B Line stop elimination program

Discussion relating to commuter rail, light rail, and subway operations of the MBTA.

Moderators: CRail, sery2831

B Line stop elimination program

Postby ithjames » Tue Jan 11, 2005 7:43 pm

Is the stop elimination program still effective on the B line? I guess this was going to happen for a few months? Supposedly in May or June of last year the T was going to stop at Greycliff Road, Mt. Hood, Summit Ave, and Fordham Road which really don't get much use and are to close to existing stops. In addition to that, the T should have removed Blandford St, Babcock St and/or Pleasent St on the BU end of it. I'm not even going there with the BU Central and BU East stop but Im wondering if the T still continues to not stop at those 4 stops anymore.
ithjames
 

Postby WildBill144 » Wed Jan 12, 2005 12:06 am

I believe the program IS still in effect--they are still skipping the four stops you mentioned.
WildBill144
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2004 10:56 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Postby trigonalmayhem » Wed Jan 12, 2005 2:07 pm

I still think they should consider adding Blandford, BU's East, Central and West, and maybe St. Paul to the stop elimination program.

:-D
trigonalmayhem
 

Postby BC Eagle » Wed Jan 12, 2005 7:18 pm

Yes, the stoppage is still in effect. I think this program represents the T's typical "backwardness". Everyone knows that the problem with the B-Line lies on the BU end. So what does the T do? It goes and eliminates stops on the other end of the line. Has this program helped? Yes, it has cut some time off the trip, and I think they should make the closures permanent. BUT, closing stops on the other end would have helped ALOT more. What, did Mulhern go to BU or something? Is Silber paying them off?

As a side note, the MBTA originally planned to close these stops in December of 2003. Myself, and a bunch of others wrote the T to convince them of the stupidy of this idea. If you're going to close stops, do so when the weather is warm, and people won't mind walking a little bit further. This way, it gives them time to either get used to it, or find alternate means of transportation. To make such a move right before the heart of winter is stupid and uncaring. Whether it was the letters that moved the program back, or just another typical T delay, I don't know. The Chiswick Rd. stop, originally scheduled to close, was also saved through this means, due to its proximity to a retirement home.
BC Eagle
 

Postby CSX Conductor » Thu Jan 13, 2005 11:04 am

trigonalmayhem wrote:I still think they should consider adding Blandford, BU's East, Central and West, and maybe St. Paul to the stop elimination program.

:-D


I disagree with Blandford & St. Paul.
User avatar
CSX Conductor
 
Posts: 5458
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:04 am
Location: Boston, Mass

Postby typesix » Thu Jan 13, 2005 12:14 pm

It is a streetcar line but agree that BU Central or East should close.
typesix
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 11:23 am
Location: Boston

Postby ithjames » Wed Jan 19, 2005 4:28 pm

Come to think of it, even the "E" line a stop on there that could be eliminated. That Back of the Hill stop, which is the 2nd to last stop on the E line, is very close to Heath St and they could get rid of it. I dont even remember that stop being there when it originally ran to Arborway
ithjames
 

Postby RailBus63 » Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:32 am

Do you folks have any boarding numbers to back up the stops you think should be closed?

Just asking.

JD
User avatar
RailBus63
 
Posts: 1872
Joined: Tue May 04, 2004 1:48 pm

Postby BC Eagle » Thu Jan 20, 2005 3:06 pm

RailBus63 wrote:Do you folks have any boarding numbers to back up the stops you think should be closed?

Just asking.

JD


If any numbers are public, I don't know of them. I would be interested in seeing them as well though. However, most of the numbers for the 4 "main" BU stops (Blanford St., BU East-Central-West) would be skewed. BU students use the B-Line as their own personal school bus, especially going outbound where they don't have to pay. I think on the B-Line, stop eliminations should be based on proximity to other stops. It's about a 90 second walk from Blanford St. to Kenmore Square, and probably another 90 seconds to BU East. There's no need for stops so close to each other. The T should do a study to see how much money they're losing with the Blanford St. stop. Who's going to pay to get on the B-Line at Kenmore Square, when they can walk a few hundred feet to Blanford St.?
BC Eagle
 

Postby ckb » Thu Jan 20, 2005 4:51 pm

I totally agree that proximity should be the better "quantitative" number than ridership.

