The Globe reports the Beacon Hill Civic Association filed suit yesterday against the handicap access ramps the city started installing, also yesterday.
The group alleges the ramps don't fit in with the historic nature of the august neighborhood, that there are alternative designs that are less icky and that the city failed to get OKs from the Beacon Hill Architectural Commission, the Massachusetts Historical Commission and the state Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs.
Mayor Walsh's office contends the city has been reaching out to Beacon Hill for more than two years and that people in wheelchairs and the visually impaired deserve the same access to Beacon Hill sidewalks as they do to sidewalks in the Back Bay, South End and Bay Village historic districts, where the city has been installing ramps without lawsuits.
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Ramped up dispute puts them on the wrong side
By Chris Rich
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 8:36am
..of history.
I really need to once more explore the brick canyons imposed on this little dim dumbo drumlin.
But the migrations of shorebirds and trails along the Neponset mouth answer me more satisfactorily.
November will be perfect.
Beacon Hill already has ramps
By Thomas Crown
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 9:13am
This is about the materials, not access. Newbie Mayor Walsh simply wants to check the box so he can unlock all those sweet Federal funds and Beacon Hill is an easy target politically and the media of course helps him out with all this nonsense.
No other major tourist area in Boston has concrete ramps and yellow plastic bump plates. Go look at the brand new Rose Kennedy Greenway, or pretty much any street crossing on the Freedom Trail, or any crossing downtown.
This is political grandstanding for Federal dollars, nothing more, nothing less, and reprehensible. Why are our politicians so transparent and embarrassing?
Why are our politicians so transparent and embarrassing?
By Chris Rich
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 9:36am
Well Mr Crown, it's because they are trying to communicate with comparably transparent and embarrassing constituents.
Now don't you have a bank heist to attend to?
Also too, is pointing out other half-assed non compliant locales a useful ploy?
What if it is some reprehensible scheme to bring the whole patchwork mess into something more uniform?
Crown is right and you are wrong
By Robin
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 2:30pm
It's grandstanding to get federal dollars. This is NOT about handicapped access. No one has nor has ever been against handicapped access. I am floored at how many people have just jumped on this as if it were only about the poor individuals who need ramps. These same individuals won't get very far on those sidewalks. Hell, I walk under my own steam and I avoid the sidewalks. So stop complaining about citizens who you think are selfish or pearl clutching people or whatever. People who live on Beacon Hill have been good stewards of the area and they're trying to keep it nice. And they are willing to help pay for an alternative. So why rip them?
You avoid those sidewalks
By Dot net
Thu, 08/14/2014 - 10:55am
You avoid those sidewalks perhaps because they are paved in brick (on Beacon Hill)? Not very smooth or good at preventing trips or falls, huh?
Why are our politicians so
By anon
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 9:55am
Many think transparency in government is a good thing.
Transparency in actions would
By Thomas Crown
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:54am
Transparency in actions would be. Transparency in motives is a different thing entirely. Sadly it's always the latter.
"The 1%" are actually... not wrong?
By Mjolnir
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:35am
I'm always one to scoff at the excesses of the wannabe-Brahmin who live on Mt. Horam as much as anyone, but... their requests don't seem too absurd in this case. I work in Longwood, and in a hub of hospitals and a much higher percentage of people with mobility and vision issues, they seem to get along fine with brick red cuts:
http://bit.ly/1sYAcC8
and dark gray cuts:
http://bit.ly/1yvHHkI
Instead of the yellow ones used elsewhere.
