PLEASE note that I'm only playing "devil's advocate" here because I'm sure we'd rather discuss this here around the proverbial cracker barrel or shop coal stove than discuss this in court in front of a jury and antagonistic lawyers:

Why is everyone boarding through the baggage car?

What happens if (coming soon: when) you get an obese passenger that can't fit through a 22" wide doorway--or, for that matter, in the seat?

What happens if you get an enthusiastic supporter who shows up in/with a wheelchair that's designed to go down the aisle of an airplane--maybe 18" wide? AND he's understanding, AND the wheelchair is only to get him to a seat, and from there he has crutches to get to the restroom if needed, but for boarding he really does need the chair?

Hell, let's rub salt in the wounds. What if the guy in the wheelchair is Doyle McCormack or Dick Yaeger or Ross Rowland? What if the person in the wheelchair is the only reason half the cars on the train exist today? What if he wants to ride in the baggage car, just to stay out of the way of the rest of the passengers?

Much as I don't like the way the woman in the video allegedly said one thing and then did another, I still don't think this was handled properly. I have seen, with my own eyes, wheelchair passengers accommodated on special one-off weekend excursions on other lines, with sometimes especially heroic and extraordinary measures taken to do so. We absolutely MUST change our mindset away from "stupid troublemakers trying to shut us down" to "Okay, who made this stupid rule, why is it in place, and what can we do to eliminate the need for this rule or placate the people that made the rule?" For all we know, a firmer argument with the insurance underwriters--underscoring the ADA issues involved--would have eliminated this.

Aging boomers - of which I am one - will provide more potential customers with disposable income ready, willing and able to purchase tickets, but fewer and fewer able to climb on board. You do yourself a disservice by not having provisions in place to serve this growing market. It can be as simple as converting a portion of a combine to include a seating area with windows, companion seating, and an accessable restroom. Hand-cranked lifts are readily available from a Canadian distributor.

I loaded one over-90-year-old into a static office car using a forklift with a painters platform once to provide us with an oral history of his travelling in the 1970's wooden office car with his father who was a superintendent on the railroad it ran on. Definitely worth it.

Whether or not to do it isn't a rational question any longer - the question is how.

dave

*bites tongue*

Clearly, an effort *should* be made by operators of historic equipment to make the excursion accessible to everyone. But once the event starts, if its not, you can't start making exceptions at the expense of safety. I sincerely hope that having had almost a year to reflect, the operator has seen fit to make safe accommodations, although I believe they were completely in the right in regards to last year's "disturbance."

The baggage car allows for quick boarding and deboarding due to the wide sliding doors and open space for people to figure out if they want to go in the cars ahead of or behind the baggage car.

ORHF's Holiday Express trains runs on the hour, in three 3-hour segments throughout the day --10, 11, 12... 2, 3, 4... 6, 7, 8. Each train can carry between 250-300 people and I would say over half of them sell out. We have 15 minutes to offload AND load each train, so that's approximately 500-600 people going through the baggage car every hour.

Those who are curious about the lay of the land, take a look at http://www.sp4449.com photo galleries of the Holiday Express. You'll see that the boarding space is narrow and on top of an historic ROW roadbed/dike. We would need to not only seek funds for modifying an historic passenger car, which includes restructuring the end collision posts, but also seek funds for rebuilding the railroad ROW area, bike path, utility poles, etc. to provide ADA-accessible ramps or lifts.

Anyone have any spare change?

Why do they need to be able to go between cars, Amtrak superliners are listed as ADA complaint but you aren't able to switch cars due to the fact that the passage to do so is on the "2nd floor". That baggage car door is certainly able to fit the largest of wheelchairs, I don't think being able to go between cars is mandatory for ADA. As for lifts these work great http://www.adaptivelifts.com/wheelchair_lift_tx.html they work anywhere and are 100% hand powered while expensive I am sure you could make the money selling a cab ride or behind the throttle time.

