Improving the T
We all know the T is broke; but over the last couple of weeks, it’s been looking increasingly broken too. Ultimately, it’s no surprise; it’s the oldest subway system in North America. Obviously, the funding mechanisms for the T need to be updated, but what about the trains themselves? This week, we’re talking to T officials, T riders, and transit gurus about ways we can bring this 19th century system into the 21st.
Comments
Leave a Reply
I suspect this discussion is mostly about the subway and therefore only about Boston, but I wish the state of MA would invest in a commuter rail system that connected the towns in western MA with our state capital. If I had my way (and the state had the money), there would be a rail system for western MA that connected towns like Pittsfield and Lee through Greenfield to the Fitchburg line and through Springfield to the Worcester line. And ideally there would also be a line that ran between Fitchburg and Worcester…
The Green line is inefficient because it goes above ground. That means that it needs one driver per car, as opposed to one driver per train. It also means that boarding either takes a long time during rush hour or many people get on without paying. Finally, it runs more slowly because it needs to stop at red lights.
Some long term capital investment should be put into submerging much of the Green line, except perhaps the D branch.
I think its dissappointing that a “not in my backyard” attitude is allowed to prevent such an important resource like the T to be properly funded. While i would certainly enjoy cheaper gas, I am willing to pay an increased fuel tax for all of the benefits a well funded public transit system would give to Boston and Eastern MA. I hope that this proposal gets revisited in the coming debate.
This is an irresponsible discussion. Grabauskas can not describe reductions in T service as net savings without showing the direct COSTS of those “savings”. The costs of more people driving. The costs of gridlock. The costs of fewer people being able to do business in the urban core. The environmental costs. The quality of life costs.
We’ve had 12 years of republican governors convinced public transportation can be separated from private passenger vehicle, mairine & air transportation. It’s all INTERTWINED & must be ONE budget.
Any slashing
No one wants to say it, but the only way that we will improve public transportation is by RESTRICTING private transportation. I know I speak for many other people when I tell you that I cannot afford a car. I rely on walking, bicycle and mass transit.
The expansion and improvement of bussing and restriction of private vehicles within the city should be the ultimate solution. London and New York are already heading in this direction. Why is public transportation overcrowded and still unable to fund its operations? Transportation is a necessity, but a private vehicle is a luxury, even here in America.
The user-friendliness of the T system would gain immeasurably from the MBTA’s overhauling the signage on buses and trains to bring it into the 21st century and in order to reflect current thinking about visual communication as well as respond to both local and visitor consumer needs. As things now stand, signage (where it exists) is old, visually confusing, wildly inconsistent, and reflective of exclusively local usages (‘inbound’ and ‘outbound’ confuse even some local people). There are layers upon layers of signage, some crudely lettered, by T employees, to answer frequently answered questions, but it’s in the wrong place, visually confusing, and, ultimately, not helpful. When it’s not even clear how you access, for example, the current Lechmere T station (when you approach it from the Msgr. O’Brien Highway, you’ve got a problem. When trains lack directional signs, or when they are misleading, conductors need to act as tour guides and take their attention away from their most vital task, which is driving a train.
I have two thoughts on how to improve the MBTA:
1. Advertising — how is this source of revenue currently managed? Could it be restructured to be more attractive to potential advertisers and simultaneously generate more funds for the T? I ride a variety of T lines, including buses and subways, and it seems there are lots ‘n lots of empty placard holders on the vehicles and in the stations. Could advertising revenue be generated more aggressively?
2. Convenience — Already, it’s easier to get around the city by T than by car because of the City’s congestion, cost of parking, etc., but I still use my car for shopping trips because it’s just too much hassle to get to retailers on foot from the T stations. If I could get off the train and buy those items that I need on a daily basis, such as food items that you want to buy fresh (vegetables, breads, meats), I would be much more likely to feel that riding the T makes my life better. The MBTA could partner with supermarkets to build stores right above the stations. I look at Back Bay station and what a waste of space it is. In Japan, city subways run right under shopping malls and department stores (for example, in Nagoya); in smaller cities (such as Yokkaichi and Tsu), the commuter train runs through the second floor of a department store (with clothing and housewares in the floors above, and food court and gourmet food counters on the floor below). In less central parts of Japan’s cities, the stations are sparse, but private grocers and other retailers naturally gravitate to the streets nearest the train stations. What could be more convenient than that?
