Jump to content

Which stations do you think should have ADA?


j express

Recommended Posts

All stations should eventually be made ADA compliant.

That said, the order in which I would do it would have to do with three factors:

1. Stations near places with high numbers of elderly/disabled.

2. Stations with high ridership.

3. Stations easy to convert.

 

I would also add a 4th factor: Stations near places of high interest, such as hospitals or shopping districts, as well as transfers from buses that serve high points of interest, such as airports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


No, it's nice to have an aesthetically pleasing subway station. Who says you can't have both a clean and running subway and mosaics?

 

I agree, it is nice, but would you rather have mosaics and a filthy station in need of repair or a clean station with perhaps less art or art work given for free?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would also add a 4th factor: Stations near places of high interest, such as hospitals or shopping districts, as well as transfers from buses that serve high points of interest, such as airports.

In that case:

Steinway St (M)(R)

121 St (J)

Lefferts Blvd (A)

Far Rockaway (A)

125 St (2)(3)

116 St (1)

242 St (1)

Pelham Pkwy/Gun Hill Rd (5)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, it is nice, but would you rather have mosaics and a filthy station in need of repair or a clean station with perhaps less art or art work given for free?

 

I'd like a station with a clean & usable bathroom !

 

everytime my (:( pulls into church, I have to deal with smelling (and feeling) not a whiff... but a WHOOOF of a urine reeked stench.... and I'm sure that's not just church on the brighton either....

 

may the gods have mercy on your nasal passages if you're that poor bastard waiting a few feet from where the train enters the station....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(note - stations on more than one line are mentioned on the first line that stops there)

 

* - maybe.

 

 

(1): 242 St - Van Cortlandt Park, 225 St-Marble Hill (for connection to MNRR),

(2): 241 St - Wakefield, 149 St - Grand Concourse, E 180 St, Fulton St (should be when Transit Center is built), Franklin Av

(3): 148 St - Harlem

(4): Woodlawn, *Bedford Park Blvd, *Burnside Av

(5): Eastchester - Dyre Av, *Pelham Pkwy

(6): Parkchester, Hunts Point Av, *3 Av - 138 St,

(7): Queensboro Plaza, *42 St - Bryant Park

42 St (S): Times Sq

(A)(H): 145 St, 42 St - PABT, Hoyt-Schermerhorn Sts, Broadway Jct, Lefferts Blvd

(C): 81 St - Natural History

(D): *205 St - Norwood

(E): *Forest Hills - 71 Av

(F): W 8 St - NY Aquarium

(M): Woodhaven Blvd (Queens Mall)

(J)(Z): *Chambers St (do I hear a full rehab?)

(N): Astoria - Ditmars Blvd, *49 St (southbound plat)

(R): Whitehall St - South Ferry, Bay Ridge - 95 St

Franklin Av (S): *Botanic Garden

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would also add a 4th factor: Stations near places of high interest, such as hospitals or shopping districts, as well as transfers from buses that serve high points of interest, such as airports.

 

Both and Art are right. It's a joke that in 2011 not even at least half or 50% of NYC subway stations are not ADA accessible. I think they got a waiver from the federal goverment to avoid fines in the hundreds of millions of dollars since almost all of the stations was bulit well before this law passed in 1990.

 

It's also a joke that quiet a few stations that been rebulit (unless it was not possible)without installing ADA acess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like a station with a clean & usable bathroom !

 

everytime my (B) pulls into church, I have to deal with smelling (and feeling) not a whiff... but a WHOOOF of a urine reeked stench.... and I'm sure that's not just church on the brighton either....

 

may the gods have mercy on your nasal passages if you're that poor bastard waiting a few feet from where the train enters the station....

 

lol... Amen to that! If that station gives you a run for your money, you should try the one at Parkside Avenue. I haven't taken the (Q) train in some time since I've been using the express bus for almost 6 years now, but whenever I would be coming from either Sheepshead Bay or Midwood, that station reeked of piss, especially towards the first few cars.