Amtrak Superliners were built with the primary boarding door at the center lower-level of the car, and the lower-level was constructed with handicapped seating areas with straps and brackets, and a handicapped-accessible restroom. If we had a Superliner car in our consist, then we wouldn't have this issue. Anyone have a working Superliner car they would like to donate to ORHF? ;)

Historic passenger cars have the primary boarding door at the vestibule-end of a car, but once you climb those stairs you THEN have to navigate a 22-24" zigzagging hallway in order to access the coach seats or lounge. Yes, you could roll a wheelchair onto the baggage car, but then how do you get to your seat? You can't! ADA law recognizes this and has provided an exemption.

Installing brackets on the baggage car would not meet ADA standards because the rider would still not be able to get equal experience that the rest of the passengers are getting. No windows, exposed to the elements, cold and windy while the rest of the passengers sit in warm, well lit cars with comfortable seats and booths, tables and large windows!

Additionally, ORHF only runs two weekends out of the year, whereas Mt Hood Railway or Grand Canyon Railway operate pretty much year round. Apples and oranges.

Sigh. Okay.

Someone shows up with a 19" wide wheelchair. They're willing to use it to get to a seat, sit in said seat, and let you stash the wheelchair for the trip. What do you say now?

What, you need a wheelchair lift? I found plenty of options in the area of this incident with a quick Internet search. Are you certain you can't partner with someone who already has one, like the county parks & recs department or a county/city services organization? Even a non-profit rate brokered with a commercial rental who would get PR out of it?

Steal a wheelchair clamp from the local transit agency. Remove one seat from one car, and find a way to make the clamp bolt to the seat fixture.

It seems as if at this point, we are looking for excuses to not accommodate the handicapped. There have been plenty of options that have been offered which keep getting shot down. This was not the intention of the ADA. It was not intended to prohibit the handicapped from entering areas that they were willing to enter even though those areas are not compliant because they are not required to be. They are putting forth the effort to make sure they are able to do something. They could have been using that effort to push for new laws that further force museums, companies, and other entities to make further accommodations for them. Instead, they are trying to find a way to live their life as if they weren't handicapped. What is being done here is discriminating against the handicapped, which is something that the ADA was not intended for. By discriminating against the handicapped, you get lawsuits and other negative effects, instead of working with them.

41 CFR (Title 41 of the Code of Federal Regulations) covers "Public Contracts and Property Management" and starts with Part 50. I did my searching here: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/retrieve.html I also searched prior years back to 2006. Even if a law found under a correct citation says that "carrying" is ineffective, it seems that the conclusion that it's also "unacceptable" is an opinion that the author, or whoever relies on his words, will have to defend without the benefit of law, precedent, or Federal assistance.

When it comes to providing alternate accommodations in historic equipment, you cannot let the perfect be the enemy of the good. We have seen plenty of examples where wheelchairs have been accommodated in baggage cars, combines, and open cars, including the recent story about the reality TV show that installed tie-downs at a tourist line in the midwest (Name escapes, and I am too lazy to search). This is not a perfect solution, and while it is best to provide a variety of seating options (combine with airline-style transfer wheelchair), it is better than turning the disabled away. Care must be taken to ensure disabled visitors do not feel are getting second-class service, or are being treated like baggage. Is your baggage car currently open to the public? Do people choose to ride there? I know they do elsewhere. If that is the only available accessible accommodation, that can be stated wherever passengers purchase tickets. It seems that most operations have a car or two in their consist that are not a part of their museum's historic collection. Such a car may be a candidate for modification. While I bristle that the Nevada Southern saw fit to cut a hole in the side of an SP Harriman coach for wheelchairs, there are plenty of rolling abominations and open cars that have no historic integrity left to lose through modification.

