Status of Savin Hill station in terms of reopening

I remember at Savin Hill previously, there was a newspaper vendor in the morning rush hour, but that was about it. Now, anyone riding to/from Braintree passing by Savin Hill or from Ashmont on the northbound side, has anyone noticed some black graffiti on one of the brick exterior stairs? I saw it and I was NOT happy over it . What a shame to a brand new project.

Asinine and pointless.

http://www.dotnews.com/savinhillstationwontopen.html

A state board on Monday rejected the MBTA's appeal to open Savin Hill Station next month, citing handicapped inaccessibility and delaying the scheduled reopening until at least late July.

In a unanimous vote preceded by several blistering rebukes, the Architectural Access Board, part of the state Executive Office of Public Safety, ruled against the T, deciding that the two-month gap between a restricted opening and a handicapped accessible opening was unacceptable.

....

On Wednesday, Flaherty, husband of state Senator Jack Hart's chief of staff Rosemary Powers, said the process was more troubling than the verdict itself.

"That was a dog and pony show," he said. "They were there to beat up the MBTA for their history of not providing access. It had nothing to do with Savin Hill Station."

....

T project manager Scott Kelly said keeping the station closed to all riders would not allow contractors to bring the station up to legal standards any more quickly.

The state legislature should step in to overrule this. I bet it would pass unanimously.

Ron Newman wrote:The state legislature should step in to overrule this. I bet it would pass unanimously.

And in the process watch a bunch of ambulance chasers run to the Moakley Court House and file a lawsuit against the T "on behalf of disabled riders everywhere"...

In other words, don't hold your breath on it.

True Mr. Findlay, very true..

I woudln't think it would be fair for the station to be open for non-wheelchair patrons and those having to wait till later, so I'd keep it closed till further notice.

Derek Bernier wrote:True Mr. Findlay, very true..

I woudln't think it would be fair for the station to be open for non-wheelchair patrons and those having to wait till later, so I'd keep it closed till further notice.

Since it was a botched job and that huge hole in the ground in downtown Boston has made folks angry with fouled up public works projects I would think the threat of a lawsuit would be enough to get the contractors to pull out all the stops(self imposed or other) and get the project done sooner.

And the "with or without passengers using the station" is a load of crap. Passengers WILL get in the way and affect the progress of the station, the station WILL NOT get done just as fast with non-disabled passengers using it while the ADA compliance is complete. Two clear cases in point: Malden Center and Community College.

And the "with or without passengers using the station" is a load of crap. Passengers WILL get in the way and affect the progress of the station, the station WILL NOT get done just as fast with non-disabled passengers using it while the ADA compliance is complete. Two clear cases in point: Malden Center and Community College.

Oh yeah, I've seen them two stations on the O line. How dare the MBTA would pull that crap without any ADA compliance. Not to mention, WOLLASTON stations is itself NON-ADA.

Shame on this T system...broken promises by them.

And there was even an article in one of the major newspapers about the FTA critizising the T for not fixing it's escalators and elevators in their MBTA system, and that the FTA was even gonna withold federal funding for their projects if they don't get those darn elevators and escalators fixed soon...

Derek Bernier wrote:Oh yeah, I've seen them two stations on the O line. How dare the MBTA would pull that crap without any ADA compliance. Not to mention, WOLLASTON stations is itself NON-ADA. Shame on this T system...broken promises by them.

Actually Malden Center and Community College weren't getting renovations, they were actually just getting elevators installed. Still, they showed that it's almost impossible for the passengers using the station not to interfere and delay the progress of the station renovations/rebuilding.

And there was even an article in one of the major newspapers about the FTA critizising the T for not fixing it's escalators and elevators in their MBTA system, and that the FTA was even gonna withold federal funding for their projects if they don't get those darn elevators and escalators fixed soon...

That's misplaced blame. It's the contractor(s) who fouled up on the maintnence, not the T. However the T can be called out for renewing contracts with the contractor despite the shoddy record.

Then again it's also extremely hard to keep things like elevators and esculators working all the time when you have a system that has two lines over 100 years old and two that are undergoing constant renovations to meet ADA requirements. Give the T some credit, the Orange Line is basically ADA compliant and the Red Line is due to be compliant soon as well.

And the "with or without passengers using the station" is a load of crap. Passengers WILL get in the way and affect the progress of the station, the station WILL NOT get done just as fast with non-disabled passengers using it while the ADA compliance is complete.

It just seems like at some point reasonable, public-minded people have to start thinking in terms of costs and benefits. Again, I'm absolutely in favor of doing everything possible to improve access for the disabled, but does it really make sense to to keep the station shut for 100% of the riders for 3 additional months in order to speed up access for - and I'm guessing here - 1% of the riders by, what, a week or two? (Or by no time at all, if you believe the T spokesman, which it sounds like you don't.)

There has to be a win-win solution out there - for example getting some specialized shuttles for the disabled and working nights and weekends on the elevator to speed that up. Or open the thing and charge the T or the contractor $2500/day they're non-compliant - that'll get them moving. Or only open the stairwell on the north side http://www.mbta.com/projects_underway/i ... metric.jpg
to riders and let the elevator and escalator guys work like crazy in the back without passengers interfering.

