- Apr 28, 2020
- Reaction score
My understanding, and I'm mostly paraphrasing F-Line from about a half-dozen different posts on the subject over time, is that mini-high level platforms are all that is needed to meet ADA requirements, and that it's a Massachusetts state rule that requires new and substantially modified stations to have full-high platforms constructed.NHDOT posted the Public meeting slides here. What struck me about all of their station designs (attached here), is that both Nashua and Manchester require track level crossings to access their island platforms, and Bedford requires it for it's very small outbound side platform. It must be ADA compliant otherwise they wouldn't be proposing it, but it's something that would seemingly only work with low level platforms, which would be a shame for new builds.
View attachment 19042
It's regrettable from and operational/efficiency standpoint that they're not going with full high-level platforms, though hopefully it won't have a significant operational impact (we're not talking the kind of frequencies the inner Lowell would get in a Regional Rail world, so it's less likely to be a deal-breaker). The cynic in me wonders if full-highs would have been a bridge too far for "Live Free or Cheap" New Hampshire, and if so at least their absence would mean one fewer reason for their unreliable legislature to try and kill the effort.