Historic equipment may be "exempt," but your operation is not. It is not a "get out of jail free card" to only operate historic equipment. As a non-profit, you are NOT providing TRANSPORTATION, you are (or had better be) providing an EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE. I know I have said this (in this very thread) before, but if you can not provide that experience to the disabled on your historic equipment, and if you are not also able to provide an accessible "equivalent" experience that reproduces the ride as much as possible, then you are violating the spirit of the ADA. An alternate experience could be accomplished with videos, docents, and/or an alternate accessible train, but it is obviously better to get them on the train with everyone else in the first place.

The point was also made by Dave that our country's population is aging. We are going to be seeing more people with mobility issues, and you only need to piss off one of them. Irrespective of our opinions of her behavior, we should all be VERY happy this woman did not sue. I seen no profit in trying to challenge her decisions at this point.

When the first batch of Superliners were built, the Americans with Disabilities Act did not exist, and these cars cannot be said to be truly ADA-compliant. The original Sightseer Lounge cars are a case in point.....no accessible restroom and the lower-level doors are located near the B end adjacent to the snack bar with no room to maneuver a wheelchair or scooter.

The Superliner II series are ADA-compliant (except dining cars) including a much larger accessible restroom in the coaches, an accessible restroom in the lounge cars, and the lower-level doors in the lounge cars now in the center of the car. The Superliner II lounge cars are supposed to carry a wheelchair ramp, so that if a disabled passenger wishes to visit the lounge car, they can be moved from their coach or sleeper.

Jim Tatum.

A quick Google search came up with this company that supplies portable ramps. http://www.discountramps.com/modular_ramps.htm

I'm sure there are lots more of them, this is simply an example. Something like this could be installed temporarily for the runs. Place it parallel to the track, and then have platform at the top where they turn and board the train. It could be used for all passengers, thus also avoiding the risk of trips and falls on the steps as well.

Yes, there will be some expense involved, there always is a in project like this, but the ramp could serve all passengers and since there are no moving parts you wouldn't be dealing with the complexities involved in a lift. As for modifying the cars, maybe they could modify the baggage car instead to provide a place where passenger could have a view. Possibly a "railfan car" style door safety railing and some heavy clear plastic to keep out the weather? I don't recall what the car looks like, so I'm not certain if that would be an option or not.

As others have mentioned, seniors are a major market, it may be smart to accomodate them.

It's not about technology. It's about attitude. Being willing to do what is "readily achievable". If you aren't willing, you are likely to choose options which put you functionally in violation of law, and get you sued.

My first reaction to this situation was not to believe the complainant; I had trouble believing that a person would call another person a "wheelchair" simply because they sat in one.

However, from what I've seen lately in this thread, my opinion of the Portland group is lowered. That policy posted above looks bad to me. Other things I've seen from them suggest a negative attitude toward wheelchairs, perhaps as Randolph says, letting the 'perfect' be the enemy of the 'good'. They can't handle wheelchairs perfectly, so THEY DON'T WANT 'EM. Note attitudes like "We only have 15 minutes to load the whole train, we don't have time for accommodating the handicapped". That is inconvenience, not impracticality, and I don't believe the law permits that.

OK, they've got a setup where they use wide steps to rapidly load through a wide baggage door, then people walk half the length of the baggage car, through vestibules, to coaches on either side. And there is a limited area where boarding is possible? OK. Let's look at that.
http://www.brian894x4.com/images/Holida ... new026.jpg

So how to get the person onboard. Let me make a sidebar.

One of the things that's often forgotten about mobility-impaired folks is they tend to be highly social people. They bring a "gang" of friends wherever they go, and they tell a lot more friends about their experiences. Partly this socialness is driven by a need for help - they can't be loners. The bottom line is the disabled tend to bring a lot of friends. And that's really good for business!

And it should be noted, that this "good for business" is a direct result of the ADA opening the possibilities for the disabled to go places and do things. In the old days, the disabled didn't go out, and they didn't drag their friends along to spend money.

