Carolyn Crockett

Left: Photo Jacqueline O'Sullivan

Posted by John B. Kelly

Longtime West Fens resident Carolyn Crockett died of cancer last Thursday night.. She has been sick for a few years, and was receiving hospice care at home. She was in her late 40s.

Carolyn was an original NAG member, and came to the group through her involvement in the Fenway Community Development Corporation .

FCDC Executive Director Carl Koechlin captures her contribution to the community:

Carolyn served on our board for several years up until a few years ago and also chaired our property management committee for many years. She exemplified the generous spirit and commitment to others that are essential to any strong community and community organization. We would do well to carry those attributes on with our work. We will miss her.

Carolyn was on the quiet and polite side, and preferred to be active behind the scenes. But like just about everyone with a disability, she knew she had to fight hard for what she -- and most especially, her young nephew, Zachary -- deserved. Carolyn committed her daytimes to caring for Zach, who is severely disabled both physically and cognitively. Her fights for Zachary made her an activist. In a 2000 Boston Phoenix article about the impact of development in the Fenway, Laura A. Siegel wrote:

Gridlock is already a problem. That can be more than an annoyance, especially to people with disabilities. "I once waited 20 minutes for an ambulance to come when I had a child [Zachary] who wasn't breathing," said Fenway resident Carolyn Crockett, who uses a wheelchair. "EMS said they were stuck in Red Sox traffic."

When I finally got up the nerve to try and start a neighborhood access advocacy group, FCDC community organizer Jethro Heiko suggested reaching out to Carolyn Crockett, a disabled member of the FCDC board. She joined right up, and steadied the group with her stock of knowledge, both about opportunities like the Mission Hill/Fenway Trust, and -- just as important in my book -- who and who did not "get it" regarding disability.

It was easier for Carolyn to advocate on behalf of others, like Zack or the other disabled and elderly residents of her building. So our original priority list of curb ramps didn't even include her own not-very-accessible streetcorner, the intersection of Kilmarnock and Peterborough St, because she thought the priorities should be total disasters like the uncrossable broken stone pavers where Westland Avenue meets Hemenway Street.

After she was diagnosed with colon cancer (it turned out that she was unlucky enough to be genetically predisposed), Carolyn cut back on her activities, but continued to care and advocate for Zachary. One of the events she was able to attend was NAG's first protest. Exasperated by the Menino administration refusal to even talk about slowing down the installation of bricks on Huntington Avenue, BCIL and NAG collaborated on a protest in September, 2003 on a just-installed patch of brick in front of the Burger King at Huntington and Gainsborough St..

Carolyn was my hero that day, because she was able to more-or-less neutralize a local and obnoxious counterprotester, who was driving me nuts by holding a sign celebrating brick. "As long as you agree with everything he says, he's really not much trouble," Carolyn said. I'm not sure anyone should have to make such a sacrifice, though..

Last years Access Tour of the Fenway was the last time she felt well enough to come to a NAG outdoor event. Zachary came with his dog and helper, who pushed him in a manual chair along the sidewalks. Zachary's experience made us see how bad some of the new sidewalks were: some of the “cracks” between the concrete panels were so wide that Zack's front wheel fell in.

Carolyn had a wry sense of humor about how farcical fighting for access can be. Like the time she spoke to the nearby McKinley Middle school about its curb cuts being full of snow, only to be told that the curbcut was unshoveled on purpose to create another parking space.

After it became clear that the cancer would be terminal, she debated back and forth about whether to replace her broken old wheelchair with a new one. Her big question: Would it come on time?

It was a good question, as the local wheelchair dealers all take months and years to finish the seemingly endless process of prescription, fitting , order , and delivery. Meanwhile, Carolyn kept seeing wheelchair advertisements on TV promising immediate delivery. So she phoned one of these suspicious outfits on a whim, and was flabbergasted by receiving a new chair within days.

But the chair suddenly had a problem and needed service. So with nothing to lose, Carolyn telephoned the company on a Saturday, thereby traveling further into an alternate disability universe where company representatives react with genuine concern: "But how will you get around without a chair," the rep asked Carolyn.