I live near the Stony Brook T station in Jamaica Plain, and while it’s nice to have a park across from the station, it would be even better if I could get off the T and pick up some fresh vegetables for dinner on the way home each night. Instead, the only retailer is a liquor store, and once a week I have to drive to the supermarket when the roads are congested, parking is a hassle, and then for most of the week, I’m stuck eating old vegetables. I realize that there’s a supermarket near the Jackson Sq. T station, but getting off at Jackson Sq. and walking to the supermarket (and then back again) adds an hour to my evening routine, and I just can’t manage it. A supermarket located directly ~above~ (i.e. ~in~) the T station would make all the difference.
Thinking small and short-term: could the MBTA rent space to small businesses selling items riders use on a daily basis, such as green grocer, bakery, etc.? (They already do this in some stations, but could expand it to all stations and also offer permanent space.) Thinking bigger: could the MBTA partner with supermarket chains to build larger stores directly within the stations? For example, Stop-n-Shop on the Orange line, Shaws on the Green line, etc.? At the same time, could the MBTA work with the City to change zoning to attract small retailers to the blocks around T stops. Even relocating farmer’s markets to service T riders would be an improvement. Thinking really big and really long-term: could the MBTA start their own chain of department stores (like they do in Japan, such as the Kintetsu rail company), or supermarkets or other retail enterprise? Another idea: how about building office space in, over or around T stations, and then renting to other sectors that would benefit from easy access to mass transit, such as medical centers, small colleges and training centers, day care centers, and so on. Likewise, the City could think about setting up community centers, career centers, and branch libraries in the T stations.
If riding the T could help streamline people’s busy lives, people would come to think of it as a modern convenience. The cost and hassle of owning a car in the city are significant, and I would absolutely love to be able to live without one. But the convenience of owning a car still outweighs the costs and inconvenience of living without one, and that’s really a shame.
Hey how about sending MBTA management to europe, so they can learn how to run a public transport system…
I have these suggestions: !. The stations should really be cleaned. Posters saying they are being cleaned won’t do. Has anyone else noticed the mold hanging from the ceiling of the westbound Park Street red line? 2. Why do the T trains’ doors shut so soon at the station? And why are the trains often immobile a while after this? This happens even before rush hours. Not only do I see people not able to get on the train, I have seen people trying to get off them, but unable to get off in time before the doors close. I often hear on the trains announcements advising passengers to move to the middle of the train, but nobody wants to do this and risk missing their stop! 3. I frequently see plastic cones and other obstacles that are in customers way. I believe these are fire hazards. I understand repairs must be made, but they seem to last several months. This seems a poor choice in priorities to me.
Jane, thanks for the opportunity to comment. The most useful approach to the T budget problems is to have an “independent”, top to bottom examination of cost / benefit relationships. As an example, GE’s Zero Based Budgeting process would give us the information needed to accurately judge the efficiency, and usefulness of the current T operations. Everything should be included. Transit schedules, salaries, maintenance, expansion, etc. Frankly I don’t trust the T or the legislature to find the problems or propose solutions.
Visible problems are: running empty trains, buses and boats at off hours, inadequate parking that limits ridership, and very poor communications with the public.
I heard the segment with Michael Dukakis and I think he pointed out what to me is a glaring problem with the MBTA, poor management. The recent crash on the green line, the second serious crash on the green line in under a year (the last one was in Newton on May 28, 2008, which killed the operator) indicates a serious lack of good judgment on the part of management.
The investigation into the actual cause of last year’s deadly crash was inconclusive, but the article that explains this on WBZTV.com (published June 2008) contained the following quote from the driver/victim’s father “I knew she wasn’t on the phone,” said Edmonds’ father Terry Jones. “When I would call her she said ‘I can’t talk now, I’m driving’.” I don’t mean to bring further speculation of driver negligence on the cause of the crash, but cell phone use was the primary lead in the investigation based on accounts of the operator using the phone at other times during the ride, and the father’s quote acknowledges that the operator’s phone was often, if not always, on while she was operating the train. They found no evidence that she was on the phone at the time of the crash, but could it have been ringing and perhaps she was scrambling to locate/answer it? I’m not sure if such a scenario can be ruled out forensically.
