Salem Jail Video (replay)

This is an old video of mine, but I like to promote it every now and then.  It’s a shortened version of a 60-minute video I produced on the Salem Jail, shortly before it was sold to developers.

There are other videos from people who’ve broken into the Jail, but I feel mine is the only one with any respect for the building and what it really was.  They didn’t hang witches here.  And it wasn’t a place for “psychic experiments”, either.

I’d love to have the whole video online someday.  For now it airs on SATV occasionally.

Salem Jail Renovation Continues

The Salem Jail renovation is moving along.  The whole interior of the main building is now completely gutted, in what appears to be the busiest week for the project since it started.

More photos on my Salem Jail Renovation Flickr stream.

More Frustrations with HP Parking Enforcement

Last post I mentioned one of the hot buttons of the Salem Commission on Disabilities, sidewalk access.  Recently, Ken Bonacci, a colleague and former member of the Commission, brought up another frustrating situation for us over the years:  Handicapped parking violations at Salem Depot, and elsewhere around the city.

Ken has been very forward in dealing with the situation, more than most people would contemplate.  The MBTA police have directed him to stop:

Lenehan [Lt. Robert Lenehan, MBTA Police] said the T asked Ken Bonacci, a former Disabilities Commission officer, to stop approaching cars that are illegally parked in handicapped spaces and asking drivers to move, in part, out of concern for Bonacci's safety.

The MBTA recently received a two-page letter, apparently written by a commuter, complaining about the enforcement actions. As a result, Lenehan sent an officer to the Salem train station to speak with Bonacci.

The transit police want to make sure the well-intentioned enforcement actions of Bonacci and other volunteers working with the local commission don't result in a confrontation with an angry motorist, the T official said.

The article goes on to explain what the Commission has done:

Disability Commission members were trained several years ago by the Salem police in volunteer enforcement of handicapped parking violations, Harris said. They used to take photos of cars, write down license plate numbers and turn the information over to police, who would then issue parking tickets.

They were also given identification badges, which Bonacci said he places against the driver's window to identify himself before speaking to a motorist or asking a driver to move.

"He was doing exactly what ... the commission was trained to do," Harris said. "He just knocks on a window and politely explains that they're in a handicapped spot and they don't have a placard or plate and need to leave."

As part of the training, Salem police emphasized the need to avoid any kind of confrontations, Harris said.

The Commission has had a long history of frustration with HP parking enforcement and we have experimented with some different approaches, including the one mentioned in the article.

At one point a few years the Salem PD gave us "informational" ticket booklets which were to be forwarded to the Parking Department. Originally, the informational citations were to be a kind of green stamp; if a driver collected several, there would be points on the insurance and a real citation.

When we asked about the disposition of the tickets, we were told they would be thrown away. We gave up on that one.

The Salem PD tried volunteering us to go around with digital cameras, when the technology was newer, to monitor HP parking spaces, but there weren't enough volunteers, nor was there the money to have the PD do it.

Our latest idea, so far, isto get funds to pay a detail to monitor parking, again at key spaces like the train station and downtown. This would relieve us from the situation that Ken was in.

I would not have done what he did in that situation. I use the train station regularly; I don't drive but I can easily walk to the handicapped spaces and see who's in them. I wouldn't have confronted anyone. But Ken is a very forward person. He did this on his own initiative. That's why we respect him.

Ken was a very respected member of the Commission, and we consider him a dear friend. Ken has been my ideal as a commissioner for the 2 years I have held the position. 

With the turmoil surrounding the MBTA, we're not certain how the MBTA police will be able to enforce the spaces until the new station is built. I understand that on weekends the T police is so thinly staffed there is only one officer to serve an area from Boston to New Hampshire.

Nevertheless, we do hope to leave this to the police. We really do. But Ken did not act out of thin air, but out of the many years of frustration that drivers with disabilities have experienced.

Many of whom, by the way, will complain to us.  That’s OK, it’s our job to hear them, but as with our sidewalk issues, we are dependent on the police and the rest of the government to help us out.

No doubt, in the near future, we’ll be meeting with Chief Tucker to get some ideas on dealing with parking scofflaws without being cops ourselves.