Carolyn shook her head laughing about how this naïve company didn't get the industry-wide memo about how to be indifferent and unresponsive, not friendly and concerned.

Carolyn was friendly and concerned.

Boston Courant Photo Shows More City Access Violations

Posted by John B. Kelly

The Boston Courant article about the May 8 AAB hearing, where the Menino administration was found in violation of state law for the third time, also included a picture taken by my helper, Lovebucket bass player Rob DuBuske. The paper used a generic sounding caption, DPW Employees Work on a Huntington Avenue Sidewalk, which unfortunately left out more damning information.

This work occurred in the middle of the afternoon on Saturday, May 6, just two days before the AAB hearing. As I prepared for our monthly NAG meeting, members James Magee and Billie Tyler told me that construction men were working on the sidewalk, so I was looking for any last ditch efforts on my way over.

Sure enough, on Huntington near Mass Ave., Rob and I found this scene of a construction crew feverishly laying brick while illegally blocking off the construction site. The two women in the front right of the photo are just about to descend a ramp down to Symphony Plaza West's lower level (Utrecht Art Supplies), where they could then climb the stairs at 333 Mass Ave. This option was not available to people who do not use stairs. So first I, then James Magee, were forced to risk our safety in the street. The crew of violators did not seem to notice anything.

The Boston Courant's caption might more accurately have read:

DPW Crew Violates Access Law While Unsuccessfully Repairing Huntington Sidewalk Two Days before Hearing

while crediting Rob DuBuske for the photo.

The city was violating 521 CMR 3.10, , which I also discussed exactly 1 year ago, here.

Boston Courant: "State Orders City To Fix Sidewalks"

Posted by John B. Kelly

Reporter Daniel Friedman covers the Architectural Access Board's (AAB) decision against of the city in this week's Boston Courant.

In a ruling that advocates for the disabled called a clear victory, irate members of the state's Architectural Access Board (AAB) last Monday told the City of Boston to comply with a 17-month old order to fix sloping sidewalks on Huntington Avenue by July or face at least $120,000 in fines.

Friedman nicely covers the complicated chronology:

• "Installed in 2003, brick sidewalks on the street have angered disabled residents who argue that the bricks jar wheelchair users and endanger elderly people."
• NAG and BCIL file complaints in 2004.
• AAB rules against city in January 2005.
• City loses appeal.
• DPW botches resurfacing of the sidewalk.
• AAB insists on compliance again.
• At the veritable last-second, city throws "$40,000 worth of repairs the weekend prior to Monday's hearing" at the problem, again without success.

Friedman's coverage of the hearing itself is wonderful:

Arguing that most of the remaining sidewalks meet ADA standards, Stephen Spinetto, Boston's commissioner for persons with disabilities, asked the AAB to grant variances exempting the city from repairing remaining portions with grades between two and three percent.

Those slopes, "cause minimal trouble for a person with a disability," he said, drawing incredulous reactions from AAB members and about 15 wheelchair users who packed a conference room in the state's McCormack building.

Clearly, Commissioner Spinetto did not have an argument prepared for the board. Could he have really expected the board to just wave off the requirements? Just about everyone understands that when "most" of a sidewalk is accessible, and the rest isn't, it remains dangerous. Drivers, whether of automobiles or wheelchairs, have little appreciation for the part of the road that did not land them in a ditch.

Friedman describes the board's "irritation" at the city's "willful noncompliance," and its rejection of Disability Commissioner Spinetto's request for a variance on the crossslopes still in violation. The board criticized him for ignoring variance regulations that he provide a price estimate for repairs, and for lacking any explanation at all.

"So you have nothing to show why you're not in compliance?" [board member Martin] Ebel asked.

"No," Spinetto said.

Jack Grieco's testimony that the sidewalk "is just an accident waiting to happen" evokes his testimony from last January, which can be read here.

