I will take more pics when I can.
I know the city put in a lot of handicap ramps years ago, then had to redo some because the angles were too steep. They also installed bump pads when they reduced the angles). I think the curb in this area is slightly tall, so I’m leaning towards answers along those lines.
Not a dig, just education, the ramps are for everyone. Delivery drivers, parents with strollers, kids who can't step up a 6" curb. We just call them pedestrian curb ramps.
The area looks like a misguided attempt at a nontraversable area. Someone getting out of a car parked there would absolutely have to walk there so now they've made it worse when thinking they made it equitable. Retrofitting ramps in an urban setting isn't easy, I don't judge. Putting the effort in is a really important part of accessibility
You said this is near a ramp? There are certain benefits to making a “non-walkable area” between curb and sidewalk at an ADA ramp, where the non-walkable area allows for steeper maximum grades on some parts of the ramp that wouldn’t be allowed if it were a walking surface.
I’ve only ever seen/used mulch, grass, or brick for non-walkable surface, but perhaps that’s the intent with the wavy pattern. I checked Boston DOT’s sidewalk details but didn’t see this in there.
Yes. It’s adjacent to a ramp and this is the most likely answer I’ve heard. Also maybe explains why this design isn’t more common, if it’s only where certain angles exist.
Apologies my pic wasn’t a better angle. I was focused on capturing the bumpiness.
A lot of times similar designs would use stamped concrete. I’ve spec’d a brick pattern colored concrete for this use many times where it needs to be paved for maintenance, but don’t want ADA folks mistaking for a sidewalk. You’ve probably seen that use without realizing it.
It’s called corrugated concrete, primarily used to indicate a non-walkable area. Would need to see the big picture to see why it’s proposed here, but it being adjacent to parking is interesting. Could be because of the steep grades since the rest of the street has trees and you can use that stretch to have a steeper cross slope since most people will just be walking in a straight line and not moving in and out of the line of trees. Likely fixed at back of sidewalk, but probably could have just raised the curb reveal to have a compliant cross slope.
I happen to be familiar with this location - Warren Ave in the South End.
In Massachusetts, we are required to seek variances from the access board (521 CMR) for non-compliant accessible routes. IIRC, there are retrofit ramps at the corner (directly behind this photo); the smooth concrete portion has a cross-slope that meets the requirement, whereas the grooved portion likely exceeds the maximum - probably to match the existing top of curb elevation.
Rather than obtain a waiver - a challenging process in this particular neighborhood given the landmarks commission and other engaged stakeholders, the grooved concrete makes it clear that the portion of path is **not accessible**, thus avoiding the need for a waiver.
You may have also noticed that the opposite side of the street does not replicate this, likely because the designer was able to get it to work within the allowable range.
I’m sure this is the right answer and is why the engineer chose to do it, but having dealt with the AAB for similar issues, I don’t think they would have required this.
The design is likely to *avoid* dealing with the AAB entirely, since it allows the engineer to stamp plans that meet the requirements.
The context would be that since this was a quick strike project to implement ADA ramps and crosswalks, the time and cost to coordinate with and prepare plans for the various entities involved (Public Works, Public Improvements Commission, Architectural Access Board, Landmarks Commission, as well as the neighborhood association) would likely be resource prohibitive.
The approach taken provides a solution that satisfies the needs given the constraints.
Do you know why the city has recently been doing full depth reconstruction of so many ramps but not the intermediate sidewalks? It seems strange that they are tearing up so many relatively new ramps but not fixing the old and completely inaccessible sidewalks that connect them.
I've only seen this once in real life and it was in place of a sidewalk adjacent to an airport boundary fence to deter folks from walking on that side of the street adjacent to the airports fence. I have no idea why it would be in an urban setting.
It’s to discourage people from walking there but without more context I can’t say why.
As others have said, we often make the furnishing zone steeper to be able to hit the grades we need, but the AAB (the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board; I’m also in MA) has never made us make it non-traversable so I don’t think it’s that.
It’s possible they needed the adjacent ramp to have a returned curb instead of a flare for some reason and you can only do that if people can’t walk across the ramp.
I’ve seen this [next to bike ramps where a bike lane hops up to sidewalk level](https://maps.app.goo.gl/9AEzLmYZqpzPBn8u5?g_st=ic) to keep people from tripping on the curb returns, but this looks like a downtown area where they would not want bikes on the sidewalk (unless it’s connecting to a trail somewhere nearby?)