But maybe Longwood is a froo-froo place full of doctors and their BMWs and they don't like the yellow ones either. Well, I take the train from Ruggles, and it seems that Roxbury, the MBTA, and Northeastern are also fine with gray cuts:
http://bit.ly/1q8oQI3
But maybe Children's Hospital is an exception, what about BMC? Gray cuts there too.
http://bit.ly/1AdI3z3
Moving up Mass Ave tells a similar story on one of the busier roads:
http://bit.ly/1sVhLzh
Even directly adjacent to Back Bay Station, they use both brick red:
http://bit.ly/1AdIv0r
and gray pads:
http://bit.ly/1oMkb20
This seems not to be a big deal for the entire rest of the city. Why is it a problem here? I don't live in Beacon Hill, will likely never live in Beacon Hill, and don't particularly care about the people who do. But the neighborhood is indeed a historic artifact for the city and the country. I watched with my own eyes abroad as they used a machine similar to this to lay a brand-new brick road in order to to preserve the character and class of the area, and thought sadly about the lazy, ugly, pothole-ridden asphalt patches we do in layers and layers here in America (often over the original cobblestones in cities like Boston and Worcester). And the BH NIMBYs aren't even asking for that. This whole thing is crazy. I can only assume we have a surplus of the yellow pads and don't want to order more of the other ones.
Eat the rich, but can't we keep our city nice while doing so?
And will the world suddenly end
By roadman
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:20am
if we force the elitists on Beacon Hill to accept a standard that is used everywhere else in the City? I seriously doubt it. Especially when the issue here is - gasp - asethetics, which is both subjective and indicative of a very shallow mindset.
Capitulating to the demands of a minority sets a very bad precedent. ANd tha't is the reason the City is fighting this.
And will the world suddenly end
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:28am
If we force the elitists in City Hall to obey the law, and obtain the necessary approvals before undertaking the project?
Allowing a city administration to violate the law sets a very bad precedent. And that is the reason why the people affected are fighting this.
That's a really great use of street view.
By Chris Rich
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:43am
And it does provide a sense of how haphazard it is.
It leaves the question of whether this is just an initial sortie that signals a citywide effort because of big Fed money and lots of contractors to fatten like woodchucks in advance of some off season torpor.
Or is it just the city trying to wrap this chest pounding display linger up?
It would be cool to go out and make a photo inventory of the melange of ramp types.
Google plus has things like Fire Hydrant Friday but I don't imagine a lot of photographers would get pumped for Sidewalk Ramp Saturday.
Meanwhile, back at the Trimountain...
I think the issue isn't the
By anon
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 1:25pm
I think the issue isn't the color, as much as the concrete and plastic. They want brick and granite.
Brick red cuts, as you call
By Dot net
Thu, 08/14/2014 - 12:44pm
Brick red cuts, as you call them, were proposed by the city "terra cotta" ramps vs the yellow, but rejected by BH residents.
Thank you for pointing out where the city has been inconsistent and needs to upgrade or colorize the ramp somehow. DPW isn't perfect. But they have a hi-vis standard and alternative NOW.
Also, the brick machine is nice, but I have seen no brick paved surfaces in the Northeast that survive winters with countless freeze-thaw cycles without getting uneven, and not really all that accessible!!!
Paving Perfection?
By Mjolnir
Thu, 08/14/2014 - 6:17pm
I have seen no REGULAR paved surfaces survive winters here, and I would suspect the Dutch, Swedes, and Norwegians may have some familiarity with dramatic freeze-thaw cycles... at the very least, replacing a patch of cracked bricks would probably be more effective than a blister-like patch over patch over patch over patch...
It's a frickin' hill
By Will LaTulippe
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 12:46pm
None of those things are steep inclined planes. I imagine that wheelchair + hill = necessity for the most flagrant safety devices available.
Far be it for me to stick up
By anon
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 3:19pm
Far be it for me to stick up for government decisions, but.....
your right, nowhere else in all of Boston.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=soley+st,+02129&hl=...
Yes, thats the freedom trail. Yes thats the Bunker Hill Monument. Yes those are concrete ramps.
Or how about here, where they took away brick sidewalks for the concrete ramps.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=winthrop+warren+021...
or here at a little place called Old North Church:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Freedom+Trail,+Bost...
So that would be 3 in a one mile walk. Im sure there are more. Is there anything in Beacon Hill (other than the State House) that is more of a tourist attraction than Bunker Hill and Old North Church?
