. So the position expressed by @737900er would suggest I now need to either move out of the city that I love and have supported for decades, or change jobs, even though I like the one I have and the company where I do it. I shouldn't be required to upend my life because the city isn't permitting enough new construction. I have many valid reasons for living in Boston, a better commute was only one of them.

[edit to add]
A third choice would be going in to the office anyway, which is an available option, but then I'd be taking away transportation resources from others, not to mention there being very little point to my going in when nobody else will be there.
[/edit]
 
HenryAlan said:
Better regional rail plus zoning reform might bring people to MU TOD who would otherwise choose to live closer but for affordability.
Click to expand...

But these people want SFH. I don't know how else to put it. Essientally you are asking for MA/the Feds to spend gobs of $$$ to encourage people to live in a SFH in NH, Maine, RI...
 
I think it's a big problem in an environment where we're not meaningfully building more housing inside 128 or transit services. It shouldn't be, but it is. There's nothing wrong with WFH, but I think it's a problem when a growing share of the limited housing we do have close to transit services is increasingly consumed by people not using those services, and those people are disproportionately high income.
Click to expand...
This argument reduces the utility of transit to commuting. Perhaps that is how some people experience or use transit, but we must acknowledge that commuting accounts for less than 20% of all trips (source: https://www.transportation.gov/mission/health/commute-mode-share). TOD is not just about making it easy or get to or from work - though that is indeed a major benefit. It's also about unlocking the 80% of trips that are not commutes, and allowing them to take place in something other than a personal vehicle. This is a big part of why off-peak frequency and reliability is so important to the future of transit.

Separately, regarding the notion that people just "want" SFHs, far out on in NH, Maine, RI - what's the data for this? New construction in Dorchester, one of the cheaper Boston neighborhoods, fetch $500-$600/sf these days, on par with some decently well-off, transit-served, inner ring suburbs. Unless housing out in the exurbs can match that, it seems pretty apparent to me that there's more demand of transit-oriented housing than is currently being met.
 
We've had this SFH debate in other threads. A big issue is you cannot disentangle the "SFH desire" with other factors, since prevalence of SFH tends to correlate strongly with other things like good school systems and availability of a guest room for grandma/grandpa to visit and help with childcare. Someone might want to live in the city, but also really want a good school system and is planning their life around some inlaw childchare (or need to do eldercare). Oftentimes something's gotta give. We don't have total independence of variable here; they are hopelessly intertwined.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top