Log in / Register All Boston UH only

Probably the lamest "E"xcuse ever (updated)

From the T web page:

Green E Line is being diverted at Brigham Circle due to a road paving project on Washington St. in Brookline. Please use route#39 bus between Heath Street and Brigham Circle. 11/4/2009 12:34 PM

Memo to T: Huntington Avenue service goes NOWHERE NEAR this project. And if the rationale for terminating at Brigham Circle is a traffic problem delaying the streetcars (which can be easily solved by a couple of police officers), given that the #39 buses are equally affected by this, as per this item subsequently posted on the T web page:

Route 39 is experiencing 15-20 minute delays due to traffic.
11/4/2009 1:57 PM

Tags:

The E train

By Catherine (not verified) | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 2:48pm

is probably stopping service at Brigham Circle to try to ease the traffic jam caused by the road paving. When I was walking by at noon, traffic at S. Huntington and Huntington was a huge mess. Perhaps they think taking the train out of this mix will help a bit.

They are working on the rte

By anon (not verified) | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 3:04pm

They are working on the rte 9 bridge...they are crossing the trains due to the heavy traffic between brigham and south huntington.

Memo to Roadman: MILE LONG BACKUP

By Brett | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 3:38pm

Huntington is almost completely gridlocked westbound, all the way from Brookline past MassArt. I know, because I was just there, stuck in it. It even had traffic backed up along south huntington, to Heath Street.

What the hell would be the point in trying to run the E-line up a section of that road, a section which is already covered by at least 2 bus lines? And what that would do to service on the rest of the Green Line as trains became trapped in the gridlock, right before rush hour?

If there's a mile long backup, then why aren't the Boston and/or

By roadman | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 4:05pm

Brookline Police doing something to get the traffic moving? Say like shutting the construction project down entirely - that's exactly what would happen out on an Interstate project if such a lengthy delay (timewise, not distance) occurred.

If they were detouring the #39 buses onto other streets to avoid this backup (which apparently is NOT the case here), I may agree with your point about the streetcars. But this "oh there's too much traffic for our drivers to cope with, so let's dump streetcar service" excuse for not running all the way to Heath Street (which is used by the T at least once a week) is getting very old and tired. The simple reality is that the T wants to dump service beyond Brigham Circle, and will take every opportunity to inconvenience their passengers in hopes of getting support for the idea.

As for your comment about these delays affecting other parts of the Green Line, there's nothing stopping management from forwarding trains that normally terminate at Government Center to Lechmere. And sorry, but in my book the "we don't want to put enough trains in service to protect the schedule against anticipated delays" or "our employees will protest if we make them drive their streetcar off their regular run" are NOT valid arguments for an agency that is supposed to provide a TRANSPORTATION service for the BENEFIT OF THE PASSENGERS to argue.

Extending inbound trains

By anon (not verified) | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 4:22pm

Extending inbound trains from gov. ctr to lechmere would just cause delays on the outbound..Having trains sitting in traffic on huntington ave doesnt make any sense, roadman.

Delays? As opposed to the current practice of looping

By roadman | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 4:54pm

trains at Government Center and then holding them at Park Street for between 3 and 8 minutes for "headway adjustment"?

And, as I noted in my earlier reply, if there's an excessive traffic backup caused by a temporary situation (as opposed to a permanent capacity constraint), common sense says you do something to alleviate the backup. In this case, YOU SHUT THE CONSTRUCTION JOB DOWN and get the traffic moving.

you don't get it

By Brett | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 5:25pm

But this "oh there's too much traffic for our drivers to cope with, so let's dump streetcar service" excuse for not running all the way to Heath Street

It's not a matter of inconveniencing the drivers. It's a matter of being COMPLETELY POINTLESS because brigham to Heath was a PARKING LOT.

It doesn't help anyone if the trains get stuck in the traffic for longer than it takes to travel the entire rest of the line. When I went through the area, I'd guess it would have taken an E-train about 60 minutes to get from Brigham to Heath and back again.

What *should* have happened

By Kaz | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 5:37pm

You put a cop and some road signs at Brigham Circle indicating that the left lane is closed to all car traffic. I don't care if Huntington fills up all the way back to the Pru, but then the train can get through in its lane. If need be, you put a cop at the turn so that nobody blocks the box on the inbound side for the train to make the left turn up towards Heath.

Just because the train shares the road with traffic normally doesn't mean that traffic should necessarily be allowed to overtake the lane in times of construction/high traffic. But, hey, what do I know, I just want a fully functional transit system that traffic has to deal with instead of fully functional traffic mess to which the transit system has to play second fiddle.

damn the consequences, full speed ahead!

By Brett | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 5:56pm

The stretch of Huntington Avenue leading up to Brigham circle is how ambulances get to area hospitals. Once it backs up to Longwood Avenue, things get messy fast, as ambulances can't get people to the hospital. Also, another block down is a fire station.

I didn't think anyone could come up with a dumber idea than roadman today; you just proved me wrong. Seriously, you think you'd be able to keep people from using two lanes of huntington avenue for almost a mile? You'd have to put cops at every single intersection, and then imagine what would happen as they start writing tickets for people ignoring their instructions.

And all of this for one of the least-used sections of the green line? Or I suppose you're going to wrap into this an argument to start up green line service through JP again?