Instead of wasting the money suing the city, how about you and your neighbors use that money to upgrade yourselves to the 'better' materials on your own. and quit yo bitchin'!
Counter-sue for the Civil
By anon
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 9:23am
Counter-sue for the Civil Rights violation and use the award to pay for even more compliant ramps throughout the city.
Nice try
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 9:53am
But the neighborhood does not oppose ramps, it opposes the materials that Walsh wants to use (which were, by the way, rejected twice by the mayor's own appointed architecture commission, but he just steamrolled ahead anyhow.
This is bullshit grandstanding.
Yellow is the new black
By BlackKat
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:18am
You know the hill could use more color. One tires of all the brick red in this city.
A few splashes of primary color could do wonders.
See for example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XObZXYkiMO0
BS Grnadstanding indeed
By roadman
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:22am
Not by the CIty, but by the elitist folk on Beacon Hill who are unwilling to accept the COMMONLY USED standards for these ramps on a totally subjective principle.
Please check the history.
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:30am
It's not the "elitist folk on Beacon Hill" who refused to accept the ramps as proposed by the city, it was the city's own Architecture Commission. That's not a bunch of NIMBY busybodies, it's a governmental body established by the state legislature whose members are in part appointed by the mayor.
Yeah...nice camoflauge
By Kaz
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 1:22pm
You keep mentioning that it's the BHAC and "not a bunch of NIMBYs"...so let's evaluate that claim.
The BHAC is a 10 person commission.
Currently there are 2 vacancies...so now we're talking about 8 people. 4 of those are holdovers and should either be renewed or replaced. Another one hasn't even been sworn in yet. So, really, there are 3 active members in good standing on a 10 person commission. Your commission is a very flimsy wall to be standing behind.
Let's examine the members.
Mary Fichtner lives in Beacon Hill.
Susan Knack-Brown lives in Beacon Hill.
Martha McNamara lives in Beacon Hill.
Joel Pierce lives in Beacon Hill.
Annlinea Terranova lives in Beacon Hill.
So, 5 of the 8 people are Beacon Hill residents. And those are just the ones that I could state definitively and easily from some Google and phone book searches.
So, stow the "BHAC" is "independent", etc. subterfuge to the conversation.
Congratulations on
By gotdatwmd
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 1:38pm
Congratulations on establishing that they live there but it doesn't say anything about their decision making process or tries to establish that it's a conspiracy of cronyism.
What are you on about?
By Kaz
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 1:44pm
It directly contradicts the claims of the post to which it is a reply.
That's all it is a response to. It has nothing to do with cronyism or that they make poor decisions. In response to him saying they are "appointed by the mayor" or "not the elitist folks on Beacon Hill" or "not a bunch of NIMBYs" or just "some governmental body", he's full of crap. At least half of them ARE from Beacon Hill and not just some Mayor-appointed governmental body...as if they are some wholly impartial body isolated from the desires of the neighborhood in some way.
Saying "it wasn't the BHCA, it was the BHAC!" is about as pointless as it gets...but it was a veil that he was trying to hide behind.
And your point being?
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 4:23pm
Wouldn't you expect the city to appoint people who have some connection to a neighborhood to the architectural board for that neighborhood?
Classic
By Kaz
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 5:20pm
Of course I would. That's why I felt it was worth my time to actually investigate it!
The question you've ignored and attempted to throw back on me is why you thought that declaring them a "government group" and "not a bunch of NIMBYs" was valid. You were the one trying to make a dismissive point about others' arguments using "Walsh's own commission" as a source for why he's outrageous to go against the will of the neighborhood.
Your argument is posed as him versus them and he is wrong. You then declare that someone on HIS side of the fence (the architecture commission HE appointed) disagrees with his assessments and decisions, thus attempting to undermine his position. But the sappers are actually in large majority from the other side of the fence! Of course they're going to disagree with his assessment that they are wrong to continue to fight this!
how's this for "historically inappropriate materials"
By tape
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 9:26am
"The plaintiffs seek to prohibit the City from reconstructing or altering the sidewalks and streetscape in the historic district using historically inappropriate materials and designs."
