Sleety Icy Work from Home Day

Due to the weather conditions in Central Massachusetts, I'm working from home today. If anyone has updates about today's MBTA/MBCR commutes, feel free to share them as comments or email either myself (worctrainrider AT gmail.com) or Commute-a-holic (commuteaholic AT gmail.com).

From today's The Boston Globe, an article about the state's transportation situation. There is a real possibility that Mass Pike tolls, T fares and gas taxes will increase in 2009. It might be one increase, say just a gas tax increase, or increases across the board. Our transportation system is broken.

Also in today's Globe, an article about how the T is still showing a strong increase in the number of riders. The article mention that more riders are evident on the MBTA's/MBCR's commuter rail lines. Across the country, transit systems have noticed an increase in riders. Transit experts say it is too soon to say if Americans have undergone a paradigm shift and are moving towards mass transit.

With all the information about the increase in ridership, it would be nice if the MBTA/MBCR could publish their on-time performance stats for the commuter rail lines. I would love to see information about the commuter rail performance for 2008 and also a monthly breakout.

Commuters Still Upset Over Increased Parking Fees

We've known that the new parking fees will be going into effect this Saturday. That doesn't mean this is a dead story. Regional editions of The Boston Globe printed three separate stories today about the increased parking fees. Heck, even this blog got a mention in one of the articles!

"Grumbles greet hike in T lot fee" focused on commuters using the Worcester-Framingham commuter rail line. Commuters are frustrated that the parking costs are rising, especially since some lots do not have enough spaces and other lots leave a lot to be desired from a maintenance perspective. On top of that, the service and experience riding the commuter rail trains leaves a lot to be desired.

Towns along the commuter rail line are fielding calls from citizens who are frustrated at yet another increase to the cost of their daily life. For commuters who take the train from Framingham, consider using the town owned parking garage near the commuter rail station. You can purchase monthly passes that are less expensive than the daily MBTA parking rates.

The T answers with their same canned response. Frankly, I just do not think they get it. If they got it, they would say "no perks for us - no cars, no lunches, nothing outside of our salaries and our operating budgets." But I think the T works in Fantasy Land and the rest of us are stuck working in Reality World.

Spokesman Joe Pesaturo said in an e-mail that commuter-rail parking rates have been unchanged for six years, that the median cost of parking in downtown Boston is $33, and that the agency had to find a way to cover part of the money it owes workers who were recently awarded $53 million in back pay, among other funding needs. Already shackled by $8 billion in debt, Pesaturo said, the transit agency can't borrow its way out of the situation, and has to raise the money from other sources.

"The decision to ask customers to pay more for parking was very difficult," Pesaturo stated. "The MBTA . . . has been left with the unenviable choice of seeking fee increases or reducing services."

The "Commuters balk at T parking rate increases" spoke to commuters along the Fitchburg, Haverhill and Lowell lines. In this article, Joe Pesaturo said the T is "facing its most daunting challenge" in 9 years. Hey Joe - why do you still cater your board meeting lunches? Why aren't fares collected? Why does the T just list excuse after excuse after excuse. Be honest - parking rates aren't going to help the lots be maintained, this is extra money to cover your losses.

I think we're all angry. Over the past 2 months we've seen a lot of institutions ask for bailouts. T riders are now bailing out the MBTA by handing over more money to park. A 100% increase is drastic.

Finally, "Maine balks at the cost of bridge repair" takes the Northern New England point of view on the parking rate increase.

Even Suffolk University's The Suffolk Journal wrote an article about how the increase in parking fees will affect students, faculty and staff.

In an Op-Ed piece also from today's Globe, the Governor outlines how he'll change mass transit and transportation here in the Commonwealth. Governor Patrick cuts right to heart of one of the issues that plagues both the T and the Mass Pike: patronage. These authorities were notorious bastions of places where politicians could get jobs for their supporters. Perhaps that wasn't the best way to run two very important state agencies. The Governor also said our transportation system is "broken" from an infrastructure standpoint. He is proposing some drastic steps to realign transportation in Massachusetts:

1. Consolidation of agencies.
2. System-wide planning and financing of transportation needs.

The first step will be the elimination of the Mass Pike. Within two years tolls on the Pike west of Route 128 will be removed. Massachusetts will explore advanced toll collection technologies. The Big Dig Debt will be restructured.