Salem Commission on Disabilities hosts City’s five year plan public meeting

At tomorrow’s meeting of the Salem Commission on Disabilities, Jane Guy will be presenting the city’s 5 Year Consolidated Plan.

The meeting starts at 4 PM at Salem Access Television, 285 Derby St.

For anyone interested, we have a copy of the 100% design plan for the Bridge St. Reconstruction Project (from Howard St. to the Salem-Beverly Bridge) and will have it for inspection at 3 PM at the meeting.

Sidewalk Access Flares Up

For a number of years now, the Commission on Disabilities has been frustrated with the obstacles often present on downtown sidewalks. Many restaurants have established outdoor seating; Tavern in the Square is constructing its outdoor seating in the photo above.

Many other businesses have sandwich signs. Many sidewalks, particularly the Essex St. pedestrian mall between Liberty & Washington Sts., are cobblestoned.

These are frustrating obstacles for people with mobility and visual impairments. Last Thursday night at the Council chambers, our frustration finally boiled over.

Jack Harris, Charlie Reardon, Andy LaPointe and myself were there. Only Jack was quoted in the Salem News article, but he said everything that was on the back of all our minds.

As best as I can paraphrase, this is what I said:

To me, it isn't about Tavern in the Square in particular. They have the right to want and try for outdoor seating. I understand and accept the reasoning behind roping off the dining area [to fullfill state liquor laws.]

It's the fact that the SRA did not let us know this was coming down the pike. We at the Commission on Disabilities only found out about it in September, and I posted the blueprint and sidewalk closings diagram on my blog just a few weeks ago.

If only we saw this in July!

We on the Commission would have said our piece and come to an understanding before earth was ever turned on the site.

We knew the Courthouse and Salem Depot projects were coming down the pike, as were the North St. and Bridge St projects. We could engage with their project managers and at least know what was coming.

The SRA? Absolutely nothing from them before the fact.

If this meeting were only about Tavern in the Square, I think we were invited here in bad faith for a matter that we can't advise on until after the fact.

Why did they start building now? Why didn't they line up the permitting over the fall and winter? They could have done that, started construction after the spring thaw and have been done very quickly without any animosity.

By itself, Tavern in the Square’s outdoor seating doesn’t bother me, but when you have it and the multitudes of other restaurants and shopowners that put out chairs and tables and sandwich signs all around Washington, Front and Essex Sts, the totality of this is that even able bodied people won't be able to move around on a moderately busy Saturday, never mind October.

[End of remarks to the Council.]

The News article got a good number of comments; I’m going to address “youasked”. He or she was somewhat critical:

DMoisan....Are you kidding? Picking on one of TWO sidewalks being blocked in one small sectin of Salem when there are entire areas without sidewalks or usable access at all? You of all people should know better.
Just want to get your Commissions mission statement out there? Great, more power to you.
But come on, be a little more proactive instead of reactive grand standing.

How about a sidewalk along Loring Ave around dead mans curve? South campus area, make the state pay for it.

Route 107 Highland Ave....
15-20 years ago when Washington Street Rotary was there it was SO safe and accessible...
Do I need to go on?

The sad part of this is that all of those items he or she listed have been on our agenda recently. I was hoping for some new items in that post that we could work on. We do have to work with other city departments and elected officials (in the case of Loring Ave. where’s Joe O’Keefe again?!) not to mention the state.

And I am all too aware of the problems on Bridge and Washington and have been for fifteen years. At least we have one small victory: the pedestrian signals at WalMart were done over last month, in case that’s what the commenter was referring to.

It’s like saying if we can’t fix all the sidewalks around town, we can’t fix any of them!

And what is this business of being “proactive”? If we don’t find out about things like Tavern in the Square until after everything else is permitted, then we are reactive and what’s the point? We get complaints from constituents about access problems and we are expected to help get these to the right people to be resolved. So we’re reactive. What was the point again?

Unless and until the Planning Department and the SRA gives the Commission, and the public, access (via the city’s web site) to the same exhibits they use to make decisions on outdoor seating or anything else, we’re just going to do this over and over again.

And we’ll be “reactive”. Sorry.

Day in the life of the T

Good video on many of the modes of the T. I've taken them all except for the Mattapan trolley and the commuter boat, though I have taken the Salem Ferry a few times.