While big media ignored the story, Daniel Friedman's article proves again the importance of local papers for news that really touches on our daily lives. Great job!

Thanks to advocate Jamie Simpson for clipping the article.

Just What Exactly Is "Cross Slope?"

photo: Jacqueline O'Sullivan (click on picture for larger view)

Posted by John B. Kelly

Cross slope is just another way of referring to how "tilted" a sidewalk is. It is like walking on the side of a hill, where your inside foot or wheelchair wheel is higher than the outside one.

Here is a good example, from Westland Avenue near Cappy's Pizza, which is in a very new building at the corner of Hemenway Street.

The cross slope on this sidewalk is 4%, which is very steep for any wheelchair or walker user, and probably affects a lot of other people.

Wheelchair users just end up heading for the curb, over and over again. It is exhausting, scary, and dangerous -- especially when the sidewalk is icy. Nothing like sliding to your doom and not being able to do anything about it.

That's why all new construction demands 2% or less crossslopes.

It seems that the city of Boston didn't bother to inspect the constructed sidewalk, which is now its responsibility. I filed a complaint against this cross slope on Monday.

AAB Decision: A Civil Rights Victory

Posted by John B. Kelly

Yesterday's Architectural Access Board (AAB) decision is a civil rights victory.

I want to thank everyone who supported in any way our efforts at the "Great Fine Hearing of 2006," whether attending, submitting testimony, helping with measuring violations , making a storyboard, coming to a protest, and all the other ways people have contributed. This is the start of a very accessible season!

The Menino administration, along with its institution friends like Symphony Hall, has acted over the last few years like they could do whatever they wanted in our neighborhood and get away with it. Even if it was illegal. The city wanted to pretend that crossslopes between 2% and 3.1% were no big deal. It wanted the board to just let them off the hook without question. But the AAB reminded them that 2% was the legal maximum for good reason -- that it takes 50% more effort to move across a 3% cross slope than a 2% crossslope.

The bottom line is this: the city will have to dig out the asphalt base under the bricks along Huntington Avenue, and bring every cross slope under 2%. This means that we can offer Mayor Menino another bite at the apple: he has another chance to do the right thing here, give up on this awful brick and replace it with a smooth surface. Sometimes, the best option is also the cheapest option.

Taking up the entire sidewalk, re-laying an asphalt base, and putting down those irregular bricks again will cost the city more in every way, in terms of cash and reputation. It has already lost at least $40,000, the money it threw away on Saturday in its last ditch attempt to persuade the board that sort of and mostly compliant is the same as compliant.

Hopefully, the AAB will stand by its decision to fine the city, since no one, whether private individual or institution or local government, should be able to get away with taking away civil rights. When a thief steals something precious from you, and a couple of years later reluctantly returns it in worse condition, they must still be punished.

This city stole our access by putting down irregular bricks that were noncompliant, and then made every effort to not fix them. Even if by July 1 this sidewalk is technically regulation, the city must still pay for the three years we were excluded from going down our own neighborhood street. Risking our life in the street, exhausted and stressed if we stay on the sidewalk, and frustrated and demoralized if we go around.

No one wants to have to penalize a city (there are so many needs, and never enough dollars), but we are always hearing about the word "responsibility", and it is time that the administration that went to court to argue that it is not "the responsible party" for this sidewalk, take responsibility for its actions.

City officials seemed to hope that last second touch ups and some cool charts would get it off the hook, but they sure were wrong. It amazed me that Commissioner Spinetto had no justification for the variance he applied for. Remember this is language that the Architectural Access Board uses to make its decisions:

the Board can only grant variances if compliance with the regulations is proven to be technologically infeasible or the cost of compliance is excessive without any substantial benefit to persons with disabilities.

This means that the city had to prove to the board that fixing the problems was just impossible, or (and this is what the city tried to argue) that the remedy would cost so much and hardly help disabled people at all (the magic phrase "substantial benefit"), so that a variance makes the most sense.

