Race and the MBTA

The Boston metro area is one of the most racially and economically segregated in the country (Elton). Today, as segregation methods are increasingly covert, one of the major systems that support that segregation is the design and operation of the MBTA, specifically the rapid transit lines (known as the “T”). The T has service to many of the wealthiest and Whitest parts of the metro area; while Roxbury, Mattapan, and Chelsea (the neighborhoods with the highest Black and Latinx populations) are extremely underserviced. This forces the non-White populations of Boston to use more unreliable and slower transit methods. Distancing even further these racially segregated communities from jobs and opportunities in disparate geographic locales throughout greater Boston.

The history of US urban planning is plagued with projects that have overtly and covertly intended to further racial and economic segregation. Boston, like many other cities, was “redlined” in the New Deal era. Redlining was a bank lending practice that forced Black residents to live in only certain areas of the City. The transportation networks built in that era served primarily the “green-lined” neighborhoods of the City reserved for the white and the wealthy. Through the two-pronged approach of boxing people of color into specific areas and then not providing adequate transportation to leave those places (particularly for jobs), Boston and other US cities ensured deep geographic segregation. Boston has several areas along the red and green lines that account for much of the employment opportunities in the City (Focus 40). Thus, access to the T is essential for robust job options, and areas that are underserviced by the MBTA become increasingly economically disadvantaged because access to jobs is inhibited (Jenkins). Today, residents of Roxbury and Mattapan are unable to easily access employment in major parts of the City (such as the Longwood medical area and Kendal), which lie along the T lines and farther out in the suburbs. A good and reliable MBTA could have the effect of softening geographic boundaries and allowing people throughout the City to take part in opportunities all over the City. But the network today disadvantages racially diverse segments of Boston, and as a result, those areas become increasingly insular and challenging to leave. In this way, historical racist practices of redlining for housing are maintained and reproduced covertly in transportation.

Historically, in the planning of urban transportation networks, there has been a conception of two types of people that use the system (Spieler). First, there are the “dependent” riders, who are poorer and primarily people of color and rely on the network to access work and other necessities because they lack alternatives like a car. Second, there are the “choice” riders who use the system by choice when it happens to be convenient for them, i.e., when it is faster and more appealing than auto transport. In cities like Boston, choice riders are given more efficient and nicer infrastructure to attract them to transit, and the dependant riders are given worse systems because the City felt like they didn’t need to draw them in. Areas with dependent riders have unreliable and confusing bus routes, while the choice riders have rapid transit systems that are well designed and easy to navigate. A bus on a comparable route to a T line takes longer because of a higher number of stops and having to deal with traffic. Moreover, bus stops don’t have the same kind of anti-weather infrastructure (shelters) that T stops have. From the standpoint of simply trying to sell the most tickets, these two separate systems make sense; but public transportation should not have monetary goals and should first and foremost serve people that depend on it for their lively hood. Yet because the MBTA has historically conceived of two distinct types of ridership, it has underserved the poorer and more diverse Boston areas. The concept of the two types of ridership goes a long way to explaining privileged and non-privileged regions of Boston, but a second factor is more pernicious. A lot of town halls and public meetings that discuss transportation are overwhelmed whith White people talking about wanting “clean” and “safe” spaces that are not sketchy (i.e., no Black people), so this citizen level racism contributes to the cities efforts to underserve Black ridership. In Boston, the communities of Roxbury, Mattapan, and Chelsea lack access to efficient public transportation that would open up the full economic opportunities of the City to them. While they have bus networks, there is T access, and this is highly detrimental.

To illustrate the lack of service to specific sections of the Boston area, I overlay a map of the MBTA’s rapid transit lines on a map of the racial composition of Boston. The map makes it clear that the MBTA intentionally avoids servicing people of color while going out of its way to service White Boston suburbs. MBTA’s stylized rapid transit map makes it look like the whole city shares approximately equal coverage. Yet, when the actual map is shown alongside racial demographic data, that cover-up disappears, and the broad lack of service to Roxbury, Mattapan, and Chelsea (among other areas) comes into focus. The places in the City that are underserved by rapid transit are the areas that are thought of as not a priority, so a coverage analysis of the MBTA is very revealing of the cities present and historical values.

Roxbury was not always so cut off from rapid transit (Martin). From 1901 to 1987, the Washington street elevated comprised the southern half of the Orange line, importantly making a stop in Nubian square, the economic center of Roxbury (Lynch). Yet as the T “modernized” in the late 80’s the MBTA decided to demolish the elevated route and move the Orange line west to service Mission Hill and Jamaica Plain (predominantly White areas). This move was symbolically solidified by the lowering of the art deco Dudley [now Nubian (Garcia)] station 12ft to change the station’s function from a T stop to a bus stop. The move was representative of a nationwide shift in transportation focus in the late 20th century. Infrastructure built in the ‘80s and ‘90s was focused on getting people in the suburbs into the City using primarily automotive methods, advantaging suburban Whites while throwing people of color under the bus (Tankersley). In 2002 to “replace” the loss of the elevated Orange Line, the MBTA initiated the new “Silver Line.” While the MBTA map would tell you the Silver line is the same as the red, blue, orange, and green lines, it in fact is little more than a glorified bus route. The Silver line serves Boston Logan, south Boston, and Roxbury. It uses modified busses that run using suspended electric wires; thus, it was much cheaper to construct than an underground subway. The Silver Line is only slightly faster than regular bus routes; around the airport, it uses dedicated roads but throughout much of the City, especially in Roxbury, it uses public roads and so is affected by traffic and its delays in the same way that other bus routes are. It almost seems as though the MBTA was trying to obscure their lack of service to Roxbury by including the silver line on their rapid transit map. Thus, in my map, I excluded the silver line and the equivalent Mattapan line.

