Medeiros Urges MBTA To Reconsider Proposed Cuts: Letter

The following was submitted by former City Councilor Monica Medeiros, who encourages residents to email publicengagement@mbta.com by 5 p.m. Friday to have their voices heard on the proposed service eliminations and reductions.

Dear MBTA,

As a resident and former City Councilor in Melrose, I am writing to express my opposition to your proposal to eliminate Bus Routes 136 and 131 and the commuter rail stop at Cedar Park in Melrose. After attending the December 1, 2020 virtual public meeting addressing the proposed service eliminations affecting the City of Melrose, I feel even more resolved that these service cuts would not be forging ahead but rather would be setting us backwards in terms of offering opportunity to our most economically challenged residents, in terms of meeting our City’s and our region’s housing goals, and in our commitment to the environment.

Public transportation provides access to opportunity. This access is a great equalizer. It opens doors to education, employment and culture. As someone who lives on the 136 Bus Route, I have used this route to get to get to work, into Boston for cultural events, and most importantly as a means to commute to both undergraduate and graduate school at Northeastern University and Emerson College respectively. I believe others should have this same opportunity.

Public transportation should be affordable and accessible. Eliminating these bus routes 131 and 136 would remove access to public transportation to entire neighborhoods on both sides of Melrose and in neighboring Wakefield. Eliminating these routes could close the door to many of our most economically challenged residents.

Eliminating these bus routes and especially the Cedar Park commuter rail station would set us back in the efforts our City has made to address our region’s housing crisis by encouraging smart growth. As a City Councilor, I voted for zoning changes to create an overlay district to encourage residential and mixed use development along the rail corridor. The decisions to make such drastic zoning changes came after a long and contemplative decision-making process which involved public participation of the entire community. These zoning changes are part of what has allowed us to be designated as a “Housing Choice Community” by the Baker Administration. Closing the Cedar Park station would derail these efforts entirely.

My takeaway from the virtual meeting is that this “Forging ahead” plan assumes that the riders of routes eliminated will simply access the T from the next closest stop or station even if it means adding another 15 minutes or so of walking time to their commute. Although this will be the case for some, those riders with more means will undoubtedly end up in automobiles. Some may drive to the nearest commuter rail station, to Oak Grove, Wellington or into Boston itself. Others will turn to a ride-sharing company, and those who are lucky enough will get a ride to and from Oak Grove from a family member or friend. This will only increase our carbon footprint, and this renewed dependence on automobiles is likely to become the new norm for these riders.

I recognize that the COVID-19 crisis has drastically reduced ridership due to the pandemic and that this has an economic cost, but these service eliminations would do disproportionate harm to Melrose.

The proposed Cedar Park closure does not appear that it would generate any meaningful savings. In the virtual meeting, Mr. Gonneville indicated that the savings would only be from reducing labor costs due to the time saved across the system by not stopping here. If these riders actually do simply walk to the next nearest stop as is expected by the proposal, this will only increase the boarding and disembarking times at the other stations, netting virtually no time saved.

Instead the harm to the Cedar Park neighborhood and our City would be great. Eliminating the stop would hurt the residents who rely on it - especially those in the many nearby apartments, it would hurt the home values in the area boosted by being in walking distance to the stop, it would hurt the small local businesses which are part of our already tiny commercial base, it would hurt the City through the loss of parking revenue at the station, and it would hurt the efforts we have made through zoning changes to the area to encourage smart growth development in a community with virtually no undeveloped land.

Even with reductions rather than eliminations, I am concerned about the MBTA’s ability to adapt quickly enough to address a demand for public transportation services which is sure to increase as we again begin re-opening our economy. Mr. Gonneville said during the virtual meeting that bringing service back would be a 4-6 month process.

Admittedly, Bus Routes 131, 136 and 137 all have some redundancy, but leaving the 137 only as the sole route from Oak Grove through downtown Melrose and the Wakefield line would lead to very crowded buses. Under this time frame, how can the MBTA address the public health need for increased personal space as we manage our way out of this pandemic?

I want to thank the Fiscal Control Board for their time and efforts and plead that they please do not eliminate Bus Routes 136, 131 and the Cedar Park station.

Sincerely,

Monica Medeiros
3 Bay State Road
Melrose, MA 02176