In a counter-point article, The Boston Herald's editorial staff doesn't think the Governor's proposal will work.

For customer service news, Fox 25 ran this report on Monday about how people are really unhappy riding the MBTA/MBCR commuter rail. "Late trains, unresponsive customer service, bad signage, poor infrastructure, and increased fees" are just a few of the things people don't like about relying on the commuter rail. They even showed the fare boxes that people use to pay for their parking. Fox 25 report Jim Armstrong has a blog where you can read the transcript of Monday's report and see viewer's comments.

Finally, blogger innismir wrote a post that captured just how dysfunctional the T really is. At innismir's parking lot, the T actually had two different signs explaining the parking rate increase. innisimr took some photos, so you can see for yourself. This made my blood boil. I've worked in corporate communications. You are supposed to proof things before you send them to the printer. In this economy, the T doesn't have any more money to waste. Dan and Joe - how much did the misprinted signs cost us?

Good grief!

The T Desires to Play the Role of Emily Post or Miss Manners

A bit of a change with this morning's commute. I decided to take the P512 train, which departs Grafton at 7:49 a.m. I barely made it to the station on time. There were police officers all over Grafton this morning, so commuters were driving super slow. The commute was fine. We arrived to South Station at 9:05 a.m. or so, a few minutes ahead of schedule.

Commute-a-holic saw our favorite friend, MBTA GM Dan Grabauskas, being interviewed this morning on Fox 25's morning news program. Commute said that Dan provided a better workout, as he was his swarmy self on the interview. For whatever reason, Fox 25 does not provide code so bloggers can post or share video, so here is a link to the video segment with Dan's interview. You may wonder "Why was Danny G. being interviewed by Fox 25 this morning." Well, it is because the T announced a new marketing campaign - aimed at making riders more polite.

Can you believe it? The T, which is basically bankrupt, is spending money to communicate to their passengers that they need to be more polite while using the T. Good grief!! You know, Muni Manners already does this and they probably do it better. So why couldn't they just save the money and link to the Muni Manners blog off of the T's website? I am incredulous that the T is spending money on this campaign. This is utterly absurd.

Here's an idea - maybe if the T ran its services on time and actually had clean trains/buses, people wouldn't be as pent up as they are. I'm not advocating that riders have poor manners, but sometimes tempers flare because commuters are just frustrated.

It is stuff like this that causes people to want to see things like Question 1 go through.

If you don't feel like seeing Danny G. smirk in the video, you can read all about the T's latest marketing campaign in this article from today's Boston Metro.

Moving on. The Boston Globe ran an article today about the proposed Silver Line III project. Funding that project and other transit initiatives is the focus of two separate articles in today's Boston Metro. The Metro articles pick-up on the MASSPIRG report, announced over the weekend. One article is about how "Funding will decide the fate of Mass. transit," while the other focuses on "Shaping the MBTA for the 21st century." We all know that funding for mass transit and other transportation issues in Massachusetts is in dire straits. Here are some data points that the MASSPIRG report noted:

• 93,000,000 - amount of hours wasted in traffic delays in the greater Boston area during 2005.
• $4.3 billion - Massachusetts residents spent $4.3 billion more on gas in 2007 compared to 1998.
• 57% - the increase in vehicle traffic in the Commonwealth from 1980 to 2007.

SouthCoastToday.com also published an article about the MASSPIRG report.

Finally, Rep. Tom Sannicandro (D - 7th Middlesex District) wrote a guest op-ed piece for today's The MetroWest Daily News. Rep. Sannicandro details the pending purchase of the CSX tracks. His article states that this purchase will "will lower commute times and vastly improve the overall effectiveness of the Commonwealth's commuter rail program. The most dramatic and immediate changes of the plan will be enacted on Oct. 27 when the number of daily trains leaving Worcester will increase from 10 to 13, and the number of daily trains leaving from Boston to Worcester will increase from 10 to 12."