 

Maybe what they should do is make bathrooms where you pay to use them. In Italy we have that in the train stations and you have to pay something like 50 cents to use it. The person you pay is the one who cleans the bathroom, so of course one sometimes tips that person as well, since they're keeping the bathroom clean for your use. :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both and Art are right. It's a joke that in 2011 not even at least half or 50% of NYC subway stations are not ADA accessible. I think they got a waiver from the federal goverment to avoid fines in the hundreds of millions of dollars since almost all of the stations was bulit well before this law passed in 1990.

 

It's also a joke that quiet a few stations that been rebulit (unless it was not possible)without installing ADA acess.

 

As I said, the system is old and broke. I still feel fixing up the stations that the 90-95% of us that can walk down/up to is more inportant. Then when all stations are up to 'decent conditions' should they add elevators to secondary/tertiary stations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of these fix ups are completely cosmetic outside of the ADA modifications. While some things certainly are more important than ADA, and while ADA is far from perfect, outside of the few rebuilds that provide new transfers, or stabilize dangerously deteriorated stations, I don't see how any of what is done is more important than providing accessibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said, the system is old and broke. I still feel fixing up the stations that the 90-95% of us that can walk down/up to is more inportant. Then when all stations are up to 'decent conditions' should they add elevators to secondary/tertiary stations.

 

And how long would that be? Another 20-30 years or more? I don't know the exact numbers on how long it takes the (MTA) to re-do stations, but they are pretty slow in general just from my personal observations. 59th street took quite a few years to re-do and I'm not even sure if that it completely finished yet. As I said before just because someone is disabled doesn't make them any less needier for transportation than someone who can walk. Disabled people have jobs, go to college and so forth just like those of "us" who can walk up and down. I'm also curious as to how you came to the conclusion that there are so few disabled people seeing that you say that 90-95% of us are abled people?

 

Not having ADA stations is certainly a form of discrimination because the system is supposed to be for the public's use, which would mean everyone, not just abled people. Those disabled people pay taxes just like we do and their funds are also being used to build new stations, so for them to pay taxes and not have accessibility to many of the subway stations reaches the highest level of absurdity possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree Fresh Pond, every station in the system. People with ADA should have access to every station in the system, just like us regulars does.

 

However, I think the reason why the (MTA) isn't making the system 100% ADA is because a lot of wheelchaired people don't ride the subway compared to the bus.. (MTA) only places elevators or ramps and major station and allow people to connect with the bus to get from point A to B. The people who really use ramps or elevators are the the regular people, strollers and those with big heavy items, such as a luggage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And how long would that be? Another 20-30 years or more? I don't know the exact numbers on how long it takes the (MTA) to re-do stations, but they are pretty slow in general just from my personal observations. 59th street took quite a few years to re-do and I'm not even sure if that it completely finished yet. As I said before just because someone is disabled doesn't make them any less needier for transportation than someone who can walk. Disabled people have jobs, go to college and so forth just like those of "us" who can walk up and down. I'm also curious as to how you came to the conclusion that there are so few disabled people seeing that you say that 90-95% of us are abled people?

 

Not having ADA stations is certainly a form of discrimination because the system is supposed to be for the public's use, which would mean everyone, not just abled people. Those disabled people pay taxes just like we do and their funds are also being used to build new stations, so for them to pay taxes and not have accessibility to many of the subway stations reaches the highest level of absurdity possible.

 

As I have said before, if there are buses that mirrors a line [especially in Manhattan], then only the most important [heavily used, transfer points, etc] should have them. Buses can take people to the next station that has an elevator. The % was my perception. It could be much more like maybe 15-20% handicaped [i dunno, it's not like there's a data that tallies wc riders].

 

As for station rehab being cosmetic, sure, but it all comes down to $$$. As I said, if every station is fixed up, then I would be for elevators at every station [that warrants one, even if it doesn't have that many riders].

 

But unfortunately the MTA is broke and there are still stations that could be fixed up for the few funds the MTA has left allocated for station rehabs. That's why as insensitive as it sounds, I'd rather have more stations be fixed up and then the next priority being installing elevators for secondary/tertiary stations. It's all about priority given the lack of funds.

 

Also elevators breaks down. Worst case scenario: What if you have a whole series of elevators in a row that breaks down? What then? You'd be back to square 1. Elevators needs constant maintenance and with the MTA laying off workers in the train yards, are we willing to lose more just to have more elevator workers around? The elevators/escelators we have now are suspect on if they work part of the time. So the more elevators you have, the more likely you'll have more breakdowns taking away workers from the more important stations.