Comments on the Salem Depot Project

These are comments I’ve sent to Thomas Rovero of the MBTA, and the mayor’s office on the proposed Salem Depot garage. There will be another public meeting sometime in December.

From: David Moisan, Salem Commission on Disabilities

To Thomas Rovero, MBTA, Mayor Kim Driscoll, chief-of-staff Jason Silva:

Dear Mr. Rovero, Mrs. Driscoll, Mr. Silva:

I’ve attended the public design meeting on the new Salem Depot garage and have read the report posted on the MBTA web site. I believe it is a good starting point and a very welcome development.

There are, though, some concerns I have with the design. The word that comes most to mind is isolation. There are elements of the design that serve to cut off train and bus riders from downtown.

First, I’ll grant that a good part of the isolation comes from the original design of the traffic rotary on Bridge St., and the original use of the Salem Depot area as a maintenance area, interlocking tower and track junction by the old Boston and Maine railroad. It had been occupied for this purpose by the B&M for many, many years.

At one point in the past, the pedestrian passage to Salem Depot (when it moved to Bridge St.) was fenced off from traffic. But it was still a very dangerous place to walk, and very unfriendly in any event. Not what we want to represent Salem to train travelers.

Any design would have to work hard to overcome these problems.

But some things that were proposed at the meeting just accentuate this isolation.

The existing train platform, and the proposed half-full height platform is one example. Wheelchair or cane users, and on the weekends, all users, must go to the very end of the platform.

From the end of that platform looking north, you can see the Carlton School on Bridge St., a full mile away.

It actually seems closer to the platform than downtown!

I remember when the depot moved to Bridge St., trains stopped much closer to the tunnel portal. A few years later due to ADA requirements, the mini-high was built and trains moved further up north.

I support the ADA. The ADA is not the problem. But I didn’t like and still don’t like going what seems like miles from the Bridge St. entrance to get a train.

I’ve read the report on the train platform. I understand the great difficulties involved in making a high-level curved platform accessible. But I must agree with my chairman on the Commission on Disabilities, Jack Harris, and push as hard as I can for a full height platform that can be reached a short distance from the garage.

My second point is the bus berths. I ride buses from Salem Depot frequently. For I and many other people downtown, Salem Depot is the closest place to get a departing bus, since most of the bus routes skirt downtown when they leave the station and there are no closer stops.

The preferred design alternative has the bus berths on the north side of the station, with the garage between the buses and the Bridge St. entrance.

As with the train platforms, this is almost as far as Carlton School! Perhaps when I need to take the 456 I should just walk up Bridge St. to the school.

I much prefer having the bus berths along one side of the garage, or even two, as it is in one alternative presented in the report.

And they must be sheltered or at least have canopies like the current bus shelters. Some bus routes run at 80 minute or even 90 minute headways so riders will want to use the train’s waiting room; in dead of winter with kids in tow they’ll need to.

On the waiting area, I want to see it on the platform side of the station, in sight of both the train tracks and the bus berths. People will have an eye out for their train or their bus.

There must be digital signage, and automated announcements. I’m aware the T is phasing in a new generation system; Salem must have it. We must be able to sit in the waiting area and hear , and see “The next train to…Newburyport…is now approaching”, similar to rapid transit announcements. Within the lifespan of the garage, there’ll be a similar technology for bus passengers so they’ll know how long until the next 455 comes. The design of the station must allow for these improvements.

My last comment is for the City of Salem.

As all of us know, the Courthouse project, and many other projects, are changing downtown.

The city is starting at a disadvantage; as noted in my opening paragraphs, the area of Bridge and Washington Sts. has never been made for pedestrians. Visitors, jurors and court personnel alike will use that intersection constantly.

The City must do what MassHighway has done for the recent Highland Ave. crossing reconstruction and put modern audible talking pedestrian signals at Bridge and Washington.

There’ll probably never be a footbridge or a tunnel in that area in my lifetime; neither are practical.

The city, and the MBTA will have to work very hard in the coming months to make this version of Salem Depot welcoming to commuters and visitors. They need to make Salem Depot part of Salem’s downtown once again, as it hasn’t been for over 50 years.

The design is a very good start. I’m looking forward to future meetings to make this the best it can be. I’ll probably be one of the first to go down the ramp into the new station when it opens.

Make me proud of it, and proud of my city.