Yes, when we first heard the news that more trains were being added to the Worcester line, we were initially excited about this. But then when we saw the schedule, we noticed that essentially trains just got moved around.

From what I want and from what I've gathered from other commuters on the Worcester line, riders would like to see the following:

• More express trains from Worcester: Frankly, it would be great if trains could run express from Ashland to Boston.
• More express trains from Framingham: Commuters who live in Framingham and points East do not want to have to rely on the regular trains for their commutes into Boston.
• More train options for off-peak commutes: This includes riders who commuter from Boston and points west and more afternoon trains leaving Boston for Worcester-Framingham riders who may need to leave the office early.

I am hopeful that these changes will happen. However, I do not want to see our elected officials just rest on their laurels because they were able to purchase the tracks from CSX. Acquiring the tracks is one thing. Implementing a more vibrant train schedule is another.

Connecting the Commonwealth and the T's Expansion

From today's Sunday Boston Globe two different takes on mass transportation in Massachusetts.

In the weekly Starts & Stops column, the newest report from MASSPIRG is cited. MASSPIRG just published "Connecting the Commonwealth: Key Public Transportation Projects and Their Benefits for Massachusetts." The 53-page MASSPIRG report focuses on why more and better mass transit is needed in the Commonwealth in the 21st century. Transit enthusiasts will embrace this report, which also details how Massachusetts can expand its infrastructure to include New England metro-areas outside the state. Of course, the larger question is how to fund the recommended initiatives, especially in the current fiscal situation the state is currently facing. Not to mention the economic issues plaguing our federal government.

On a different note, the "Starts & Stops" column lead story, about emergency services on the Pike, should be read by all Pike users.

Moving on - the second T-focused piece in today's Globe was an op-ed article authored by Charles Chieppo, who was a member of the MBTA's Blue Ribbon Committee on Forward Funding. Mr. Chieppo makes the case that the state needs to ensure better oversight of the T and the Authority's expansion projects.

The bulk of the editorial focuses on the proprosed Silver Line III expansion, connecting the Silver Line that runs between downtown and Dudley Station with the portion running between South Station and Logan Airport. This project is estimated to cost $1.8 billion. The project is in place because of environmental mitigation surrounding the Big Dig, specifically the additional vehicle traffic as a result of the road improvements. The reason the Silver Line III project is so expensive is because the T would need to tunnel under densely populated urban areas. If completed, the Silver Line III will only attract 15,000 new riders a day - mainly people who are probably already just walking around the city.

Mr. Chieppo is not arguing against funding mass transit projects. Rather, he has attempted to make the case to ensure that these projects are properly funded and properly managed.

The Big Dig initially appeared to have the funding, but look at where the mismanagement got us. The State is reeling from this project, designed to "improve" traffic flow in Boston. We need to urge our state leaders to look at the larger picture and put in mass transit and transportation infrastructure projects that benefit everyone.

US Transportation Infrastructure Woes

There is a great article from today's The Wall Street Journal (subscription required) about how cutbacks in driving are impacting both the federal highway system and mass-transit expansion projects.

The US Department of Transportation released a report that notes over the past 7 months, Americans have reduced their driving by over 40 billion miles. In the Northeast, which incorporates both New England along with New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, there was a 4.2% reduction in vehicle travel from May 2007 to May 2008.

While the cutbacks are good in terms of some federal policy goals such as curbing emissions and reducing oil consumption, from a funding standpoint this is not a positive situation. Federal fuel taxes largely help to finance highway and mass transit systems. As oil costs rise, so does the price for construction materials including asphalt. These factors make the road, bridge and train infrastructure that much more costly to maintain.

Of course, cities, states and the Feds didn't do a great job of maintaining our transportation infrastructure before the substantial rise in fuel costs started to impact our country.

About 25% of bridges in the U.S. are either "functionally obsolete" or "structurally deficient," like the Mississippi River bridge that collapsed in Minneapolis last August, killing 13 people.

