T needs to step up its game on ‘diversions’ (CommonWealth Magazine)

Boston’s MBTA has been relying increasingly on shuttle buses so it can shut down portions of subway lines for repairs. I am not convinced that these shutdowns are actually necessary or useful, and they are certainly a miserable experience for riders. Are we trying to reduce ridership and encourage driving? With service like this, it seems so. Here’s a piece I wrote in CommonWealth Magazine.

Shuttle buses not cutting it during recent subway shutdowns

TWO WEEKENDS AGO the MBTA did something previously unthinkable. It closed half of a major subway line, through downtown Boston, on a game day, with shuttle buses running from Back Bay to Sullivan. There was little notice and even less planning for running the buses that would shuttle people through dense Boston traffic, turning a 20-minute train ride into a miserable one-hour ordeal.

Each time an Orange Line train carrying 200 passengers unloaded at Sullivan Station, riders slowly packed into buses, each painfully inching through traffic and making every stop while exiting and boarding riders jostled to get on and off.  There were no dedicated lanes for buses, no traffic officers, no signal adjustments, and no enforcement to keep cars from stopping wherever they felt like (but the flashers must make it okay). Multiple buses with 70 passengers each had to wait behind a handful of cars.

Instead of multiple express and limited-stop route options, there was only one route and its design made little sense. Stops were hard to find, inaccessible to riders with disabilities, or located far from the stations they were allegedly serving. The northbound Downtown Crossing stop was located at least a quarter mile away at 100 Federal Street. I spoke to several riders who missed their stop because of either the bizarre route, poor information, a language barrier, or the lack of audible announcements on shuttle buses. These riders are the “essential workers” the T needs to be especially responsive to as it builds back from the pandemic.

The experience was particularly confusing and arduous for riders transferring from commuter rail at North Station. The only indication that subway service was not provided was in the form of two small, hard-to-read signs near the subway entrance and the main entrance. No personnel were located inside the commuter rail station to direct passengers along the unintuitive route to the shuttle bus, a one-third-mile walk from the commuter rail platforms to an unmarked fire hydrant on North Washington Street, instead of a more intuitive location along Causeway Street near the subway entrance – or the equally confusing spot where Lechmere shuttles have been boarding for the past two years. Compounding the problem was the poor weather conditions that weekend. At a time when commuter rail ridership remains low, such failures to coordinate services frustrate riders and drive them away.

At one point on Saturday evening, thousands of Bruins fans stood on the sidewalk on North Washington Street, eventually cramming onto arriving buses, most without masks for the slow crawl across the temporary Charlestown Bridge. North Washington Street itself has a red bus lane but it was full of cars (as usual). Since no one thought to temporarily prohibit parking on that block, buses stopped in the travel lane to load, causing further delays to the buses behind.

At Sullivan, there were no signs showing the shuttle route or any other useful information. Most regular route buses stopped in different places so that the shuttle could stop upstairs, but there was only one sign indicating this, located all the way at the end of the platform where nobody would see it. Not a single bit of information was in Spanish or any of the other languages commonly spoken in Malden, Everett, and Somerville, although to be fair there was not much in English either.

The MBTA is now gearing up for another year of “diversions” – shutting down a different section of track each weekend and sometimes on weekday evenings – and early indications are not encouraging. This week the T quietly posted in a web site alert that the busiest part of the Blue Line would shut down for two weeks – less than two weeks from now. The Blue Line has been the subway line with the highest ridership during the pandemic, and closing it on short notice for an extended period without a comprehensive, legible alternative for riders is unfathomable.

So far this year there have been shuttles on the Red Line north of Harvard and between Broadway and JFK/UMass. The Orange Line will have shuttles  again this weekend. Over the past year, there have been numerous Red and Orange Line shutdowns, as well as two Green Line branches that closed every weekend for six months and another that was closed every day for two months, all with similarly poor execution. These shuttle operations continue despite a severe operator shortage that prompted service cuts and shows no sign of easing. And yet the subway lately has been slower than biking, and the Green Line B branch is still slower than walking. You can see for yourself on the TransitMatters Data Dashboard.