Have they not noticed the asphalt streets? Surely those "altered the streetscape" with "historically inappropriate materials".
Restore Cobblestones!!!
By Chris Rich
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 9:34am
If it was good enough for Crusher Murray, it's good enough for the likes of these wanna be Brahmans
It might take a few weeks after forever, but it'll be a perfect chore for ambitious contractors when times are tough.
May the brick canyon walls ring with the jackhammers of liberty!
.
After walking down Charles Street
By whyaduck
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 9:48am
just the other day...
I really think the hill's historic sidewalks, in general, are way to narrow. Methinks they need to be significantly widened.
oh good
By cybah
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:39am
So we can get rid of electric, telephone, and cable television lines also.
Depending on how far back we want to go 'historically' we could remove the gas lights also.
Lets get rid of the cars also.
Don't forget about mulch used in planters too.
What an insufferable bunch of bloviating bigshots!
By whyaduck
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 9:51am
Hopefully the suit will get tossed out.
The unfortunate downside: the installation of any sort of handicap access ramps will be delayed for what might be a lengthy period of time.
Stay Classy, Beacon Hill.
Stay Classy, Walsh
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 9:55am
Had the city gone with its own architecture commission's recommendations (that's a city body, not a bunch of self-appointed neighbors, by the way) the ramps would have been in and done 2 years ago.
And, as I said, good luck to 'em...
By whyaduck
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:03am
Per Adamg:
"Mayor Walsh's office contends the city has been reaching out to Beacon Hill for more than two years and that people in wheelchairs and the visually impaired deserve the same access to Beacon Hill sidewalks as they do to sidewalks in the Back Bay, South End and Bay Village historic districts, where the city has been installing ramps without lawsuits."
Blah blah blah
By Kaz
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:25am
Raze it all and restore the pasture.
Actually, I was just thinking the same thing...
By whyaduck
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 9:50am
raze the hill. Cows are cute.
What if your handicapped and
By nitefly
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:20am
What if your handicapped and wheelchair bound , and you decide to visit Acorn street and find absolutely no wheelchair ramps on street corners, of course you will demand and make a request to the city of boston, and what does the city of boston do, they install handicap ramps on each corner of Beacon hill, this is the right thing to do, being that thousands of tourist each year visit Beacon hill, and a fraction of these tourist are wheelchair bound. But, that person that owns that $2million Joy street condo thinks the ramps ruin the beauty of an old historic looking neighborhood, There are more significant things to spend Boston tax paying dollars such as sheltering the homeless, but having Boston tax paying residents paying to remove handicap ramps in beacon hill is a slap in the face to all boston residents.
Nobody is objecting to ramps.
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:31am
Nobody is objecting to ramps.
Period.
No one except this lady:
By thegirl
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:57am
One warned it could lead tourists to stay away from one of the nation's premier attractions. "The terrible problem is, we are, if not the most important, certainly one of the most important tourist attractions in this country. and we have worked for the last 50 years to enhance that tourist attraction" and now the city wants to blow that all by installing ramps with concrete framing, she said."I must say that the idea that we would care about a few federal dollars to fix our potholes and jeopardize this unique historic district in the United States of America, I don't think there's any comparison," she continued, adding a better solution for her husband - who is in a wheelchair - and others would be dedicated handicapped lanes, similar to the bike lanes that the city has striped on roads in other neighborhoods. (emphasis mine)
http://www.universalhub.com/2014/battle-over-handi...
Did she speak for the neighborhood?
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 6:40pm
Did she speak for the neighborhood in any sort of official or representative capacity? Was it the sense that people from the neighborhood who were in attendance at the meeting approved of her statements, or was there evidence that many people from the neighborhood sort of groaned, rolled their eyes, and shrunk into their seats as she spoke?
