This Sunday's Boston Globe Magazine asks, "Is The Commuter Rail Worth Saving?"
If you ask Bostonist, the answer is yes. Although the article quotes people who use the commuter train and people who don't, it is the quote form a dissatisfied rider that we find most telling:
"I can't do it anymore, I'd rather sit in my car, undisturbed, not have to share my space, not have to have someone's elbow in my lap, have my own radio, to be in control of my own destiny."The Globe goes on to say that although the cost of this person's commute has increased marginally since she started driving, by about $1.15, she finds it a small price to pay for peace of mind.
Bostonist has mixed emotions about what this means for Boston, its suburbs, and the myriad effects that decisions like this have on all of our lives. On the one hand, Bostonist can empathize with a person's desire not to feel tethered to the anxiety that comes with entrusting time and punctuality to the hands of public transportation. We also understand the appeal of being able to listen to what you want on the radio (sans iPod), to smoke if you want to smoke, hell, even to sing along to Kelly Clarkson's 'Since You've Been Gone' while picking your nose. (OK, we don't really get that last one, but you get the idea.) (Our own decision this November to forgo the commuter rail for some sweet personal driving time, didn't pan out as well as we hoped, however.)
So why advocate for the expansion and more importantly, the maintainence of the of the commuter rail? In one example of the positive effects it can have on the surrounding cities, realtors in Worcester credit the commuter rail with the surge in property values there. The ridership on the Worcester line immediately exceeded expectations when it was added in 1994. As Paul Regan, executive director of the MBTA's advisory board, says,
"...the history of the last 15 years has been that they built it and people came. But they built it and people came and the T now has a very old fleet, and the age of the fleet shows up in service reliability. . . . People won't ride something they don't think they can depend on. We've got to focus first on making it dependable, making it exactly as advertised."
The important thing to remember is that the commuter rail isn't about reducing traffic. As Fred Salvucci, former state transportation secretary, concedes, "It would take a very large number of people getting out of their cars to result in free flow. And if you had free flow, other people would jump into their cars and get into it. It's like shoveling the ocean." Building more roads, more tunnels, and more bridges has long since been disproved as an effective way to ease traffic. Induced travel, as it is known, it is akin loosening your belt because you have gained weight. A strategy, but not an effective one to deal with the root causes.
As the Globe points out, Worcester and Lowell are both experiencing a rebound, and both are well served by the commuter rail. Communities without viable public transport are almost certain not to experience such a rebound.
Doug Foy, secretary of the Executive Office for Commonwealth Development, passionately points out in his advocacy for expansion of the commuter rail,
"I'm not particularly enamored of the notion that we should be subsidizing the rich stockbroker to take the train from New Bedford. But I am very interested in helping New Bedford rebuild itself. And if a transportation investment can do that for New Bedford ... well then, that's what the public should do."
"There are those who see the value in the line and embrace it," The Globe says "That's the commuter whom the rail system relies on - the one who recognizes its value and embraces it as a part of his or her life." Bostonist encourages this and will wait excitedly for all these improvements. Though even now, without them, we are unabashed supporters and users of the rail. Long live the rail!
Post contributed by Paulo Mastrangelo
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