The T says maintenance needs to be done and, yes, essential maintenance activities that cannot take place during normal subway operations are fully appropriate and necessary. The question is:  Why can’t maintenance be done overnight like it always has until recently? According to the T, weekend shutdowns are better and cheaper than having a station open but under construction, or having trains go slowly through a work zone, for a much longer period. But has anyone asked T riders if this approach is better, or considered how it harms and deters riders and increases driving? MassDOT would never consider shutting down the I-93 tunnel for even one day, but this is exactly what the T is doing with the Orange Line, and riders have no alternatives.

There may have been a time when the rare summer weekend subway shutdown was acceptable because ridership and car traffic were much lighter, so shuttles could be fast and frequent and some people would choose to walk. If that was ever true, it is no longer. In many parts of the city, traffic is worse on Saturday afternoons than at any other time. Sending packed shuttle buses through the Theater District on a Saturday evening or to Quincy on a Sunday afternoon isn’t a painless experience.

Apologizing for the “inconvenience” and suggesting riders “allow extra travel time” shows a failure to understand and appreciate the impact these disruptions cause. Every time a low-wage worker is surprised by a poorly communicated disruption and delayed by 45 minutes, they risk losing a job and/or 45 minutes of pay. Many people simply miss out on social, educational, or recreational opportunities because it simply takes too long. Meanwhile the T’s own attendance policy imposes “progressive discipline” for bus and subway operators who show up even 30 seconds late to work, but apparently it’s okay to delay others and they won’t even tell you how late you’ll be.

If these subway shutdowns are really absolutely necessary, the MBTA must plan, communicate, and operate replacement services that keep disruption to an absolute minimum.  This would include, at a minimum, working with the relevant cities and state agencies to create temporary bus lanes, adjust or turn off traffic signals, and use police officers at intersections to keep buses moving.

Multiple shuttle routes, including express and limited-stop options, would make the experience more tolerable and be more efficient anyway. Alternative routes should offer extra service that’s free and which riders are encouraged to use, such as the Green Line and commuter rail lines that parallel much of the Orange Line and parts of others. Shuttle buses can also be more creative, such as bringing passengers from Ruggles direct to downtown, and not just mirroring the subway line. Shuttle buses should operate on bus-only streets to maintain reasonably fast and reliable service.

The plan must also be communicated to riders well in advance, both online and in person. Periodic announcements in stations is not enough. Riders become creatures of habit and may walk by several signs before noticing one.   Large eye-catching signs with links and QR codes are needed in multiple languages in every station and every train car on the affected line, as well as key stations on other lines, including commuter rail and buses. Generic signs warning riders of regular weekend shutdowns and advising them to check the website each week should be placed on every bus and train and in every station. Then on the day of the event, directional signage should be everywhere. The T should also adopt a communication plan for disruptions of all types and familiarize riders with how to stay informed, in any language.

This would all take some planning and coordination but it’s not impossible or unreasonable. It would also make the city and the T think long and hard about whether rail shutdowns are really necessary, because, if they are, they’ll have to do more than simply throw shuttle buses on the streets. It would also be an opportunity for municipal leaders in Boston and Cambridge to demonstrate how well they can support improving shuttle services initiated by the T, in a way where city resources are deployed to enable more efficient and convenient shuttle services and serve as a model for regular routes.

Jeremy Mendelson is a transit service planner, bus operator, and co-founder of TransitMatters.

5 Ways to Make Buses More Reliable (CommonWealth Magazine)

https://commonwealthmagazine.org/opinion/5-ways-to-make-buses-more-reliable/

Too many buses show up too early, too late, or not at all

THE REMARKABLE RESILIENCE of bus ridership through even the worst months of the pandemic has underscored the critical importance of this surface transportation mode to provide access to jobs and opportunities, especially for those not privileged to be able to work from home. Buses disproportionately carry low-income, essential workers who tend to have inflexible work hours and locations. For those with other options, a single bad experience can cause them to avoid using buses, furthering a cycle of low ridership and increased traffic congestion.

