Good news and bad news on new Brighton commuter-rail stop

UPDATE: After telling commuters last night that the new Worcester Line schedule, showing Zone 1, was correct, the T this morning said, oops, no, Boston Landing will be in Zone 1A.

The good news is that the new Boston Landing station on the Worcester Line opens for service on May 22. The bad news is that it's been put in Zone 1, which means it'll cost $6.25 for a ride between there and Back Bay or South Station.

H/t Rick.

Neighborhoods: 

Topics: 

Free tagging: 

Comments

Compare

By on

Zipcar One-Way is $5.25 for 30 minutes. Even with the Pike toll, it's cheaper to drive yourself.

up
Voting is closed. 19

Brighton is closer

By on

Brighton: 4.5 miles

Farther-out zone 1A stations:

Malden 4.5
West Medford 5.5
Chelsea 4.6
Forest Hills 5.0
Talbot 4.8
Morton 5.7

If I lived in Allston, I'd be livid.

up
Voting is closed. 36

Question answered

By on

Thanks.

(Still don't care for my Rozzie neighbors' bellyaching.)

up
Voting is closed. 15

With This Logic.....

All Fairmount Line stops after Four Corners should immediately jump to Zone 1.

It is only fair. Morton Street is further away from South Station than the Brighton Landing Station.

Fairmount, still in Zone 1A is 8+ miles from South Station. Brighton Landing is 4.5 Miles from South Station.

What is fair is fair. Everyone should pay the same fare for the same service. $6.25 from Braintree Street to South Station, then $6.25 from Morton Street to South Station.

up
Voting is closed. 36

Could this a good thing?

By on

With a Zone 1 fare, suburban commuters to jobs at the New Balance complex would be able to pay the interzone fare (from Wellesley it would cost $3.50 to get there as a Zone 1 station, but $7.50 if it is in Zone 1A). If the goal is for this to be an employment center, then making it cost-competitive for people driving from the burbs might be more important (commuter rail is, after all, intended to serve suburban commuters). If it was a big residential complex than you'd want it in Zone 1A to incentivize commuting trips to downtown.

up
Voting is closed. 35

My thoughts exactly

By on

Living out in Ashland.. but working in the heart of downtown... I'm so jealous of a friend that works over in that area... she gets to pay $157 to my $318...

up
Voting is closed. 15

Then they needed to be square up front

By on

The MBTA has been patting itself on the back about how this station brings much needed service to an underserved part of Boston (it does). But this is discounting New Balance employees by jacking up Brighton/Allston commuters by adding $8/day to their fares to go in to South Station from Zone 1 instead of Zone 1A.

Malden, 1A...
Forest Hills, 1A...
Porter, 1A...

And they all live on REAL subway lines too!

Don't even get me started on Fairmount!

This is utter bullshit.

up
Voting is closed. 32

Modernize

What's wrong with saying if you only go between Brighton <-> South Station it's considered zone 1A but if you go between further points and Brighton it's consider zone 1. That helps everyone.

Brighton is well served by local buses which are even cheaper. To charge a $4 mark-up to stand on the train is absurd.

up
Voting is closed. 17

This is a good idea. The zone

By on

This is a good idea. The zone boundary could be the station.

Or it could be 1B with its own unique set of rules

up
Voting is closed. 10

That would solve the problem

By on

That would solve the problem in this case. But it's a complicated band-aid, not a true fix to the major problems with the commuter rail fair structure.

up
Voting is closed. 5

Price from Worcester to

By on

Price from Worcester to Boston Landing: $6

Price from Boston Landing to Yawkey: $6.25

That's just weird.

up
Voting is closed. 18

You could argue...

By on

Fairmount is better service even. You get on at the end of the line and get a seat. Allstonians get on a packed Worcester train.

up
Voting is closed. 19

Not because they're minorities

By on

But because they live in the part of the city that is least served by rapid transit.