Back on track. How do we get those folks onto the train? I bet you can find cars in this consist where you have steps up to a vestibule, right next to seats on the inside. It might take some rearranging of the train, but it seems possible to land a vestibule with steps somewhere inside the boarding area, such that there are seats right inside that vestibule. And reserve those seats for the disabled.

Don't worry, ADA can't possibly require your staff to be hospital orderlies and man-carry a person up steps. That's a specialist job which requires training and is not "readily achievable". But chances are, the disabled person will have brought their own muscle with them! If they and their friends can work it out for themselves, I believe ADA requires you to let them, and make that easier to the extent that it is "readily achievable".

What to do with the wheelchairs? I'd say "try harder to find a site inside the car", but the answer might simply be "leave them at the boarding area".

And I think the Oregon group erred, by trying to enforce a flat policy of "no patrons who use wheelchairs, no way, no how", and I do not believe that policy complies with ADA. IANAL.

OK, so along with all the other compromises like paint that lasts for more than 2 years with no lead in it, not paying union scale to crews, not seperating passengers according to race, we alter one combine or baggage car with the addition of windows and an accessable head. BFD. The much less consequential than rebuilding a coach cost of this and acquiring a hand crank lift will be recoveredd either very quickly by not losing a lawsuit, or less quickly but more surely by building that business along with the market as it grows.

Don't look at your operation from the operators POV - consider it from the visitors - ALL visitors - and anything that doesn't seem like it will make any of them happy riders eager to return with a busload of their friends needs to be discarded as an operating practise consistent with safety. Unless, of course, you are running trains for you rather than for them........

dave

Since you put it in quotes, I must clarify that I did not say "we don't have time for accommodating the handicapped". I did not state that anywhere and don't appreciate my words being twisted into something that wasn't said. I was simply explaining why the baggage car was used for loading and unloading passengers, which was that we have a lot of passengers!

Secondly, the photo link you provided shows a loading site that is no longer used. Major construction in the area, the realignment of Water Avenue, rebuilding of Highway 99E viaduct, elimination of parking lots that previously existed, and the 'eastside pipe' project moved the Holiday Express event to Oaks Park Station, which is right across the street from Oaks Park.

The present day loading site is as shown below:
http://www.oregonpacificrr.com/images/holidayexpress3x026.jpg

The railroad is built on an elevated dike, with the Oaks Bottom Wildlife Refuge on one side, and the Willamette River and Oaks Park on the other. A bike trail runs alongside the tracks. Even if there was a ramp or a lift mechanism set up, where will the person in the wheelchair sit for a fun Holiday Express trip? Leaving them in the dark baggage car isn't ideal and does not equal the experience others are getting in the other cars. Keep in mind that this is in December when Portland gets to be cold, windy, rainy, and even snowy/icy. Having a person in a wheelchair sit in some baggage car while his/her friends and family stand around in a hollow, windowless, cold baggage car does not make up for the inability to move throughout the train.

Don't get me wrong -- I strive to fight for equality and would love to see this situation resolved. Somehow relating to this, (begin rant) being deaf myself I can't enjoy a movie at Portland movie theaters because none of them provide subtitles. In order to enjoy a movie with subtitles, I have to travel to Washington state for one screen that plays selective movies at selective times of the day. I like some of the Portland theaters better for their seating arrangement and comfortable chairs, and the fact that the theaters are close to home... but my options to see the latest films, wholly, are limited.

Subtitling technology is available. Those making millions and millions of dollars in the film industry certainly can pitch in a few cents to provide subtitles to the deaf. Why aren't movie theaters accommodating the deaf? I mean, even they have ramps and plots for those in wheelchairs. And don't get me started on how crappy closed-captioning for TV is! (/end rant)

I assure you that ORHF board members are exploring ideas and solutions. Due to limited funds, lack of accessible passenger cars and lack of infrastructure on the railroad dike, it does not appear that this situation will be resolved by this year's event.