Scary! I know some of the roads that I use frequently have been impacted by bridge issues. In Grafton, alone, a major bridge has been out of service for years. And it looks like a bridge is being repaired in the Millbury center area. Who knows how long that will take to fix? And look at the havoc the Longfellow Bridge that connects Boston and Cambridge has raised this summer.

Along with bridges, one out of every seven miles of the nation's roads has been rated "not acceptable" by the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission. To get our roads up to snuff, the Commission said that $225 billion a year is needed. Our current spending level is 40% that figure. Yikes!

The Bush administration is expected to release as early as Monday figures projecting a deficit of $5 billion or more in the Highway Trust Fund for next year. Thanks to steady increases in driving, since it was set up under President Dwight Eisenhower, the trust historically has run a surplus. It steers gasoline-tax revenue through a federal appropriations process before sending it back to the states.

This issue alone has sent lobbyists for business groups into overdrive on Capital Hill. Last Wednesday, the House passed an $8 billion bill for highway and mass-transit projects. This bill is expected to pass through the Senate, even though the President has some reservations. And on Thursday, an additional $1 billion for bridge repair was approved by Congress. In 2009, Congress is considering approving a six-year transportation bill that would include more than $400 billion in spending.

Transportation Secretary Mary Peters said administration officials are crafting an overhaul plan aimed at shaping the debate. The goal would be to give states more flexibility to set transportation spending, while making it easier for them to tap private-sector dollars. Also under consideration: asking Congress to loosen restrictions on states levying new tolls on interstate highways.

Experts do not think that driving rates will "bounce back" like they did after the gas crises in the 1970s.

Amtrak ridership is up 11% this year. Mass transit systems in areas including Seattle and Florida have seen ridership spikes of more than 30%.

Earlier this year, the House passed legislation that would provide an additional $1.7 billion to transit agencies over two years. Both chambers have passed bills that would significantly boost Amtrak funding.

Mass Transit Demands Have US Cities Scrambling

Driving to work this morning, I heard on the WXLO traffic report that there was an accident at the Rt. 140 - Rt. 30 intersection in North Grafton. I hope none of the Train Riders who use the Grafton station were involved in the accident. I also hope no one was delayed as a result of the accident.

Yesterday CNN.com published an article titled "U.S. cities scrambling to meet rising mass transit demands." Even areas of our country that are very car-centric have been reporting a surge in the use of mass transit. The MBTA was mentioned:

For example, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, which is currently operating at capacity during peak periods, ordered more subway cars, buses and coaches for its commuter rail.

The article didn't really share anything new, but it is interesting to see transportation become a major issue. The article did reference iReport, which is interested in having commuters across the US share their commuting stories.

It is really a shame that mass transit has taken a back seat in public policy over the past 50-55 years. Our nation was so focused on using the automobile to get to and from places, that we ignored public transit. At least Boston is lucky - they didn't remove all of our train lines (though Worcester and Greenbush are new versions of older lines).

Along the lines of Boston's retirement of some train lines back in the 1950s, The Weekly Dig has a current article about how some South Coast cities and towns have been trainless since 1959. It gives the history of trying to resurrect train service to New Bedford, Fall River and other South Coast localities.

While we're on the subject of the South Coast Rail Project, SouthCoastToday.com reports on the ongoing evaluation of station sites for the line.

Today's Boston Metro had an interesting article regarding the state's bailout of the Mass Pike. The question: "If the Pike gets bailed out, what about the T?"

Finally, if you're looking for a fee-less ATM when you get off the train, then the Select-A-Branch ATM Network is your answer. Ten S-A-B ATMS have been installed in MBTA commuter rail stations around the Boston area. Read about it in this press release from Tuesday.

MBTA GM Dan Grabauskas Opts to Not Use the T

I kid you not. You cannot make this up!

Seriously, only the Herald would dare report on this. An article in today's Boston Herald profiles how the MBTA's General Manager, Dan Grabauskas, commutes to work. While he is encouraging everyone else to use the T, Dan actually commutes from Ipswich to Boston in an MBTA-owned Ford Escape hybrid.