And Beacon Hill already *has*
By anon
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 1:24pm
And Beacon Hill already *has* ramps at most or all corners. http://goo.gl/maps/S0pGG
What they don't have is concrete on those ramps, and plastic bumps.
Language Etiquette
By Felicity
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 12:34pm
The term "wheelchair bound" is really offensive and factually incorrect. No one is "bound" to their wheelchair. Appropriate language is "wheelchair user" or "person that uses a wheelchair."
Language Etiquette
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 6:38pm
What is the appropriate term for someone who uses a wheelchair by necessity, because they are unable to walk, or unable to walk very far, or who, as a result of a disability, is more or less required to use a wheelchair if he or she wants to get around? In particular, what is the term for someone who uses a wheelchair but, because of his or her disability, is more or less unable to get out of the wheelchair without assistance?
Get rid of those unhistoric cars!
By SwirlyGrrl
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:51am
Well, maybe permit a 19th century Benz or two.
Why stop there?
By anon
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:50am
I demand that the Back Bay fill which was STOLEN from its rightful place where Downtown crossing now is be restored. This city used to have lots of hills, not just Beacon Hill and I think this inequity needs to be addressed now.
#restorethehills
Flood control measures, yes!
By SwirlyGrrl
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:14am
Dig up the fill and dump it back on the hill. Then restore the city to its network of islands separated by natural intertidal zones.
I will never understand
By trickycrayon
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 9:57am
why rich people think they know better than everyone about everything, and also somehow deserve exceptions to the rules by which everyone else plays. "We found a prettier, (maybe) better, more expensive solution! We'll pay for it!" Sure, yeah, okay! Will you also pay for the upkeep when it turns out not to be better? Why are you not wiling to go with ESTABLISHED MATERIALS & METHODS THAT MAKE CITY STREETS SAFER FOR THE DISABLED?
You haven't been following the story
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:02am
Good question, Why is it that Walsh thinks he knows better than everyone about everything, and somehow deserves exceptions to the rules by which everyone else plays?
In this case, the rules, well established by law, are that that changes to the streetscape need to be approved by the Architectural Commission (duly established by the legislature; several members are Walsh's own appointees) and by the state Historical Commission. The architectural commission has twice rejected Walsh's proposed materials, and Walsh hasn't even bothered to go to the state Historical Commission.
In fact, "Play by the rules" is exactly what the neighborhood is going to court to get Walsh to do.
The neighborhood would be delighted to use the ESTABLISHED MATERIALS AND METHODS that have been successfully used in all sorts of neighborhoods all across the country.
You do mean the Beacon Hill Architectural Commission as
By whyaduck
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:09am
"In December, members of the Beacon Hill Architectural Commission voted down the city’s proposal to install pedestrian ramps and tactile warning strips in the neighborhood. They held that the ramps and yellow plastic strips would affect the Colonial character of the streets."
And
"However, after a team from the city’s Inspection Services Department concluded this week that the neighborhood is unsafe for people with disabilities, Mayor Walsh said he has the authority to overturn the Architectural Commission’s December decision."
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/201...
Saying it's so don't make it so.
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:34am
Walsh is making an unsubstantiated claim that he has some particular authority, a statement that may or may not be true. The courts will sort it out.
Oh, but I have.
By trickycrayon
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:16am
It's nonsense.
Shut up and comply like everyone else.
Obey!
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:35am
I'll bet you're absolutely adorable in your swastika armband.
And now I know how Joan of Arc felt ...
By SwirlyGrrl
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:48am
Yes, because pretending that you have a pristine historic neighborhood when you also have street parking, and being told that you can't have exactly what you want to make it look like Epcot would is equivalent to living in Nazi Germany.
Oh the Martyrdom!
I'll let The Smiths take it from here:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLtFlKn7N90[/youtube]
How about we just...
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:52am
Is it really that much to ask that the mayor follow the rule of law?
