bloke wrote:and yeah, you're right, Rick. I meant to say "millions" on the curb tear-outs. I figure each corner (because they are government-contracted) cost at least $1000 (if not $2000). I've seen hundreds-and-hundreds-and-hundreds of them in Memphis - in more-and-more-and-more obscure locations. I know I've personally driven past a thousand of them...which (surely) cost more than a million dollars just to do the ones that I've personally seen. (Would it have made more sense to rent billboards encouraging wheelchair-bound citizens to request them where they will actually be used?) As Greyhound is having to - rather than continuing to refurbish virtually "last forever" buses - buy all new buses (buses which happen to offer lower luggage clearance than the old buses) to comply with the wheelchair lift thing, I guess what you're telling me is that - in effect - the bus wheelchair lifts actually cost roughly a half million dollars per bus. [/size]
Wrong on the second part. Greyhound's buses are no more "last-forever" vehicles than are freight trucks, which last two or three million miles before being replaced. Greyhound buses may get 500 miles/day operation (though I bet it's higher), and run probably 345 days a year, so they should last about 15-20 years at the most. But usually they get overhauled before then, inside and out, because the interiors become unusable. Buses have been designed to accommodate wheelchair accessibility for at least that long, which is why it was not required for the whole fleet for large fixed-route carriers to have made the conversion until last October. No bus that could not be converted should have lasted long enough to not need to be retired anyway.
And they had another reason to replace them all since 1991: At that time, the maximum legal width of vehicles changed from 96 inches to 102 inches, and Greyhound (as well as all other bus companies) prefer the wider coach to provide more comfortable seating. The old MCI MC-12 Americruisers, which were the last of the 96-inch coaches, were discontinued right about that time. All of the 102-inch coaches were designed to accommodate wheelchair accessibility, though it was an option for a long time.
Small companies were not required to convert their fleet, but they were required to provide the service if requested, as you describe.
But the law says what the law says. It's not up to government agencies (operating below the political level) to set aside what's in the law just because they want to. If the law is unreasonable, the blame should go to those who wrote it and voted for it, and to those who were the cheerleaders at the time.
Most wheelchair ramp replacement programs at intersections are coupled to other improvements and routine replacement of the infrastructure at intersections. We build huge amounts of infrastructure in the 50's through the 70's, and now we have to maintain it, which means replacing it when it no longer meets standards or is falling apart. Such maintenance is at crisis levels in the U.S. right now. That's a matter of determining what is important, and when it comes to setting priorities, maintenance is just not very appealing to the political classes. When you figure out what to do about that, let me know. (I know what
I'm doing about that, but maintenance is largely a local issue, so the priorities need to be set locally.) Yes, there are some silly aspects to ADA compliance. That is not the silliest of laws by any means, but some of its outcomes really are disproportionate, to be sure. But it's not the reason your box wouldn't fit on newer Greyhound coaches.
Rick "as to your first thesis, you know that I drove my tubas 1100 miles each way when it came time for a visit to the Bloke Compound, and you know why I did so" Denney