Wow. What a great way to support the system you lead. That's like working for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts and having Tufts Health Insurance or working for Citizens' Bank but keeping your own personal account at Bank of America. What the heck, Dan.

I don't want to turn this into a "beat up on Dan Grabauskas" rant, but if he works at the State Transportation building, why can't he take the MBTA/MBCR's commuter rail into work and keep his state vehicle in the parking garage at 10 Park Plaza? This comment just reeks of arrogance:

In an interview yesterday, Grabauskas argued he needs the SUV, in part to respond to emergencies, such as the Green Line train crash last month in which a trolley driver was killed.

I worked at 10 Park Plaza - there are plenty of parking spaces available for the heads of the agencies who's offices are in the building.

Does this comment mean Dan really doesn't care about the commuter rail or commuter boat passengers:

“I do try to set an example by using the T within the city, but my schedule tends to be erratic. I need to be able to go anywhere at all times,” he said.

And again, this is utterly priceless:

As for driving to Lowell to promote his Dump the Pump campaign, Grabauskas said taking the commuter train there and back to Ipswich would have taken too long. The message of Dump the Pump, he added, is to encourage people with less demanding schedules to take the T.

“I can’t think of a quicker or easier way for me to get anywhere in the city than by bus or by subway, and it’s certainly easier for some folks to take the commuter rail,” Grabauskas said. “I try to do that as much as I can.”

Of course, commuters interviewed were flabbergasted that the person who is in charge of mass transit in Massachusetts pretty much shuns the service.

Another Ipswich commuter, Sue King, agreed. “Jeesh, you’d think he would be taking the train,” King said. “Of all people, he should be setting an example.”

King takes the hourlong ride from Ipswich to North Station about three times a week. The trip takes 15 minutes more than Grabauskas’ commute and costs her $7 round-trip each day.

The MBTA Board meets today. There is a possibility that both fares and parking rates will be increased, which probably doesn't surprise anyone with the state of gas and the decrease in gas taxes collected by the state because people aren't filling up as much.

The Herald closed with this ditty:

Grabauskas, who earns a salary of $255,000 a year, struck a deal this week with T workers that will give them a 13 percent pay raise over the next four years.

The $150 million agreement adds to mounting financial woes burdening the T, which is reeling from soaring fuel and electricity costs and stagnant state aid even as ridership has hit new highs.

Should Grabauskas permanently park his SUV, he would not be the first powerful public official to ride the T. Former Gov. Michael Dukakis took the Green Line from his Brookline home to the State House every day. Ditto his longtime Transportation secretary, Fred Salvucci.

Well, I don't think our Governor is taking using public transit to commute in from Milton (Former Governor Dukakis lived in Brookline while he was governor, so that is a bit easier of a commute). Why can't they find someone to run the T who actually is a public transit advocate? Dan seems more and more like a fat-cat political appointee.

In other news, yesterday the T had a PR event that went bust. Here is the article from today's Boston Globe.

Sacramento's Urban Planning Experiment

Train Rider should be somewhere over the Atlantic right now, flying to London for a quick two-day meeting.

The news on the MBTA/MBCR front has been pretty quiet. I think a lot of people are out on vacation this week. At least, that's what the traffic reports want you to believe. Until you hit an accident or some other traffic stoppage, the roads are pretty empty. Which is nice.

I read an article in yesterday's The Wall Street Journal about Sacramento, CA's seven-year urban planning experiment. Since a lot of the content in the WSJ is subscription-only, you may not be able to link to the article.

Urban planners are looking to Sacramento to see if their urban plan, which is now in its 7th year, can be copied and used in other US cities. It does seem sort of strange that a "model" plan is coming from a state more synonymous with freeways, limited public transportation, horrible traffic, suburban sprawl and smog, but I guess we have to start somewhere.

Sacramento is following a "smart growth" model. Here are some excerpts from the article:

For decades, backers of "smart-growth" planning principles have preached the benefit of clustering the places where people live more closely with the businesses where they work and shop. Less travel would mean less fuel consumption and less air pollution.