Because Commissioner Spinetto and the project engineer admitted that they could make the sidewalk regulation, they had no choice but to argue that it would cost too much. They did not bother to explain why fixing the sidewalk would not "substantially benefit" disabled people. Under sharp questioning, Commissioner Spinetto said that remaining violations would only "minimally" bother people. We know better.

Eileen Brewster made the excellent suggestion of questioning Commissioner Spinetto's appropriateness for the position of ADA compliance officer for the city of Boston, since he opposed-- under oath-- basic ADA regulations. How can someone enforce a law that he actively opposes? More on this soon, especially when we have the transcript.

In other news, the AAB will be able to supply us copies of the hearing on CDs. I will have important parts of the hearing transcribed, like when Commissioner Spinetto said that bricks were the community choice and that illegal crossslopes are not a problem, and (my favorite moment) when the project engineer said that it was very difficult to work with the bricks because "they are so irregular."

We could also transcribe people's testimony.

Maureen Cancemi's testimony to the AAB

Posted by Maureen Cancemi

Maureen lives in Symphony Plaza, right next to the brick sidewalk in contention.

I use a power wheelchair to travel to and from my home in Boston. I have encountered many difficult experiences with the sidewalk due to the unacceptable cross sloping of walkways. The lack of maintenance to prevent and remedy further cross sloping continues to be a problem for me because the uneven walk ways cause me to drift towards the curb and into the street. This happens frequently in all weather condition but the affects are exacerbated when it is wet, icy, or when the surface is sandy.

It is hard for me to maintain control of my chair because angle of the sidewalk causes me to slide towards the curb. The cross slop also causes my body to shift downwards with the slop decreasing my ability to steer safely as I am unable to stabilize my torso.

Please contact me for further information regarding this matter through Neighborhood Access Group.

AAB Rejects Variance, Fines City... Maybe

Posted by John B. Kelly

The Massachusetts Architectural Access Board (AAB) dealt a double blow today to the city of Boston's attempts to be relieved of its legal obligation to bring a stretch of Huntington Avenue sidewalk into compliance with state and federal access requirements. The AAB unanimously rejected the city's variance application regarding cross slope violations, and levied a fine of $500 per day since last November 30, to be reevaluated contingent upon the city's ability to bring all crossslopes under the legal maximum of 2% by July 1, 2006.

Disability advocates from Neighborhood Access Group and the Boston Center for Independent Living filled the room, and told stories of danger, fatigue, and fear due to excessive crossslopes. Wheelchair users spoke of veering towards the curb and fighting for control, and being exhausted by the additional physical demands of a tilted walkway.

In a sometimes testy session, Boston Commissioner of Disabilities Stephen Spinetto was unable to meet the burden of proof that compliance is "technologically infeasible or the cost of compliance is excessive without any substantial benefit to persons with disabilities." Neither Spinetto nor another city official (I did not get the name) contested compliance feasibility, but tried to argue excessive cost. Boardmember Martin Ebel, focusing relentlessly on the question of "substantial benefit," left Spinetto no choice but to argue that slopes between 2% and 3.1% would be "minimally" problematic . Member Myra Berloff, Commissioner of the Massachusetts Office on Disability, recounted the genesis of the 2% standard: federally sponsored studies had showed that 3% cross slopes inflict 50% more exertion upon people with disabilities.

As the complainant, I stressed the overall mission of the board to integrate people with disabilities into society by ensuring our "full and free use" of all sidewalks, and that the city's bad faith noncompliance since missing its first deadline of July 1, 2005, necessitated a large fine. I reminded the board of the city's lack of response to 4 hearing notices and its failure to appear at the original January, 2005 hearing. I ridiculed its contention at a fine hearing that March of not being "the responsible party" for the sidewalk -- an argument it also lost on appeal to Superior Court. I described the city report of July 2006, which asserted compliance even as some slopes were still over 2%, and how dubious the data seemed given that the base of the sidewalk was not altered during any work. My own measurements showed slopes of up to 3.4%, which I detailed in a letter to the board last October.