I was also just thinking about the revenue loss issue (from Blanford to Kenmore) .... does anyone have any idea about the percentage of revenue from passes versus "cash" fares? Seems like most natives that use the T are eventually convinced to use a pass of some sort.
ckb
 

Postby efin98 » Thu Jan 20, 2005 6:25 pm

I think it's a bunch of sour grapes by those living beyond BU going on here. Why eliminate the stops that bring in a huge amound of ridership in favor of stops farther down the line that don't generate a fraction of what the BU stops generate?

So your commute is slowed by people board...Big freaking deal! Better for ridership reasons than for any other reason.
efin98
 

Postby BC Eagle » Thu Jan 20, 2005 7:10 pm

efin98 wrote:I think it's a bunch of sour grapes by those living beyond BU going on here. Why eliminate the stops that bring in a huge amound of ridership in favor of stops farther down the line that don't generate a fraction of what the BU stops generate?

So your commute is slowed by people board...Big freaking deal! Better for ridership reasons than for any other reason.


In this case, it's ridership that doesn't generate revenue. Many of these people use the B-Line outbound, but not inbound.
BC Eagle
 

Postby efin98 » Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:36 pm

BC Eagle wrote:
efin98 wrote:I think it's a bunch of sour grapes by those living beyond BU going on here. Why eliminate the stops that bring in a huge amound of ridership in favor of stops farther down the line that don't generate a fraction of what the BU stops generate?

So your commute is slowed by people board...Big freaking deal! Better for ridership reasons than for any other reason.


In this case, it's ridership that doesn't generate revenue. Many of these people use the B-Line outbound, but not inbound.


And it's perfectly legal and well within their right. Too bad, they have just as much right to ride the train regardless of where they are going or whether they intend to ride eastbound again.

And why not stop with the BU stops? Why not eliminate Arlington Street or Boylston Street as well? Why not Symphony and Prudential?


Oh, and if the BU students are so abusive with the stops why are so many people getting on and off at those stops while heading eastbound? Answer that with a straight face...

Judging by your screenname, this isn't sour grapes- it's full blown jealousy.
efin98
 

Postby ckb » Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:04 pm

From my eyeball and thumb estimates of the distances using the system maps on MBTA.org, Blanford is closer to Kenmore than Arlington & Boylston and Prudential & Symphony are.

Further more, the other stops you mentioned are underground and have more than barebones shelter and infrastructure than Blanford.

For me, it isn't about "those damn BU kids" or "those damn Allston kids" or anything like that (who do indeed have the right to ride). Its about effective use of limited public transportation resources. People that need to use the transportation can walk an extra 900 feet and shave off minutes on the trip (waiting at the stop, then waiting for the traffic light, etc). But something needs to be done, it shouldn't have to take 30 minutes or more to get from downtown Boston out to Allston. If we keep stops open, can we work on signal timing/prioritization please?
ckb
 

Postby Ron Newman » Thu Jan 20, 2005 9:20 pm

ckb wrote: If we keep stops open, can we work on signal timing/prioritization please?


I'd like to see that too. Ideally, trolleys and buses should be able to pre-empt traffic signals in exactly the same way as fire engines do, and using the same technology. As soon as the trolley or bus arrives at an intersection, whatever phase the signal is in should be immediately terminated and the trolley or bus given a green light. Once the trolley or bus passes, the signal should return to whatever phase was interrupted.

This would greatly improve the reliability of both Green LIne trolleys and buses on crowded routes like #1 and #66.
Ron Newman
 
Posts: 2772
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 7:04 pm
Location: Davis Square, Somerville, MA

Next

Return to Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Frode and 6 guests