Sacramento -- yoked to the car and mired in one of the lousiest housing markets in the country -- offers an intriguing laboratory for that idea. Four years ago, just as oil was gaining momentum in its torrid climb to $140 a barrel and beyond, the six-county region adopted a plan for growth through 2050 that roped off some areas from development while concentrating growth more densely in others, emphasizing keeping jobs near homes.

Between 2004 and 2007, the number of projects with apartments, condominiums and town houses for sale in the region increased by 533%, while the number of subdivisions with homes on lots bigger than 5,500 square feet fell by 21%, according to housing-research firm Hanley Wood Market Intelligence.

While the project isn't perfect, they are seeing some benefits. It will be interesting to see what ends up happening due to related transportation costs.

The Effects of High Priced Gas on the Suburbs

Yesterday's Boston Sunday Globe's "Starts and Stops" column was a follow-up to last Sunday's article about how some people are moving from the outer suburbs closer to their job. Now that we're seeing record gas prices, urban planners are trying to forecast how this could ultimately effect the suburbs.

The national average of miles driven in a year equaled 14,862 in 2006. In 1970 that figure was 9,949. Massachusetts drivers logged 11,702. The Commonwealth is below the national average for a few reasons, including the size of our state and the fact that we actually have an extensive transportation network.

While people may be driving fewer miles today, the 70s gas crisis did not have a long term effect on the number of total miles driven. So nobody knows if this current reduction in the amount of miles driven will be a temporary or a permanent one.

Ultimately, the only big reduction may come with commuters who have to drive 50 miles or more to get to and from work.

In other news, an interesting article about share-van rides ran in the Globe's North/New Hampshire edition last week. Back in the early 1990s, long before the Worcester commuter rail line existed, I rode a Caravan vanpool to and from Boston. It was a cheap, efficient way to commute. We could park for free at the park and ride lot at the Millbury Mass Pike exit (this was so long ago that the 146 exit didn't exist on the pike). Before the commuter rail, you used to see a lot of vans riding on the Westbound Pike. They were white vans. With the cost of gas, it will be interesting to see if more vans pop up - especially in areas where there may be fewer transportation options.

Association for Public Transportation Urges Rail Infrastructure Investment

According to an article in today's Telegram & Gazette, former Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis is frustrated that the Commonwealth's public transportation system is not as adequate as it could be.

Not wanting to say, "I told you so," but certainly implying that, Dukakis was quoted as saying:

"Twenty-five, thirty years ago, it was obvious that we were heading for this."

What's this, you might ask? Well it is the rising cost of gas that is causing residents to seek alternative transportation options which aren't as robust as they could be.

Dukakis was the keynote speaker at last night's Association for Public Transportation's annual meeting. The article noted the following:

The former governor and his wife, Kitty, recently visited Europe, a trip that
reminded him that the United States has “underinvested” in rail. “You come back
to the United States and it’s embarrassing,” he said.

I know that Mr. Dukakis is not just a big advocate, but he follows what he preaches. Back in 2005, I ended up on the same flight that Mr. Dukakis and his wife Kitty were on. We were flying from Madrid to Amsterdam. Assuming that most people with anytime of celebrity cred would fly first class turned out to be just that - an assumption. Mr. Dukakis, his wife and the other couple they were traveling with sat behind me in plain old regular coach.

The article continued to mention the challenges in extended commuter rail service between Worcester and Boston because the tracks are owned by CSX. As we all know, the state is trying to purchase the rail tracks that are between Worcester and Framingham.

While last night's meeting focused on commuter issues, the attendees also noted that transit agencies must work with freight companies to be successful.

Transportation infrastructure is aging, increasingly congested, and unable to
accommodate the current population,” said keynote speaker Frank J. Busalacchi,
secretary of Wisconsin’s Department of Transportation. For decades, public funds
for transportation have been devoted to highways, but that model no longer
works, he said.

“We need the same commitment to mass transit as we make to highways,” he said. “It’s going to be very costly.”