That’s why it is essential that MBTA bus services become more reliable. Too many buses show up too early, too late, or not at all. Buses often bunch together as some get stuck in traffic and leave long gaps in between, forcing riders to wait up to three times as long as the schedule indicates, only to be met with an overcrowded bus and then another one (or two or three) right behind it.

While the MBTA is currently in the process of redesigning the bus network, which should include major reliability improvements, we don’t have to wait until next year to start making progress. The challenge of keeping buses on time in dense urban areas with variable ridership and traffic conditions is not unique to Boston, so we can look to transit industry best practices to ensure more buses show up on time and keep moving. Here we discuss a few essential changes to achieve even spacing of buses and minimize waiting time and overcrowding.

 Headway maintenance

Busy frequent routes in mixed traffic tend to have variable travel times that make schedules hard to follow. There are often enough buses to carry the number of passengers arriving each hour, but the uneven spacing between buses results in overcrowding and is an inefficient use of resources.

As an effective way to deal with these issues, the MBTA should deploy a “headway maintenance” operation where buses simply stay 10 minutes apart. This makes service easy to understand and use and keeps wait times short, so that transfers are easy. Headway maintenance would also prevent the worst overcrowding, which is typically caused or worsened by bunching and long gaps that are common today. Rapid transit lines (and the shuttle buses that fill in for them during planned shutdowns) already do this: instead of having scheduled times, dispatchers work to ensure the spacing (headway) between trains is consistent and low enough so nobody has to wait too long. Implementing this on buses would mean that every operator is responsible for monitoring the spacing ahead and behind them using computer aids and managing their speed, and thus would be very low cost. (This practice could also be adapted to trains to smooth out arrival times and reduce instances of overcrowding and stop-and-go trips, especially on the Green Line.)

Pulse points

In less dense areas where service is less frequent, there is another option for keeping wait times short: the pulse. A pulse point is a central hub where several routes all arrive and depart at around the same time, so that people can transfer between all the routes conveniently. An example of where this could work well is Central Square in Lynn, which is a hub for most of the bus routes serving the North Shore. There is already regional rail service nearly every half hour, with trains arriving from Boston at 25 and 55 minutes past every hour and trains departing for Boston at 4 and 34 minutes after the hour with only a few gaps. There are also five bus routes that terminate at Lynn and run just about hourly, together with the Number 455 bus which passes through on the way from Wonderland to Salem every half hour and the relatively frequent 441/442 buses toward Wonderland or Marblehead.

What would a pulse schedule look like at Lynn? Without changing the rail schedule at all, the 455 bus could pass through on the hour and half hour in both directions, with the other buses arriving at 5 minutes beforfe the hyour and departing 5 minutes after the hour. This allows riders to connect from the terminating routes such as the 426, 429, 435, and 436 to trains going to Boston or to the 455 bus to Wonderland and Salem. It allows riders coming from Boston on the train or from Wonderland on the 455 bus to connect to those routes, with only a 5-10 minute wait. Likewise, it allows connections between the train and the 455 bus, allowing riders headed for the outer part of the route past Lynn to save a considerable amount of time compared to taking the Blue Line and changing to the bus at Wonderland.

These connections can be made even better if the schedule of the trains is adjusted to make the inbound and outbound trains arrive closer together, which would allow for connections to/from trains in both directions. Early morning, evening and weekend buses could also wait an extra few minutes to depart if any route is running a little late.

Pulse systems could be applied in other places where MBTA or Regional Transit Authority bus routes meet at a station, including Waltham (MBTA), Fitchburg (MART), or Framingham (MWRTA), or anywhere two or more bus routes meet. Indeed, Brockton Area Transit (BAT) in Brockton already operates a pulse system centered on the BAT Center across the street from the Brockton station, but the MBTA train service isn’t coordinated with the buses.

Dedicated bus lanes

Third, in order to maintain even spacing between buses – which makes them more reliable – and ensure the success of pulse systems, the issue of traffic congestion must be addressed. The number one reason why buses are late and run invariably between destinations is because they are stuck in traffic.  While various strategies can be used at the street or vehicle design level to keep buses moving, the most effective is dedicating road space to buses.

