Boston transportation

[magid]

The T closed four stops on the B (green) line today (Greycliff Road, Mount Hood Road, Summit Avenue, and Fordham Road). They're projecting it will shave 3 or 4 minutes off the 45 minute trip from BC to Government Center.

The graphic with the article had some interesting figures:
B 5.6 stops/mile
C 5.8 stops/mile
D 1.4 stops/mile
E 4.8 stops/mile
Though the map didn't include the whole line, so I'm not sure whether it's for when each line is distinct, or the whole length of each line. (Even simple numbers like this can be so ambiguous. And we're not even close to real statistics and other more-easily-twisted numbers.) What I find intersting is that the B line was problematical enough that the T took steps, but the C line has more stops/mile (less than every fifth of a mile!), and there's no mention of anything changing there. I wonder if it runs more smoothly, and if so, why.

How safe is riding the subway? Better than driving, but there are a lot of unanswered questions:
"What about damage to the hearing of workers and passengers exposed to the roar of subway trains? What about air quality? What about the spread of infectious diseases among riders?" I hadn't realized that there aren't answers to these questions. Or, rather, that the answers I've assumed haven't been validated. I'm glad the T is starting to investigate metal levels, at least.

Also this morning, Terminal A re-opened at Logan. The redesign involves lots of new security features, which sound like they've been thought about in terms of people and luggage flow as well. It'll be interesting to hear how it works out. Anyone flying Delta out of Boston soon? Now, if only the spaghetti tangle of roads around Logan were simplified...

Comments

[gnomi.livejournal.com]

What I find intersting is that the B line was problematical enough that the T took steps, but the C line has more stops/mile (less than every fifth of a mile!), and there's no mention of anything changing there. I wonder if it runs more smoothly, and if so, why.

I have nothing more than anecdotal evidence, but I think it's because of the nature of the areas the two run through. The B line runs through areas heavily populated by students -- Comm. Ave. being the disputed territory of BU and BC :-) -- whereas the C runs through mostly residential and business areas. While there may be more stops on the C, the trains load and unload more efficiently at each stop, thus making the stops shorter.

Also, Comm. Ave. is much more twisty and turn-y than Beacon St. The trains have to go slower along Comm. Ave. because of the nature of the surface along which it travels.

Just my observations from living on both the B and C lines. Nothing scientific whatsoever.

observations are useful

[magid.livejournal.com]

I know that college students can be a nuisance as neighbors (I lived by all the noisiest ones in Allston one year :-), I hadn't thought of them as being less efficient riders, or less time-focused, or whatever.

Surface and twistiness, yeah, that definitely makes a difference. And perhaps how many major and minor intersections there are along the way?


(Though Comm Ave being disputed, I hadn't heard that. I mean, Comm Ave is obviously BU towards the east, and BC towards the west, with housing for both, presumably, in the middle. Or is it the housing that you're referring to?)

Re: observations are useful

[gnomi.livejournal.com]

Housingwise is what I meant. The BU and BC students who choose to live off campus are jockeying for the same few affordable apartments (Allston/Brighton used to be much more affordable than it is now), and with the T, there's not much of the area of Comm. Ave. between them that is too far for either set of students.

[ruthling.livejournal.com]

It would be interesting to run the statistics on subway safety in combination with the ones that say sprawl leads to obesity and related ehalth problems (no reference, sorry, I can look one up later). Since, I would bet that subway riders walk more than any of the other modes (the T uses a much wider radius for a T stop "catchbasin" than for a bus, for example), this might wash out the other health factors. Doesn't mean they shouldn't improve air quality and safety, though.

[magid.livejournal.com]

I think the net plus of walking added to the lower risk of subway vs highway (though apparently it's not as safe as the commuter rail) would indeed make it healthier.

I'm also interested in lower environmental impact, which gives a subway commute an even greater edge (over driving, at least, and possibly over buses, unless they're electric).

And yes to improving air quality and safety. I'd also add decreasing noise pollution, if at all possible. When I don't wear earplugs, I end up putting my fingers in my ears for part of the route (just before Harvard outbound, just after Arlington outbound, where the tracks curve). It's just painful, though I'm surprised at how many people have no issues with it.

[arfur]

I'm surprised at how many people have no issues with it.

We've just gotten acclimated to it. I tune it out. I was thinking about it yesterday, going outbound past the Boylston stop. It was there, but the ears just didn't care. Probably my ears in general -- I think they're as sensitive (as in, able to hear soft noises) as before, I just don't pay attention to loud noises that are familiar.

Hm...psychophysics...anyone care to find the master's thesis based on this?

[magid.livejournal.com]

I can tune out a lot of the regular noise, though it's enough there to be oppressive. But the extreme squeals and high-pitched sounds that come from those curves, I can't ignore; it's almost painful, actually.

Different people, different sensitivities...

speaking of (possibly) twisted numbers

[arfur]

(though apparently it's not as safe as the commuter rail)

Yes, but by what? Mile? Hour? Commute? Conductor's shift? And even so, the bigger question becomes how safe the different "transportation profiles" are, or even just an entire commute. Someone who takes commuter rail is likely further out, and so more car-dependent in general; and they'll usually drive the car to the commuter rail.

anyhoo...

Re: speaking of (possibly) twisted numbers

[magid.livejournal.com]

Yeah, there's a lot of non-data in that statement. I have no idea whether by mile or by commute or anything. And I also thought about the probability that the commuter-rail user is likely also a driver for the commute. Presumably since it's a shorter drive, the hazards are commensurately less...