Another issue with Boston’s T network is that it was built to bring people from the City’s outskirts into the city center/ financial district. This network type, known as a hub and spoke model, has all of its interline change stations (shown in black) in the downtown area, making travel hard between the “pie slices” of the City that the lines create. Even when the Washington Street Elevated was operational, to get from Nubian to the Longwood Medical area would require taking the Orange line to Downtown Crossing and then taking the Green Line out of the City, a route that is four times longer than if there was a line going directly from Nubian to Longwood. This model is not designed for people who work outside the financial and government centers in downtown Boston. A system that serves both the outskirts and the City’s interior would have a multitude of interline change locations. (The “Urban Ring addresses this issue”)

In 2018, the MBTA released “Focus 40,” a 22-year investment and infostructure plan. While the plan acknowledges a lack of service to the communities of Roxbury, Mattapan, and Chelsea, it fails to address the racial nature and origin of these discriminatory practices and so falls into the practice of “color-blind racism,” as outlined by Bonilla-Silva in his book “Racism Without Racists.” It is essential that when talking about urban planning that it is clear that geographic disparities in access to transportation systems are really racial disparities. The Focus 40 plan stops short of introducing meaningful projects to address unequal service in the Boston area. Future projects consist primarily of minor changes to bus routes and renovations of existing stations. By far, the largest investment included is the expansion of the Green Line from Lechmere, which is already nearing completion. The new Green Line will help further connect Somerville and Medford (and Tufts) to the City. These areas, however, are predominantly White and rich and so are not dependant on public transportation in the same way that the segregated neighborhoods of Boston are. I do support the new Green Line (Afterall any public transportation infostructure will help to lessen our dependence on cars which is essential in light of global C02 emission trends), but if in the next 20 years the MBTA can only commit to one large project, it should surely attempt to serve Roxbury and Mattapan.

If the MBTA were to change course totally, many initiatives, large and small, would begin to curb the effects of racist urban planning. The City has long been considering the “Urban Ring” project, a new T line that would encircle the City and go directly through Roxbury (Lynch). It would connect all of the existing T lines at interline change stations outside of the city center, making it unnecessary to go all the way downtown to transfer from the Red to Green lines. There is also an initiative to reconstruct a new Orange line branch along Washington St. to run through Nubian Sq. and to continue to Mattapan to merge with the Red Line there. While both of these projects would be expensive, these measures are owed to historically underserved and racially segregated Boston areas. The MBTA could also make small changes that would help towards anti-racist goals. The elimination of riding fares would increase overall ridership/ citizen mobility and would significantly help poorer people as the T is quite expensive to ride. The addition of late-night service on some bus and train routes would help people who work night shifts (like nurses) and require transportation during those hours.

As manifested in Boston by the MBTA, public transportation policy in the US is an example of both covert and overt racism. This racism furthers economic and social inequality by marooning certain areas of the City and isolating them from regions that are Whiter and the locus’ of employment. Although not discussed here, public transportation policy in the US (or lack thereof) over the past century has contributed to the climate crisis by not providing adequate alternatives to automobiles. As the US moves to address systemic racial inequality and climate change, the expansion of transportation networks at all scales is essential.

Works Cited

Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo. Racism Without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in America. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2018.

Christof, Spieler. "Racism Has Shaped Public Transit, and It's Riddled with Inequities." The Kinder Institute for Urban Research, 24 Aug. 2020, kinder.rice.edu/urbanedge/2020/08/24/transportation-racism-has-shaped-public-transit-america-inequalities.

Dustin, Cable. "The Racial Dot Map." Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, University of Virginia, July 2013, demographics.coopercenter.org/racial-dot-map. (Racial Demographic Data)

Elton, Catherine. "How Has Boston Gotten Away with Being Segregated for So Long?" Boston Magazine, 8 Dec. 2020, www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2020/12/08/boston-segregation/.

Garcia, Maria, and Cristela Guerra. Dudley Square Will Change Its Name To Nubian Square, WBUR, 19 Dec. 2019, www.wbur.org/artery/2019/12/19/dudley-square-nubian-square-approved.

Jenkins, Wesley. "The Unequal Commute." Urban Institute, 6 Oct. 2020, www.urban.org/features/unequal-commute.

Lynch, Andrew. "An Animated History of the MBTA." Vanshnookenraggen, 4 Apr. 2012, www.vanshnookenraggen.com/_index/2012/04/an-animated-history-of-the-mbta/.

Martin, Phillip. "Racial Disparities and the MBTA." WGBH, 26 Apr. 2012, www.wgbh.org/news/post/racial-disparities-and-mbta.

"MBTA Focus 40." Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. 2018, https://www.mbtafocus40.com/.

Robert K. Nelson, LaDale Winling, Richard Marciano, Nathan Connolly, et al., "Mapping Inequality," American Panorama, ed. Robert K. Nelson and Edward L. Ayers, accessed May 2, 2021, https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/redlining/

Rankin, Bill, and Louis Hyman. "The Boston T." Radical Cartography, 2003. http://www.radicalcartography.net/?bostonnow. (visual inspiration for my map)

Tankersley, Jim, and Zolan Kanno-youngs. "Biden Seeks to Use Infrastructure Plan to Address Racial Inequities." The New York Times, 1 Apr. 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/04/01/us/politics/biden-infrastructure-racial-equity.html.