Obviously, I don't know the whole story here but just from the tone of the newspaper article, it sounds like the sides are entrenched, the AAB is happy flexing its muscles and no one is trying to come up with a creative way to serve all the public in the best way possible.

Anyway, I'm a completely uninformed outsider and don't know what I'm talking about, so maybe I'm way off base - and please correct me if so - but that's just how I see it as an annoyed and frustrated Savin Hill resident.

Well (as we drift off topic) the question becomes: where do other transit systems relative to Boston in age stand when it comes to ADA compliance...
The system is small and I do not see the issue with making everything compliant - all stations should be accessible (with the exception of Boylston) by now - 2005. This should have been a high priority - I know a commuter rail line to somewhere no one wants it and an expensive bus tunnel that no one uses are important, and while I HATE the extra construction, low floor vehicles and etc , it should have and has to be done. It's the law and the T isn't above the law, 100 years old or not.

CS wrote:Well (as we drift off topic) the question becomes: where do other transit systems relative to Boston in age stand when it comes to ADA compliance...

Compared to the other systems of the early 20th Century(New York, Chicago, and Philly) Boston far exceeds them. For the first time Boston has a fully ADA compliant bus fleet and only a handful of un-ADA accessible subway stations. And the only reason the T isn't fully compliant on the Green Line is due to the Type 8s being so fouled up and behind schedule.

The system is small and I do not see the issue with making everything compliant - all stations should be accessible (with the exception of Boylston) by now - 2005.

No. Not when you have to work around the daily commutes on some of the busiest transit lines in the country. All of the key stations are either done or going to get done but regardless of how small the system is you still can't get things done fast with so many people needing to use the system.

This should have been a high priority - I know a commuter rail line to somewhere no one wants it and an expensive bus tunnel that no one uses are important, and while I HATE the extra construction, low floor vehicles and etc , it should have and has to be done. It's the law and the T isn't above the law, 100 years old or not.

And neither are the people who force the delays and refuse to pay for the projects. You can rant and rave at how the T is screwing people over and how they are breaking the law when the fact is they are not. They are actually doing something and whether you like it or not it has to move slowly.

efin98 wrote:

CS wrote:Well (as we drift off topic) the question becomes: where do other transit systems relative to Boston in age stand when it comes to ADA compliance...

Compared to the other systems of the early 20th Century(New York, Chicago, and Philly) Boston far exceeds them. For the first time Boston has a fully ADA compliant bus fleet and only a handful of un-ADA accessible subway stations. And the only reason the T isn't fully compliant on the Green Line is due to the Type 8s being so fouled up and behind schedule.

The system is small and I do not see the issue with making everything compliant - all stations should be accessible (with the exception of Boylston) by now - 2005.

No. Not when you have to work around the daily commutes on some of the busiest transit lines in the country. All of the key stations are either done or going to get done but regardless of how small the system is you still can't get things done fast with so many people needing to use the system.

This should have been a high priority - I know a commuter rail line to somewhere no one wants it and an expensive bus tunnel that no one uses are important, and while I HATE the extra construction, low floor vehicles and etc , it should have and has to be done. It's the law and the T isn't above the law, 100 years old or not.

And neither are the people who force the delays and refuse to pay for the projects. You can rant and rave at how the T is screwing people over and how they are breaking the law when the fact is they are not. They are actually doing something and whether you like it or not it has to move slowly.

I'm not ranting or raving, I am giving my opinion based on what I see as fact - if the state orders you to do something and you don't do it, you break the law. If the state ordered me to do something and I didn't do it, I'd probably be thrown in jail. What's with the double standard?
And I'm sorry, they are screwing people over. I ride the 23, 22 and 28 buses daily and they are packed to a point that is dangerous, yet they have empty buses out in South Boston. If that doesn't spell screw, then I don't know what does.

The issue of reopening sooner may not be as cut-and-dried as it may seem. It may seem like a simple decision to say "the station was inaccessible before, and will remain inaccessible until date X whether reopened for everyone else in the meantime or not." It may be the case that the ADA doesn't allow the station to open without being fully accessible, whether it was previously accessible or not. I don't know if that's the case, but it's something to consider. I know the ADA distinguishes between new construction and renovation to a point, but a certain level of work pushes you into "new construuction" under its criteria.

I'm not debating whether it should openor not, just raising the issue that this may be a part of the reason why.

Regardless of who is or isn't breaking what law, the rule that should be applied here is a simple utilitarian formula: "the greatest good for the greatest number". Which means opening the station now, even though not everyone will be able to use it yet.

The state law should simply be changed as necessary so that the state isn't breaking it when it opens the station.

Rob, perhaps you should split this topic?

Yeah, unless we are still mentioning about Savin Hill.

And speaking of, it will have to wait for the elevators and escalator (if any) to get it open for business. Although when it reopens, I'll be sure to visit the new Savin Hill Station.