Of course, one could argue the two are related. Guess which areas were promised some sort of actual rapid transit when the T moved the Orange Line - and then never got it?

up
Voting is closed. 34

No-o-o, the Washington st El was torn by demands

By on

From the community it served. Eugene Rivers and 2 other preachers took grandstands like "How can our children grow in the shade of this monstrosity" and the OL moved to its current location at great expense. It is now 3 or 4 blocks to the west of it's old location. When this happened the questioned was even asked "You aren't going to claim we stole the train from you because you have to walk 3 blocks, are you?" "Of course not!". But of course younger generations from this area Do go on about how The Man stole their transit and insist there needs to be a second OL. No one was promised a new rapid transit branch because the line moved a few blocks, but it's fun to pretend.

up
Voting is closed. 21

The two are not mutually exclusive

By on

The community wanted the el torn down - but they were also promised a replacement that would be as fast. They didn't get it.

And it wasn't just Roxbury. You might want to talk to people in the South End and Chinatown as well.

This has nothing to do with your obvious race hatred.

up
Voting is closed. 36

I'm confused. I go through

I'm confused. I go through Dudley every day and I can't seem to find the Orange Line station within 3 or 4 blocks. If I had known there was one closer than almost a mile away I'd ride it every day! Guess it's not very well marked.

up
Voting is closed. 27

The El was on Washington Street, not in Dudley Sq.

By on

The Ruggles, Roxbury Crossing and Jackson Square stops are not very far from where it was. Dudley Square is further east from where the El was. So: Good if you live on the west side of Washington, Evil social engineering if you live on the east side of it. If the OL ran through Dudley what do you think the people who live near Tremont Street would say? (You know how it is).

up
Voting is closed. 8

eager to hear the explanation of how Dudley isn't on Washington

By on

The Dudley square bus station is exactly where the Dudley square elevation station was. They used the same building! Try harder.

Dudley Square to Roxbury Crossing is over half a mile. Sure, I guess it's 3 or 4 blocks and we could pretend that means something. Egleston to Jackson is also about half a mile and didn't even get a silver line bus.

up
Voting is closed. 26

Oops on placement, totally my bad.

By on

And Google maps says that it is in fact a .6 mile walk. Which would take a horrific 12 or 13 minutes (Key disingenuous concern for people who could call The Ride if they wished). But hey, maybe some day they will install some kind of dedicated bus lane on Washington Street. That should do the trick, right? I mean it's not like you would demand a third option, right?

up
Voting is closed. 8

The short distance meant

By on

The short distance meant something to the federal government, which stated in the 1980s they would not pay for a Green Line branch on Washington St. because of its close proximity to the relocated Orange Line they had just given Massachusetts $$$100s millions to build. Also, dig up all of the "replacement service" planning documents from the 1970s and they always stated replacemnt service on Washington St. could potentiallybe light rail or a busway. The feds thumbs down on light rail sealed the deal.

up
Voting is closed. 8

Lol, Washington isn't wide enough to put tracks down the middle

By on

That's why they built the El in the first place. Washington is in fact the old road up the neck which was the main connector to the Shawmut peninsula. The width and the building lines were long established by the time tracks were being placed on wider Blvds like Comm Ave. Er, I mean it was all a cleverly conceived plot against populations that weren't living there at the time. You have to admire the advance planning and anyone who doesn't agree is only showing that they are racists. I do agree that the Feds didn't feel like building another rail line after giving $$$ to relocate the existing one. The struggle continues.

up
Voting is closed. 11

Washington is plenty wide enough

By on

The problem is it isn't wide enough for two lanes of cars or buses each way AND parking on each side of the street AND separated light rail. The intersection usually cited as impossibly narrow is passing the Cathedral of the Holy Cross, where the street is currently 72 feet wide. Huntington Ave at Parker Hill, which has 2x2 lanes of traffic, parking both sides and street running rail is 58 feet wide.

up
Voting is closed. 11

an ar-TISTE

By on

de rip-off.

oui.

Sacre bleu!

up
Voting is closed. 7

The zone system is broken.

By on

The zone system is broken.

Currently, it is:

1a: $2.25
1: $6.25 +$4
2: $6.75 +$0.50
3: $7.50 +$0.75
4: $8.25 +$0.75
5: $9.25 +$1.00
6: $10.00 +$0.75
7: $10.50 +$0.50
8: $11.50 +$1.00
9: $12.00 +$0.50
10: $12.50 +$0.50

MAKES NO SENSE.