In other news, there was another fatality on the tracks yesterday. Last night an outbound Fitchburg commuter rail train struck and killed a person on the Concord-Lincoln town line.

Finally, WickedLocal-Boxborough published an article about the MBTA's funding issues.

Moving on to Mass Transit Because of the Cost of Gas

The weekly "Eyes on the Road" column, published Monday's in The Wall Street Journal, ran a great profile this morning about a Detroit resident's efforts to move to mass transit. You should be able to access this article this week, as it appears to be part of the Journal's free web content.

Yup, it is true. The cost of gas is causing Americans to rethink their commuting habits. We're lucky here in Massachusetts - we may not have the greatest mass transit system, but at least we have one. Cities such as Detroit, which eliminated most of their public transportation options after World War II, are in a pickle now that gas is expensive and citizens want different options.

The cost of gas will no doubt continue the dialogue about public transportation. On the one hand, Americans don't want to spend so much of their disposable income towards transportation costs. On the other hand, everyone wants the public transit to fit their schedule. There may need to be some compromises, but it would be great to see a system that fits a lot of different needs and helps us conserve our resources.

When Gas Gets Expensive, Americans Use Public Transportation

So it looks like our first heat wave of 2008 might have broken. It feels a lot better today than it has over the past few days.

How did everyone's commutes go last night in the horrendous heat?

Due to a post-work meeting tonight, Train Rider did not take the commuter rail into Boston this morning.

At the risk of dating myself, I would like to reference the 1992 movie "Singles." In this movie, about a bunch of 20-somethings living in Seattle in the early 90s, actor Campbell Scott portrayed Steve Dunne. Steve worked as a transportation architect and he was pitching the idea of adding a monorail line to the city of Seattle. The city decided they didn't want to add a monorail line.

Now if "Singles" were real life and Seattle still decided to pass on funding a monorail line in the early 1990s, I bet if they could roll back the clock and fund it now, they would. Because guess what, Americans not only want mass transit, they're using it. And our municipalities are having a tough time funding our transportation systems and keeping up with the demands of new riders.

With the rising cost of gas, it seems like public transportation is becoming an emerging issue. Too bad so many metropolitan areas never made public transportation an important service. That is probably because tax payers didn't see the need to fund it. MSNBC ran an interesting article this morning about "Jammed transit systems running on fumes."

Boston/Massachusetts was mentioned in this article.

According to the American Public Transportation Association, mass transit ridership is at its highest point in 50 years. Why? It has become too expensive to drive. This is a trend that is happening coast-to-coast. For the first three months of 2008, Americans took 85 million more trips via bus, subway, commuter rail, and light train rail than during the same period in 2007.

The American Public Transportation Association is concerned that our nation's public transportation systems may not be handle the rising amount of passengers.

While some metropolitan areas have been investing in their public transportation infrastructure, other areas have not. Now that there is an increased demand for public transportation, the infrastructure to provide it might not be there.

“We’re seeing it in a lot of other metropolitan areas where there just [aren’t] viable transit options — places like Indianapolis, Orlando or Raleigh,” said Robert Puentes, a transportation and urban planning scholar with the Brookings Institution, a public policy association in Washington. “They haven’t put the money into it. They haven’t put the resources into it.”

“There are major challenges in most of the older, established transit systems, places like New York or Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston — places that are really starting to show their age,” he said.

The article even mentioned that Washington, DC's Metro system (which I think is one of the best transit systems in this country), is one of the systems showing its age.

For the first time since 1980, the number of miles driven last year fell. This is the point of public transportation - to get cars off the roads.

The rising cost of gas can impact public transit in another way beyond more additional riders. Many transit systems are funded through gasoline taxes. If fewer drivers are filling up, that could mean less money for transportation systems. Some states are increasing their gas tax to help fund their public transit operations. Plus, with more riders, it costs more money to fuel the buses, trains, etc. that the public is using.

It all adds up to a conundrum for government officials — high fuel prices send passengers to mass transit but drive down tax revenue and strain fuel budgets.