And?

By Kaz | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 6:33pm

And the ambulances got there any faster today the way it was? As you already witnessed, there was a "MILE LONG BACKUP". I'm sure ambulance drivers have ways of getting to hospitals in backups. This isn't their first traffic jam.

Do you think the #39 sitting in the MILE LONG BACKUP was any better for the MBTA system than not just running the E Line Only left lane idea? In fact, the reverse should have been happening: Run the E Line to the end in a temporarily dedicated lane and short-circle the #39 bus at the end of the E Line instead of letting it go all the way up and down that mess to Northeastern.

Agreed - his idea is

By HenryAlan | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 6:36pm

Agreed - his idea is completely unworkable. The only way to reserve the lane would involve baricades. But the lanes are so narrow, baricades would defacto close the street to all cars. The Washington Street work should be scheduled for late evening/overnight.

Lets get something straight here....

By Pete Nice | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 7:03pm

Thats a tough spot for a trolley to get through with traffic. The roadwork should be done at night or the weekend. If thats impossible, then for safetys sake you have to stop those trains.

Its probably done during the day because Brookline residents dont allow nightwork and its a town bylaw or something like that.

Inbound ambulances from Rt. 9 really dont have any other way however besides Brookline Ave and longwood.

Nattering nabobs of

By Jay Levitt | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 10:59pm

I didn't think anyone could come up with a dumber idea than roadman today; you just proved me wrong

Hey, it's your annual "there, I've run rings around you logically" post! Last year, you proved the T's software bug couldn't be a software bug.

I remember it fondly.

As we all know, this section

By anon (not verified) | Wed, 11/04/2009 - 4:22pm

As we all know, this section of Washington St. is (was?) is very poor condition. I welcome the improvements regardless of the short-term delays. I'm sure they costed out night/weekend work and decided against it.

OK, I concede the point

By roadman | Thu, 11/05/2009 - 9:45am

and agree that, in this instance, terminating the E trains at Brigham Circle was probably a reasonable thing for the T to do. However, as others have also pointed out, that doesn't solve the larger problem of how the traffic backup affects other road users, especially ambulances and fire equipment.

And I still stand by my comment that the T seems all too willing to suspend service between Brigham Circle and Heath Street at the drop of a hat. The reasons I've seen over the years for doing so have ranged from "ambulance parked on the side of the street" to "contractor working on the outside of an apartment building". My frustration with these type of excuses was the basis of my "oh, there's too much traffic to drive through" comment.

In addition, it would have helped greatly had the T stated "due to extremely heavy traffic between Brigham Circle and South Huntington Avenue" in their alert instead of saying "due to a roadway project in Brookline". But lack of accuracy in T alerts is a matter for another time.

No reason to concede

By BStu | Thu, 11/05/2009 - 10:29am

As usual, even if something was the right thing to do, the MBTA still did it very wrong. And I say this as someone who actually got kicked off an "E" Train last night.

First off, maybe traffic backed into Huntington earlier in the evening, but it didn't at the time I was bounced off a train. I could see the back up past Riverway, but it was well contained and trains would have had NO problem running out to Heath Street. Maybe it was necessary at some point, but the MBTA kept using the excuse LONG after it was justified. Essentially the model for their constant Brigham to Heath shut downs. Every single time I've been thrown off a train with the excuse of obstructions, not a single time was it still true. Not once. Maybe there were valid reasons for the diversion, but the MBTA makes no effort to monitor the situation and change course.

Secondly, the manner of the diversions is consistently abusive to passengers. What the MBTA should do is announce the diversion before entering Longwood and encourage people to exit there to pick up the 39 bus that stops across the street. What happens is that the suspension of service is announced 5 minutes into the 10 minute delay in switching the tracks between Longwood and Brigham Circle. And then passengers are left no where especially close to a 39 bus stop. I'm not saying its a long walk. Its at most a block and a half away. But that's plenty long enough for a bus to blow past you as you walk to it. Which happened to me last night. Buses can also blow past you in the prolonged delay getting into Brigham Circle. Which ALSO happened last night.

This isn't rocket science. I've written the T about this and I'm sure others have. The MBTA just puts no concern into making things as easy as possible when they inconvenience riders. I can accept that service interruptions will happen, but I can't accept how they happen. Doing this better would take little effort, but the MBTA still doesn't care to do it. Pre-recorded announcements apologizing for inconveniences do little to comfort riders with the T shows so little regard for actually lessening the inconvenience.

roadman is right: The T wants to terminate at Brigham Circle

By Jonas Prang | Sat, 11/07/2009 - 3:21pm

The particulars of this incident are really beside the point.

The fact is that roadman is absolutely correct that the T wants to terminate E-line service at Brigham Circle and is using a protracted war of attrition to get its way.

The T doesn't like light rail, and it certainly detests light rail that doesn't run on a reservation.

MBTA works on #39 bus, fails to address E-Line

By Jonas Prang | Sat, 11/07/2009 - 3:43pm

The MBTA is at it again. Reading the MBTA-driven, press release-fueled non-story in the Globe, you'd never know that the #39 bus is the wooden-leg prosthesis strapped onto the stump of the amputated E-Line.

Waxing fulsome about the wonders of the #39 bus, the Globe—and Aloisi— fail even to mention the E-Line.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.