Why not simplify?

1a: $2.25
1: $3.50 +$1.25
2: $4.75 +$1.25
3: $6.00 +$1.25
4: $7.25 +$1.25
5: $8.50 +$1.25
6: $9.75 +$1.25
7: $11.00 +$1.25
8: $12.25 +$1.25
9: $13.50 +$1.25
10: $14.75 +$1.25

up
Voting is closed. 29

Because

By on

The hikes were always based in amounts.

Once the fare to zone 1 was $2.00, while zone1A was a buck.

up
Voting is closed. 13

Right, they've been doing

By on

Right, they've been doing across the line percentage increases and then rounding.

But that makes no sense.

1. It assumes the historic prices make sense.
2. It creates situations like zones 6 to 7 being 50 cents and 7 to 8 a dollar. Why? That seems arbitrary and unfair.

Theyre building transportation for the future. It shouldnt matter what was decided in 1972, or whenever someone last looked at the fare system and actually put some thought into it.

MBTA seems to have gone into it like this:

We can make it zone 1 or zone 1a.

Zone 1 is better for inbound suburban commuters. Zone 1a is better for local residents.

Maybe they even threw in some model on where the most traffic will come from and sod decided Zone 1 made more sense.

But at no point it appears they sat down and asked DOES THIS MAKE SENSE.

They set the fares. They can change the rules.

MBTA even has the power to create 1B! Gasp!

up
Voting is closed. 27

You joke but …

By on

There once was a Zone 1B. It was merged in to 1A in 2006.

Quick and dirty idea:

There are several inner Commuter Rail stations which serve both as destinations and origins. Boston Landing is just one. For stations like Malden, West Medford, Forest Hills and Boston Landing, give people the option of:

a. If traveling inbound and alighting, paying the interzone fare from the zone they started (but no free subway transfer; interzone passes only include local bus)

b. If traveling inbound and boarding (i.e. going from Allston to downtown), paying the 1A fare. This encourages both types of ridership without robbing Peter to pay Paul, or having half of a Haverhill train crowd on to the Orange Line at Malden to save $5 each way.

In the long run, a more simplified fare structure makes sense, perhaps four zones: City (based on the T assessment paid, which is higher by Boston/Cambridge/Somerville, so making this based on city boundaries makes some sense), inside 128, 128 to 495, outside 495. And have some overlap for each. Or something.

up
Voting is closed. 24

I'm guessing they priced it

By on

I'm guessing they priced it based on how many people they think will use this station vs a few stations out there that might have less commuters.

It's still MBTA and they're not really known for their number crunching.

The Higher Fare means brighton residents will be screwed when that area is busy with workers and shoppers.
As far as parking goes, unless most of the area becomes resident parking only like beacon hill is, it will be interesting especially in the winter.

Ciommo won't do squat about re-zoning the parking on the streets so let's see what happens.

up
Voting is closed. 11

Resident-Only

By on

I live in Lower Allston, and the city has already started to re-zone what was formerly free-for-all parking into residents-only. This is in anticipation of the West Station T stop, not Boston Landing, but it shows that they are willing to re-zone for residents. They held a neighborhood meeting about it earlier this year, but I was unable to attend.

up
Voting is closed. 14

I lived there

By on

For a long time..20 years, I'm glad they are also putting a station near Lower Allston. That will be really good for that area.

up
Voting is closed. 11

So what? From the beginning

By on

So what? From the beginning it's been marketed as more of a destination station. Even if the fare was the same as the subway, very few people would board at Brighton to go inbound. With no free subway transfer, a limited schedule, and standing room only, it only might make sense for people heading somewhere a short walk from South Station or Back Bay. Everyone else is going to keep doing what they already do - bus or walk to the Green Line.

The station (and its zone placement) is intended to encourage suburban commuters to New Balance to take the train instead of driving. In the future as the area densifies more, and/or more frequent short-turn service is added to the Worcester line, the T may reconsider. But for now, this is exactly according to plan.

up
Voting is closed. 19