Answers aren’t expected any time soon, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty said. He added:

“We need a dramatically different energy policy for our country, and that’s not going to happen overnight.”

Wow!

A Better Way To Go

The Providence Business News reported today on a new study published yesterday by the Rhode Island Public Interest Research Group (RIPIRG) about transportation titled "A Better Way to Go."

This Rhode Island-centric report noted "why rail, rapid buses and other forms of mass transportation must play a more prominent role in America's future transportation system." In Rhode Island alone, between the R.I. Public Transportation Authority's bus service and MBTA commuter rail service, 1.57 million gallons of oil were saved at a cost of $4.11 in fuel costs savings and 9,679 tons of carbon dioxide emissions not generated.

Interesting.

Boston's mass transit system can be a useless joke"

I thought this editorial published in the December 29, 2007 issue of Brockton's The Enterprise to be very thought provoking.

The editorial was written to highlight some issues that occurred at the MBTA's Riverside Station, which is where the Green Line's D train starts and finishes. However, the comments could easily have pertained to the commuter rail trains.

Here are some gems from the editorial:

• These are the days where the MBTA seems to stand for “misery, bureaucracy, torture and arrogance.”
• "I could have driven through this kind of traffic on my own and at least been comfortable in my own car,” one disgruntled passenger complained. (Seriously, some days on the commuter rail, I have the exact same sentiment).
• "The big question, though was why passengers were not warned there was no train service before they paid to drive into the Riverside parking lot."

The MBTA and the Massachusetts Secretary of Transportation need to do more to ensure that Boston's mass transit system works!!

Editorial: Funding Mass Transit in Massachusetts

SouthCoastToday.com published an editorial today written by an advocate for MASSPIRG.

The editorial, Funding mass transit requires difficult choices, provides examples of why commuter rail service to South Coast communities (such as New Bedford and Fall River) is needed. As a voter, I do not understand why the Commonwealth pushed so hard (and for so long) to re-establish the Greenbush commuter rail line (which serves towns included Hingham and Cohasset) to an area that already had ferry and rapid transit service into Boston.

If I had been a state transportation leader, I would have established commuter rail service to Springfield and the South Coast and improved the service on the Worcester, Franklin and Fitchburg lines because that is where the population growth in Massachusetts is occurring and all of these communities are not near rapid transit lines (such as the Green Line and Orange Line trains).

The editorial calls on the Legislature to approve Governor Deval Patrick's transportation bond legislation.

This is a great statement:

When it comes to public transportation, the region's transit network must expand to keep pace with its growing needs. As growth has shifted outward, new passenger rail and other forms of public transportation provide a vital role in connecting people to their workplaces and communities. Public transit allows the clustering of people together around vital centers without choking that vitality in traffic congestion and parking hassles. Anyone lucky enough to use subway or commuter rail instead of being stuck on the roads during the first snowstorm of the season knows what I'm talking about. New England's character and quality of life will be strangled if future growth simply puts more cars on the road.

The editorial also mentioned that no plan is yet in place to balance the MBTA's massive $5.2 billion debt. A third of this debt (roughly $1.7 billion) was due to the Big Dig. Also. the Commonwealth's bipartisan Transportation Finance Commission recently found that the state faces $15 to 19 billion in a transportation funding gap over the next 20 years. That's crazy, huh?

The Transportation Finance Commission has proposed that Massachusetts remove the levy currently imposed on the state's gas tax (which has not seen an increase since 1991). If the state adds a 11.5-cent tax to gas, most Mass. drivers would only seen an additional $66 increase in their annual vehicle expenditures.

As a commuter rail rider, I would not be opposed to seeing the levy unfrozen. However, I have a feeling that my fellow citizens would be in an uproar. People are already complaining about the rising cost in gas over the past two years. An additional tax could send people over the edge.

That being said, it is imperative that the Commonwealth educate its citizens on why a functioning commuter rail service serving the entire state is important. Over time, our home property values and our business opportunities could be negatively impacted if we do not have a sound and reliable mass transportation system.

I hope this is a conversation that engages other Mass. residents in 2008.