He is
By SwirlyGrrl
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:17am
The commission can be overridden, and it was.
Period.
As my father used to say "you know where you can find sympathy - its in the dictionary between shit and syphilis".
Stop throwing tantrums and maybe take a nice, calming, educational trip to Portland, Maine, where similar renovations are underway?
Let me quote you
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:23am
Cite, please.
Also what about the Massachusetts Historical Commission and the State Executive Office of Environmental and Energy Affairs?
Enabling Legislation of the
By Rob Not Verified
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:48am
Enabling Legislation of the Beacon Hill Historical Commission (Chapter 616 of the Acts of 1955, and as amended) states:
Section 9: Exclusions
Nothing in this act shall be construed to prevent any ordinary maintenance or repair of an exterior architectural feature now or hereafter in the historic Beacon Hill district which involves no change in design, material, color, or outward appearance thereof; nor shall anything in this act be construed to prevent the construction, reconstruction, alteration, or demolition of any such feature which the building commissioner shall certify is required by the public safety because of an unsafe of dangerous condition.
The ISD commissioner is the building commissioner and he did certify this condition, which overrides the commission.
The definition of "exterior architectural feature" refers to that of a "structure." I assume the parties have up until now agreed these ramps are structures under the act, otherwise the commission would not have jurisdiction in the first place as far as I can tell. But I have not read the suit so not 100% sure.
http://www.cityofboston.gov/landmarks/historic/bea... - Enabling Legislation available here
Thank you, Rob
By SwirlyGrrl
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:53am
You beat me to it.
The court can decide
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:58am
I'd guess that one of the issues on which the case turns will be whether or not ISD certifying the ramps that Walsh wants to build (as opposed to the ramps that the Architecture Commission would approve) are in any way "required by the public safety by an unsafe or dangerous condition."
I assume so. I do not know
By Rob Not Verified
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 12:07pm
I assume so. I do not know anything about prior precedent or case law on this (if any exists) so don't know if prior mayors have done this and/or what the result was. I'd like to read the initial complaint if an electronic copy ever surfaces.
"Overridden," yes. After
By Thomas Crown
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:52am
"Overridden," yes. After over two years of playing by the rules, Walsh suddenly decides it's a "public safety issue" and he can do whatever he wants. Interesting timing. Clock must be ticking on those Federal funds.
Beacon hill residents hire a
By nitefly
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 1:30pm
Beacon hill residents hire a lawyer to stop construction of handicap ramps, they say according to a law that was enacted in 1776 , so this so called historic law should apply to all historic parts of boston, an example Webster street East Boston is a historic district, are residents entitled to get brick sidewalks and cobblestone walkways, they should be. Most of boston Real Estate taxes are poured into maintaing expensive brick repairs on the sidewalks of beacon hill and Charlestown, when it comes to fixing a cracked sidewalk in East Boston the city uses asphalt and they walk away for the next 10 years.The wealthy of Beacon hill do not like the idea of using yellow rubbery looking mats for ramps, they want instead (Theresa Heinz approved) fancy expensive looking brick, who's going to pay for the expensive brick, the Dorchester taxpaying homeowner who is struggling with 4 kids that's who.
You're batting a .000
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 4:36pm
Wrong, they hired a lawyer to force the city to go through the approval process, laid out by law, for changing the streetscape. The neighborhood wants handicap access and handicap ramps, just not the ones that Walsh seems determined to ram down their throats.
Wrong, 1955
Wrong. If you read the applicable laws, different standards apply in different places.
Wrong. At 36%, the largest item by far in the budget is schools. PWD and BTD together (which include, among other things, all road maintenance and repair, sidewalk repair, etc, of which brick sidewalks are a tiny fraction) comes in at 5.2% of the budget
Pretty much the same as they do in Beacon Hill, by the way.
Wrong. Most of the people who are most active in this particular issue are not particularly wealthy, in fact the very wealthy do not tend to get involved in local community issues.