Regardless of the final conclusion of the investigation (which, again, the actual cause was never determined) the obvious risk of cell phone use during train operation should have become strikingly clear to everyone during this tragic event.
Following last year’s accident, MBTA management should have enacted and enforced immediately the safest, most appropriate policy for MBTA operators i.e. turn in your cell phone at the beginning of your shift. Who would have argued against that? What would have been their argument? I suppose one could cite the prevalent use of cell phones while operating automobiles, but the two are not entirely the same. MBTA operator’s job is to transport passengers, en masse, safely to their destination. They are being compensated, partly by the state, to do so, and should be subject to stricter regulations than private automobile operators. It’s well known that driving and cell phone operation is unsafe, but we’ve yet to reach a critical mass of tragic events to rally public action against it (as happened with drunk driving laws in the late 1970s/early ’80s, alcohol and driving were known not to mix well not long after the advent of automobile mass production in the 1920s).
Other evidence of poor judgment on the part of MBTA management is the selection and installation of the quasi-futuristic sliding door that replaced the tried and true turnstile. If you haven’t surmised, I’m a regular rider of the T, and since this new fare enforcement mechanism was installed I’ve seen a noticeable increase in fare jumpers. Before, with the turnstile, in order to evade a fare you would have to acrobatically hurdle the width of the turnstile mechanism. With the sliding doors, all that is required to forcibly open them is to wedge your hand between the small gap between the doors to engage the safety mechanism (similar to the actual T doors or an elevator).
The new sliding doors detract from to MBTA revenue in the following ways:
1. Increased fare jumping/reduced fare collection.
2. Increase in expense required to monitor for/apprehend/prosecute fare jumpers.
3. Increased service maintenance of complex sliding door mechanism, which in my observation is more apt to malfunction than the simple yet effective turnstile.
These are, to me, two egregious examples of poor judgment on behalf of MBTA management. I’m sure the Duke and I are not the the only Bostonians who have noticed?
Yes, management is key in any enterprise. Not only do managers make critical decisions at the organizational level, but they also directly affect the way individual workers do their job. Another word for it is leadership — conspicuously absent in many organizations, not just the MBTA — but the MBTA is different in that we (Boston residents) depend on the effectiveness of the MBTA for a vital part of our livelihood. The MBTA needs to realize that even infrequent delays mean a lack of reliability; if a rider can’t be sure he/she will reach their destination on time, they’ll choose a different mode of transportation as often as possible. I’ve often had conflicts in my own job because of frequent latenesses because I rely on the T to get me to work on time. Maybe the MBTA thinks that one delay per month is a good record, but on any job I’ve had, if I’m late once a month, then I’m considered an “unreliable employee.” My other option is to leave my home up to an hour earlier every day, in order to preclude lateness due to T delays (even if the T is delayed “only” once a month). It does not endear me to the MBTA!
What, exactly, makes the T late so often? What would it take to get workers to make the T more reliable? Could management look at MBTA policies and culture, and at individual managers’ behaviors and attitudes to affect change in behavior at the level of the individual worker, so that workers will be intrinsically motivated to work harder and take pride in a job well done?
I once had an interesting ride home on the bus one night, sitting next to two MBTA employees (one was a bus driver, and the other, I forget what). We got into a conversation about MBTA work policies, most of which sounded like little more than management bullying. I know from personal experience that abusive management is considered almost normal, but it is certainly NOT the most effective way to achieve excellence. People in management (in many organizations) need to realize that real leadership does NOT mean that you just demand whatever you want from your workers and expect them to comply, or else…. Workers who are treated with respect will be much better workers, and the organization will be a much more effective organization. Of course it’s important keep work standards high, but effective managers know how to achieve high standards and still maintain a culture of respect and dedication.
There’s no reason that the MBTA (which is the only game in town) should be such a failure, when every other city in the world with comparable demographics could serve as an example in how to succeed. Management practices and attitudes need to be examined at ~every~ level.