 

So it's not about the quantity, but about quality. Would you rather have every station have an elevator [higher the chances of likely the lesser used station be neglected], or would it be best for the major stations to have them [where they will get most of the attention and repairs]?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I have said before, if there are buses that mirrors a line [especially in Manhattan], then only the most important [heavily used, transfer points, etc] should have them. Buses can take people to the next station that has an elevator. The % was my perception. It could be much more like maybe 15-20% handicaped [i dunno, it's not like there's a data that tallies wc riders].

 

As for station rehab being cosmetic, sure, but it all comes down to $$$. As I said, if every station is fixed up, then I would be for elevators at every station [that warrants one, even if it doesn't have that many riders].

 

But unfortunately the MTA is broke and there are still stations that could be fixed up for the few funds the MTA has left allocated for station rehabs. That's why as insensitive as it sounds, I'd rather have more stations be fixed up and then the next priority being installing elevators for secondary/tertiary stations. It's all about priority given the lack of funds.

 

Also elevators breaks down. Worst case scenario: What if you have a whole series of elevators in a row that breaks down? What then? You'd be back to square 1. Elevators needs constant maintenance and with the MTA laying off workers in the train yards, are we willing to lose more just to have more elevator workers around? The elevators/escelators we have now are suspect on if they work part of the time. So the more elevators you have, the more likely you'll have more breakdowns taking away workers from the more important stations.

 

So it's not about the quantity, but about quality. Would you rather have every station have an elevator [higher the chances of likely the lesser used station be neglected], or would it be best for the major stations to have them [where they will get most of the attention and repairs]?

 

 

I think the lack of funds thing is a poor excuse. You can make cuts to other non-essential things like art work and have a less fancier station that is new, clean and also offers accessibility to everyone. I see no point in redoing entire stations and they still aren't ADA accessible, creating stations that look like $hit just a few years after they're open like the South Ferry station. You're right it comes down to priorities and those disabled people have every right to a quick commute just like you and I do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh of course, I'm not in favor of those 'art projects' and I also feel 'simple is better'. But I would like even the worst station [Chambers (J)] to be brought up to a tolerable standard instead of the cesspool that it currently is. If 'art works' can be cut, then I'd be in favor of that. My former home station 86th-Lex wasn't that bad, but now it just looks terrible with that so-called art work they have there. 'The way it was' was better.

 

However, I stand by my point that aside from almost all the major stations you can think of [transfer/express/heavily used etc], is it wise to have elevators everywhere else just because there is a moral obligation to serve everyone? This is the same MTA with a piss poor track record on fixing up elevators/escelators. That's why I hesitate on the idea of having elevators 'everywhere'. I feel it's 'good enough' at the primary stations and buses serving as 'backups'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh of course, I'm not in favor of those 'art projects' and I also feel 'simple is better'. But I would like even the worst station [Chambers (J)] to be brought up to a tolerable standard instead of the cesspool that it currently is. If 'art works' can be cut, then I'd be in favor of that. My former home station 86th-Lex wasn't that bad, but now it just looks terrible with that so-called art work they have there. 'The way it was' was better.

 

However, I stand by my point that aside from almost all the major stations you can think of [transfer/express/heavily used etc], is it wise to have elevators everywhere else just because there is a moral obligation to serve everyone? This is the same MTA with a piss poor track record on fixing up elevators/escelators. That's why I hesitate on the idea of having elevators 'everywhere'. I feel it's 'good enough' at the primary stations and buses serving as 'backups'.

 

I don't know if elevators necessarily need to be everywhere either. Some stations could be configured to perhaps have ramps or something of the sort instead of the gazillion steps everywhere. I certainly agree with you on that. The (MTA) isn't the greatest at fixing elevators or escalators. In fact I think in all of my life I've used an elevator maybe once only because I was with my mother. I think it is wise to just take the stairs wherever possible. I remember once having taken the train up to Grand Central and then walking up the stairs and getting on to the escalator and people were walking up the escalator when it literally just stopped dead in its tracks. A little rattling to say the least. Luckily no one was hurt and we all just walking up the remaining steps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.