Boston then asked for an additional 60 days to respond, but was ordered to achieve compliance a second time, by November 30. On that final day, the city submitted a variance arguing that it was now too cold to fix the sidewalk! And finally, this past February, it revised its variance to ask for relief from those crossslopes between 2% and 3.1%. The board responded by scheduling today's fine hearing.

More soon...

NAG letter to Mayor Thomas M. Menino

Posted by John B. Kelly

This is the letter recently sent to Mayor Thomas Menino, urgently requesting a meeting with him so that he can hear how his sidewalk policies are affecting people with disabilities.

Dear Mayor Menino:

Please meet with us. Local residents with disabilities have been trying for three years to get city officials to take our concerns seriously -- but our neighborhood only gets more inaccessible. First, uneven and bumpy bricks were laid along Huntington Avenue for the sake of gentrification, forcing wheelchair users off the sidewalks. Last year, functional crosswalks were replaced with expensive, decorative Duratherm™, which shakes us like rumble strips under a car. And now the Transportation Department plans to install Duratherm™ crosswalks all around Symphony Hall, right next to the twin Symphony Plaza housing complexes for elderly and disabled people.

We turn to you because meetings, City Council hearings, and protests have done no good. The Department of Public Works has contemptuously disregarded our complaint before the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board (AAB) for almost 2 years now. It has ignored hearings, failed to comply with orders, and even went to court to argue that it was not responsible for the sidewalk! DPW has behaved so egregiously that the AAB is holding a "fine hearing" on May 8 to determine whether to levy a fine.

We need to tell you, personally, our nightmare stories. James McGee lives right on Huntington Avenue, but the bumpy bricks make him ride his scooter in the street. Eileen Brewster relocated to the area because of its access, now taken away by the bricks. Billie Tyler, Galeen Jones, and other women who use wheelchairs have to stay off the bricks or risk incontinence. Pam Beeler finds the Duratherm crosswalks almost as bad as the bricks. People with visual impairments or balance concerns are at greater risk for falling.

Please, listen to the petition we gave you last year requesting the installation of a smooth path of travel along Huntington. And please honor the pledge you made last August at the Symphony Streetscape Project announcement. You interrupted your speech to address disabled people: "We understand your issues about bricks and sidewalks, so we're gonna work with you. Don't worry about it." Then you wrote in your weekly column (August 15, 2005) that "Handicap accessibility is a major priority for this project."

We ask you to order the Transportation Department to respect the interests of local residents, and reject the use of Duratherm. Tell them to replace the bricks on Huntington Avenue, not just adjacent to Symphony Hall and Symphony Plaza West, but all the way to Gainsborough St. This would represent a good-faith beginning to undoing the oppressive gentrification of the last three years.

We look forward to hearing from you soon.

Sincerely,

John B. Kelly

NAG comes out of hibernation

Posted by John B. Kelly

Once again, it is springtime, which means people with disabilities are able to go out and about more, but constantly run into the usual problems with poor street-level access. NAG is getting busy fighting for better access throughout Boston, but especially in the Fenway-Symphony-Huntington Avenue neighborhoods.

The next important event is:
AAB hearing: Monday, May 8, 2:00 p.m. at One Ashburton Place, 13th floor. Massachusetts Architectural Access Board hearing to determine whether to fine the city of Boston for not following the Board's order to repair a stretch of dangerous sidewalk on Huntington Avenue. The city has failed to comply with numerous board orders to bring the sidewalk into compliance, rather choosing to ignore hearings, tie things up with court appeals, and apply for variances at the last second.

This meeting is one of those times where the presence of people who are affected by and care about access will carry weight with board members, who are deciding just how the city's negligence impacts people with disabilities.

We will be asking the board to fine the city for not bringing the cross slope of the brick sidewalk on Huntington Avenue between Massachusetts Avenue and Gainsborough St. into compliance. This is the sidewalk across from the side entrance to Symphony Hall.

Note: this web site is hopefully going to change its look soon, but until then, we will be posting about our ongoing campaigns.