Media Statement: Orange Line Shutdown/Building A Better T 2022

BOSTON, August 3, 2022 — The Orange Line is an essential part of the MBTA system; it carries over 100,000 riders a day. Today’s announcement of a 30-day shutdown is a dramatic example of the urgency of improving service on the subway system. Going forward, the MBTA must commit to giving riders more notice. The short notice of this announcement shows a lack of respect for riders. The quality of the T’s communications to riders throughout this effort, as well as the quality of its mitigation efforts, will be major tests for the agency. As the MBTA plans to shut down this critical piece of transportation infrastructure on short notice for a month, we need the Authority, municipalities, and other partners to take an all-hands-on-deck approach and coordinate efforts to deliver effective and usable transportation alternatives for 100,000 T riders who will be disrupted by this initiative.

We are concerned that replacement shuttle buses have not functioned well during past diversions. Too often they were stuck in traffic, hopelessly delayed, and woefully insufficient to replace rail transit service. The MBTA and affected municipalities must act quickly to establish and enforce busways and protected bikeways along the routes used by shuttle buses and nearby existing surface transit routes that will receive diverted passengers, such as the 39 bus and the E Branch of the Green Line. This is an opportunity to show that quick-build bus lanes are feasible and can make a meaningful impact on travel times. To reduce costs from installation and removal, these lanes should be operational and enforced 24/7 for the duration of the shutdown. We urge careful coordination with municipal partners like BTD and BPD, as well as the MBTA Transit Police to ensure reliable service.

We’re pleased to hear that the MBTA will have commuter rail trains stop at Orange Line stations along the corridor including additional trains at Oak Grove and Forest Hills.  Fares from these stations should be waived for the duration of the diversion to ensure riders without a CharlieCard can access the service. Service should also be increased to stations along the route of the 34 Bus, such as Readville and Hyde Park. Many riders of the 34 transfer to Orange Line service at Forest Hills, and improved CR service to Southwest Boston is crucial to reducing pressure on the shuttle service. The T should also reduce fares on all Commuter Rail lines during the diversion to mitigate the increase in traffic caused by Orange Line riders switching to vehicles. Additionally, the MBTA should reassign Orange Line dispatchers to boost service on the Red and Blue lines, as well as boost service levels and capacity on the Green Line.

Finally, the MBTA needs to restore rider confidence by clearly communicating the benefits of this shutdown. Riders deserve a firm commitment from the MBTA that Orange Line service will significantly improve after this unprecedented diversion. The T must demonstrate that it can accomplish this shutdown within the strict 30-day period, and that it has in place strong oversight controls that were lacking during the recent Blue Line shutdown experience. Riders have put up with years-long slow zones, teething problems with new vehicles, and diversions with no appreciable impact on service. The MBTA must clearly communicate the benefits of this shutdown to riders and unveil a line with better travel times, more reliable service, and improved rider experience.

For media inquiries, please e-mail media@transitmatters.org. 

###

Action Alert: Support Regional Rail in the CIP!

Regional Rail needs your support!

The MBTA’s lack of a clear commitment to Commuter Rail electrification in the CIP is troubling. Although there are line items related to Regional Rail studies, new vehicles, and even the new maintenance facility, no explicit commitments to Phase 1 of Regional Rail or electric multiple units leave us disappointed. We need you to show your support through making a public comment on the CIP.

---

How to Help:

Copy the text below in your email and send your message to
cipengagement@mbta.com and CC: cip@transitmatters.info. 

This helps us track how many riders are sending in supportive comments for Regional Rail. Feel free to add your own language to it (e.g., tell the T what fast Regional Rail would mean for you) or just use our copy. Thanks for your help! Email Link

---

Dear MBTA Capital Investment Plan Team, 

I am writing to express my support for, and urge you to include, meaningful investments towards building a fast, frequent, clean Regional Rail system in this year’s MBTA Capital Investment Plan. The draft of the 2023-2027 Capital Investment Plan (CIP) includes only vague mentions of Rail Transformation with no real mention of electrification. The inadequate allocation of planning funding that is present will not enable us to reach climate goals, lower congestion, or increase ridership. I urge the T to complete electrification on the Providence/Stoughton Line, as well as begin design and pre-construction work on the Fairmount, and Newburyport/Rockport lines. I also urge the T to complete “no regrets investments” on the Worcester Line, the Old Colony network, and the Haverhill Line. Thank you for your hard work and the many positive investments in the CIP; we hope we will be able to celebrate further investments in Rail Electrification and Transformation in the final draft. 

Sincerely, 

[Your Name]

---

mailto:cipengagement@mbta.com?cc=cip@transitmatters.info

Learn More here

Read the full document here

Share this link with friends

Correcting the Record on Our Stance Re: East-West Rail Service to Pittsfield

Correcting the Record on Our Stance Re: East-West Rail Service to Pittsfield

BOSTON, June 15, 2020 -

TransitMatters wishes to correct the record regarding what one article called, a difference of opinion on service to Pittsfield. The article quoted a study and policy statement that we have not yet released out of context. We strongly believe train service to Pittsfield is critical to this project. We join elected officials, public transit advocates, and residents in calling for a fair and accurate study process. And we call for MassDOT to work on both higher-speed service and an initial service that could begin in 18 months or less. 

However, there are two main issues: the timeline of service and cost. MassDOT and the MBTA could run service to Springfield field for close to $0 in capital costs and less than $5M in annual operating costs in a matter of months.  Adding service to Pittsfield would cost about $46M in capital costs and maybe add $1-2M to the operating cost. There's a need for train storage in Pittsfield and our plan for service within a year relies on MBTA equipment (using this equipment to provide service to Pittsfield would be very difficult; morning trips would be extremely early just as evening trips would be extremely late and it would be impossible to provide mid-day service with MBTA equipment). This will take an additional few years, but we're still talking about service to Pittsfield much faster than any billion-dollar MassDOT alternative. 

MassDOT has not studied any of this. They are doing the exact opposite. The first three alternatives propose spending north of $1B for travel times that essentially match or exceed the current Amtrak travel times. Let's be clear. No city west of Worcester will ever see a train if MassDOT continues on this current path. That is our focus. 

TransitMatters is working on a document to show that a travel time of 90 mins (to Springfield) or less could be achieved with $900M or less in 9 years (with many trains continuing to Pittsfield). While not as fast as the $25B high-speed alternative 6, it is competitive with the Pike and achievable within a decade. The MassDOT high-speed rail plan is infeasible. High-speed trains can't climb the grades present on the Pike ROW. The other advantage of implementing our phase 1 incremental higher-speed rail plan first is that it guarantees towns like Palmer and Pittsfield get service, as most 185-220mph high-speed lines either skip towns of that size or provide limited service; secondly, the state can continue to cut travel times after this 90 min time is achieved. This can be done by fixing bottlenecks, bridging valleys, and limited tunneling. 

We are collaborating with rail advocates from Western Mass and take their feedback seriously. This is not an issue of Springfield vs. Pittsfield, it is a battle between a reasonable plan for service and MassDOT’s unspecific plans and wildly inaccurate cost estimates.

For media inquiries, please contact media@transitmatters.org