Do you have any evidence that Theresa Heinz is involved in any way?
Wrong. A group of neighbors have stepped up to volunteer to pay for the upgrade.
looks like you're batting a .000
Your saying Mayor Walsh
By nitefly
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 8:02pm
Your saying Mayor Walsh proposed a plan on what type of material should be used for the ramp, same type of material that is used throughout boston, but residents of beacon hill want an alternative, well the alrernative is your ramp's should look like the rest of boston's ramp's, It's like saying for example Beacon hill does not want filthy garbage trucks roaming on their streets, residents want to have their trucks paved in gold, city of boston says screw you beacon hill you better accept our dirty trucks, beacon hill hires a lawyer and files a law suite againts city of boston because of beacon hill's selfish demands!!
That's a horrendous analogy
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 9:28pm
That's not at all what happened.
What happened is that the legislature passed a law saying that in the designated historic districts, various restrictions applied and various approvals had to be obtained in order to make any structural changes to anything.
What happened next is that the city wanted to change the ramps, and started to obtain the approvals required by the legislature, and got shot down.
What happened next is that a group of BH residents researched alternatives -- things that had been used in other historic districts in other cities -- things that had proved to be safe, cost-effective, durable, and that gained the approval of both the historical and the ADA interests, and presented those to the city for consideration.
What happened next is that the city basically stonewalled.
What happened next is that Walsh said, in effect, "screw the approvals, screw the law, and screw the people, I'm going ahead with what I want to do. "
What happened next is that the neighbors sued to force the city to follow its own rules.
I don't see where you're getting "gold plated garbage trucks" or "selfish demands" from any of that.
And, your argument "The ramps in BH ought to look like the ramps in the rest of the city," is just not very well thought through. The entire point of a legally protected historic district is that it isn't going to look just like the rest of the city. It doesn't have the same sidewalk paving material, it doesn't have the same street lamps, it doesn't have the same rules for what you can and can't do to the outside of your house. The residents all live by the rules, often at their own expense and inconvenience. I don't see what's "selfish" about asking the city to do the same. In fact, it's the opposite of selfish, it's called giving up your own time and energy and money to be a good steward of a streetscape that's going to be around long after we're all moved away or dead.
So, the city should just shut up and follow the law
By Waquiot
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:06pm
Don't worry, I'll leave the other thing someplace else.
Oh FFS!
By thegirl
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:52am
Are you really implying that installing ramps to comply with ADA regulations to assist folks with disabilities is the *same* as Nazis rounding up and killing thousands upon thousands of Jewish, homosexuals, Romani, and people with disabilities?
Not at all.
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 10:58am
Not at all. Not even close. My comment had nothing at all to do with ramps, it had everything to do with the "shut up and comply" attitude.
"I'll bet your absolutely adorable in your swastika armband"
By Waquiot
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 11:46am
You wrote it. You could edit it (and if you do, please note for the sake of people reading further on that you edited it out.)
They're ramps. And sidewalks. If you were at a movie theatre, I was having a loud conversation on my phone in front of you, and you noted that the rule is that cellphones aren't allowed, would your response also be appropriate were I to say it to you?
"Shut up and obey"
By Bob Leponge
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 12:03pm
"Shut up and obey" is a general attitude toward the relationship between people and government; it's one to which I take extreme exception. I'll stand by the swastika armband comment, which, as I've explained, is not about ramps
So, you want anarchy and litigation?
By Waquiot
Wed, 08/13/2014 - 12:53pm
Beacon Hill should somehow be exempt from the Americans with Disability Act because following it would be akin to following the Nuremberg Laws? Or conversely, any time someone thinks that it is okay to smoke in a daycare center, they can refer to anyone who objects as fascists. Or perhaps when chemical plants in West Virginia get attacked for polluting water supplies, we can just call out those jackbooted thugs from the EPA for what they really are.
No, it is not about ramps. It is about comparing people who think the law, perhaps any law, should be followed to Nazis.
Pages