Dedicated bus lanes, a key element of bus rapid transit, allow buses to travel without obstruction with the same fluidity as trains, thus making them inherently more reliable. When riders wait to board a bus at point A, they know exactly how long it will take to arrive and then reach point B because it will not be subject to the variability of traffic. It will also be a smoother, more comfortable ride that is less subject to crowding because buses are able to complete their runs more quickly and provide more trips. A bus that is not in traffic is a faster, safer, more reliable bus.

Metro Boston has already experienced the benefits of dedicated bus lanes, with over 14 miles and counting of the lanes in communities ranging from Lynn to Everett to Roslindale. These bus lanes have not only shaved valuable minutes from bus trips; they have made the buses far more reliable. When combined with other bus rapid transit elements such as level and all-door boarding, transit signal priority, and center-running lanes, these benefits become amplified.

Dedicated bus lanes are not just good for bus riders, they are good for all users and overall traffic flow of the road. By alleviating the conflict between buses and other vehicles as they attempt to merge in and out of moving traffic at bus stops, bus lanes can lend themselves to the improvement of overall traffic flow, decreasing idling and minimizing dangerous emissions on the corridor. They can also create opportunities for shared bus-bike lanes which many of the Boston area bus lanes have incorporated. With dual-side door buses (that is, buses with doors on both sides), the operational flexibility of the road with bus lanes is significantly increased because buses are no longer restricted to curbside boarding on the right and that space is opened up for other critical uses like protected bike lanes, parklets, delivery and drop off zones, or outdoor dining.

Transit signal priority

Traffic signals play a very important role in bus and light rail reliability. While there are many thousands of traffic signals in Greater Boston, only a small number of locations are responsible for most cascading delays and reliability impacts.

Signal priority is the simple act of ensuring that transit vehicles are given a green light as they approach an intersection. This technology is inexpensive and can keep buses moving with minimal impacts to pedestrians and other vehicle users.

With a small one-time investment focused on high volume bus corridors, station busway access points, and a few dozen hotspots, bus reliability will greatly improve.

Intersections which delay transit service should be prioritized for signal upgrades. Since we can’t install this technology everywhere right away, as a general policy, all signal cycles should be kept simple and short so that they are easy to understand and nobody has to wait too long. Short signals minimize transit delays while also limiting the need for extra vehicle lanes to act as car storage, which further improves safety for transit riders and other pedestrians. Transit signal priority is often only needed at the longest and most complicated signals, where it is best complemented by a queue jump lane – a very short bus lane – that allows buses to bypass traffic waiting for the signal, access the bus stop, and merge back into the traffic flow.

All door boarding

The time that a bus spends at the station or bus stop to let passengers on and off – known as “dwell time” – is one of the most overlooked factors impacting bus service reliability. Because fare collection is only possible through the front door of MBTA buses today, the process of boarding passengers can often be lengthy, not to mention unpleasant, with passengers frequently lined up or bunched together in all weather, waiting to board one-by-one and tap their Charlie Cards or insert cash at the front door farebox.

A 2015 study by ITDP found that 40-70 percent of delays on MBTA key bus routes happen at bus stops, even more than delays caused by congestion or intersections. Demonstrations of “all door boarding”, where passengers are able to board all at once through both the front and back doors, have shown travel time reductions up to 30 percent as well as notable improvements to bus reliability – because the buses were able to leave the station on time – and overall rider experience.

All door boarding is most effective in combination with off-board fare collection or no fare collection at all. While controversial in its application, the MBTA’s Fare Transformation project seeks to enable all door boarding through placement of fare card validators at both front and back doors, thus enabling a limited version of the benefits offered by this bus improvement. A more effective strategy is to place validators at bus stops, especially at stations where boarding volumes are high.

A frequent, reliable and integrated transit network is what people want, need and deserve. If “moving more people in fewer vehicles” is truly a goal we embrace as a Commonwealth, then prioritizing reliable, efficient bus service is imperative. To support public health and economic recovery and make our region more resilient in a post-pandemic era of climate change, the focus of our streets must change from movement and storage of vehicles to movement and activity of people. Similarly, the operation of bus service must shift to focus on minimizing waiting and travel time by ensuring frequent service with easy, predictable connections, so that everyone can participate fully in their communities.

