Gaskin: Time to hit the gas in promoting Blue Hill Ave. BRT

The City of Boston received a $44 million grant to redo Blue Hill Avenue. This is a once-every-50-year opportunity, and we are falling short.

For years, the City has aimed to introduce a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system along Blue Hill Ave. to solve persistent transportation issues. The Barr Foundation has spent over $11 million to sell Boston on BRT. A Gold Standard BRT could be transformative. Globally, such systems have proven to be cost-effective, high-capacity solutions to urban transportation challenges. Cities have successfully implemented Gold Standard BRT systems to move millions of people efficiently while reducing traffic congestion and pollution. For example, Bogotá and Guangzhou have demonstrated that BRT systems can rival subways in capacity and speed, transporting tens of thousands of passengers per hour at a fraction of the cost.

On paper, BRT appears to be exactly what Boston and Blue Hill Ave. need. However, the City’s approach to implementing this potentially transformative project has been far from exemplary.

Inadequate Community Engagement and Communication

The City’s engagement with the community has been insufficient, rendering the BRT proposal unpopular among residents. Key issues include:

1.  Lack of Clear Communication

The City has failed to effectively explain what BRT entails and its potential benefits. A video illustrating bus movement on Blue Hill Ave. before and after BRT would be helpful. Many residents perceive the proposed changes as merely a plan to reallocate bus lanes. Without a clear and compelling explanation, residents are left focused on potential losses rather than gains.

2.  Distrust of Promised Standards

The City has not communicated the varying standards of BRT systems or committed to delivering a Gold Standard BRT. This lack of transparency fosters skepticism, with many doubting whether the MBTA can deliver anything at the “gold standard” level.

3.  Failure to Emphasize Equity

While bus riders on Blue Hill Avenue are acutely aware of issues like long travel times, significant variability, and unreliable service, the City has not framed the BRT project as one of transit equity. I met a woman who could commute from Rhode Island and get to her job in downtown Boston faster than a person living in Mattapan. Public transportation along Blue Hill Ave. is the worst in the city and disproportionately affects communities of color.

Without an equity-focused narrative, many residents view the project as catering to the needs of suburban commuters who need a less-congested Blue Hill Ave. to shorten their commute. One fear is, as commute times are shortened, real-time software will direct more drivers to Blue Hill until it is back to existing levels of congestion. Suburban commuters add traffic, exacerbate health issues like asthma in a community where rates are five times higher than in other parts of the city, and they seldom support Blue Hill Ave. businesses.

This echoes historical grievances, such as the Fairmount Line, which went through Black communities without making stops or eventually provided infrequent service, and Amazon delivery trucks that cut through neighborhoods like Roxbury that they didn’t serve with same-day delivery.

Dismissal of Alternatives

Many residents feel the City has dismissed alternative solutions such as better traffic enforcement, rerouting commuter traffic to 93/128, or implementing congestion pricing. This perception alienates community members, who feel their suggestions are ignored.

Change requires “giving to get.” The area has a disproportionate number of children and seniors and a high asthma rate. Some people might be willing to sacrifice parking spaces in return for clean air for our children. Without trust that what residents gain will outweigh their sacrifices, support for the project remains elusive.

Uninspiring Vision

Given how much the state has spent to improve the commute of suburban commuters e.g. $534 million for the Greenbush Line, or $2.28 billion for the Green Line Extension, commuters along the Blue Hill corridor are coming up short. The project’s envisioned outcome lacks appeal. Comparing the proposed median and streetscape design to the vibrant landscaping and public art in the Seaport highlights a stark difference. For residents, Blue Hill Avenue is more than a road — it is their front yard and greenspace. The current proposal fails to align with a “Complete Streets” philosophy. Key questions remain unanswered:

Was a walkability audit conducted, and will its findings be incorporated into the design?

Will the plan address the need to replace deteriorating sidewalks and crosswalks?

Does the project align with the City’s “Vision Zero” initiative?

Does it account for future needs such as driverless cars?

What is the area plan for EV charging stations, or e-bike docking?

Sections of Blue Hill Avenue sit within a heat island. Besides adding trees, what heat mitigation interventions such as the use of light-colored pavement are being considered?

A new Blue Hill Ave provides an opportunity to incorporate improved stormwater management techniques e.g. use of permeable pavement, incorporating rain gardens, bioswales, and rainwater harvesting.

How will it address the growing number of delivery trucks from companies like Amazon?

The median between Grove Hall and Mattapan represents a significant amount of real estate. What is the best use for it, regarding landscape, including public art, rain gardens, plant or other carbon sequestration, ground-mounted solar? The Barr Foundation needs to help sell BRT to the residents. Now is the time to design the Blue Hill Ave. of the future that meets the transportation, environmental, and quality of life issues for the residents.

Ed Gaskin is Executive Director of Greater Grove Hall Main Streets and founder of Sunday Celebrations.