Jeremy Mendelson is a co-founder of and lead bus service planner for TransitMatters; Julia Wallerce is Boston program manager for the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy, and Acardy Goldmints-Orlov is a member of TransitMatters.

CT 49 - MBTA, News, Fares, Solutions & Why Everyone Depends on Transit

Recent MBTA news and advocacy battles encouraged me to record a podcast to counter the dominant narrative. Let's review what's causing this mess and how to stop the bleeding and operate a reliable and effective network.

Why a well functioning and affordable T should matter to everyone, because we all depend on transit even if we never use it (some of the reasons). And right now it's neither.

The population of Boston has increased 10 percent since 2004 and T ridership is up 30 percent on major lines, causing severe overcrowding, yet no significant improvements have been made since at least 2000, and service quality is declining. People cite transit as a primary reason the want to live in big cities.

The MBTA is chronically underfunded, promoting inefficient operating practices such as a reliance on overtime, deferred maintenance and an inability to plan for upgrades. Instead of addressing these problems, the control board has chosen to vilify transit workers.

Rapidly rising rents and declining wages have forced large numbers of people to move to places with slow, infrequent and expensive transit service. We have repeatedly cut service and raised fares on these "low ridership" services, while ignoring others with great potential.

Fares impact everyone, including those most vulnerable to rising costs, middle class riders who are more likely to choose other options, and everyone impacted by increase traffic on our streets (i.e. everyone). Bus, subway and commuter rail fares have more than doubled since 1991, while the gas tax has increased only 3 cents. Like transit, roads and highways are heavily subsidized, yet only transit riders are being asked for more. Governor Baker says a fee is a tax, but apparently not if it's a transit fare.

Finally I discuss several alternatives to raise revenue -- focusing on better and faster service -- without increasing the fee for users. But no efficiencies will fill the $7 Billion budget gap -- and that's just to reliably run what we have, never mind desperately needed upgrades. A transit network is a valuable public service, not a business, and it's time we started treating it like one.

Comments? Suggestions? Please visit CriticalTransit.com, email feedback@criticaltransit.com. Follow me on Facebook and especially Twitter @CriticalTransit and follow and support my work in Boston via TransitMatters.info. Your support goes a long way!

Episode 17: conversation in transit with Brock Dittus from The Sprocket Podcast, regional connections

I hopped on a train from Boston to Providence last week with Brock Dittus from The Sprocket Podcast. On the return train we got out the microphones and had an interesting chat about bikes, buses, trains, slow travel between cities, suburban sprawl and much more. Brock mentioned Tri-Met of Portland, the Lower Columbia Community Action Project which provides limited rural transit service in Washington state on a shoestring budget, and Transportland cargo bikes. Thanks to Josh Zisson from Bike Safe Boston for loaning Brock a superb single-speed bicycle.

At the end of the show I share an experience where a connection between LRTA and MBTA was practically useless due to lack of information. A great example of an inter-agency regional transit connection is the Coastal Link operated jointly by Bridgeport, Milford and Norwalk transit agencies on the Connecticut shore line. This decade-old route fills a gap in a retail-oriented suburban area and is part of a a series of local bus routes running from the New York line to the Rhode Island line.

All about transit in Boston

Boston is a great place to visit (and live) and offers lots of great lessons on transit service design and operation. It has one of the most diverse transit fleets in North America -- heavy rail (subway/metro), light rail (trolley/streetcar/tram), local and express buses (diesel/CNG/hybrid), electric trolley buses (trackless trolleys), regional commuter rail and a handful of commuter ferry routes in Boston Harbor.  The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), known locally as "the T", provides service throughout the region and operates all of these modes. You can read all about the MBTA on Wikipedia and the transit history and vehicle roster page maintained by local transit fan Jonathan Belcher. This week's super long show explores only a fraction of the system, including the Green Line light rail/trolley network, Blue Line heavy rail line, Silver Line bus rapid transit (BRT) lines, and the bus network in Harvard Square.

Please send in questions or comments on anything you hear to feedback@criticaltransit.com or comment on this page.