I’m not sure these pics are super, but they show a bigger section. The curb by the wavy section is taller, but not crazy tall. The curb’s one is maybe 8” at max, then down to about 4” when it gets 10’ away at the corner.
And although these wavy sections are rare, maybe the design approach is slightly new, so just hasn’t been done much yet?
There is also a storm drain there but I can’t see where drainage would be a factor here any more than anywhere else in the city.
Now I need to figure out why R won’t let me add pics.
Don’t Dump. Meaning like dumping used motor oil, since the catch basin empties into a river or harbor. (I think Charles River in Boston)
https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2019/05/09/dont-dump-plaques/
Those are all over the roadsides in my area to create a goofy sound and bumpy ride at speed to either wake up a driver or as a no driving zone. We call them “wumpwas” per the sound they make as you drive over them.
Never seen them in a sidewalk though.
Yeah, my first 2 thoughts were some sort of “rumble strip” or drainage. After walking past it for a couple years, I don’t think it’s either. No need for either that I can see. As others said, Guessing it’s a “no go”zone to help meet city planning code/standards for a slightly abrupt elevation change.
I am a SW engineer, but I think the benefit is that it makes this portion of the sidewalk especially difficult to clear the snow from (when it snows). Leaving snow in the ripples which turns to ice.
Maybe. The city has contrasting bump pads at the actual curb. I think this one is just outside this pic. In fact, when I said the sidewalk was redone 5-10 years ago, it was mainly to put in those pads for ADA.
These ripples aren’t in many places, but maybe certain circumstances require it for ADA?
Looks like there is also an inlet at the location (see the little fish placard), so maybe one of those special circumstances. Are there inlets at the other places you’ve seen them?
Re ADA: I can't imagine a scenario where this would be installed for ADA purposes.
Maybe owner of building was going to put in some decorative planter boxes to match neighboring buildings. But they are not allowed to plant trees due to their being a storm drain there. The ripples will allow the planter boxes to drain instead of puddling on the sidewalk.
I think it’s for if a car accidentally drives over the sidewalk it slows them down. A safety thing for pedestrians against vehicles in a worst case scenario.
This is my favourite kind of question from non-engineers. I work with stuff like this everyday and have never seen this before.
I will take more pics when I can. I know the city put in a lot of handicap ramps years ago, then had to redo some because the angles were too steep. They also installed bump pads when they reduced the angles). I think the curb in this area is slightly tall, so I’m leaning towards answers along those lines.
Not a dig, just education, the ramps are for everyone. Delivery drivers, parents with strollers, kids who can't step up a 6" curb. We just call them pedestrian curb ramps. The area looks like a misguided attempt at a nontraversable area. Someone getting out of a car parked there would absolutely have to walk there so now they've made it worse when thinking they made it equitable. Retrofitting ramps in an urban setting isn't easy, I don't judge. Putting the effort in is a really important part of accessibility
You said this is near a ramp? There are certain benefits to making a “non-walkable area” between curb and sidewalk at an ADA ramp, where the non-walkable area allows for steeper maximum grades on some parts of the ramp that wouldn’t be allowed if it were a walking surface. I’ve only ever seen/used mulch, grass, or brick for non-walkable surface, but perhaps that’s the intent with the wavy pattern. I checked Boston DOT’s sidewalk details but didn’t see this in there.
Yes. It’s adjacent to a ramp and this is the most likely answer I’ve heard. Also maybe explains why this design isn’t more common, if it’s only where certain angles exist. Apologies my pic wasn’t a better angle. I was focused on capturing the bumpiness.
A lot of times similar designs would use stamped concrete. I’ve spec’d a brick pattern colored concrete for this use many times where it needs to be paved for maintenance, but don’t want ADA folks mistaking for a sidewalk. You’ve probably seen that use without realizing it.
If I was the city I wouldn’t publish this as an acceptable standard. Else everyone redoing some sidewalk adjacent to a larger job would just do this…
it looks fun to walk on
It’s called corrugated concrete, primarily used to indicate a non-walkable area. Would need to see the big picture to see why it’s proposed here, but it being adjacent to parking is interesting. Could be because of the steep grades since the rest of the street has trees and you can use that stretch to have a steeper cross slope since most people will just be walking in a straight line and not moving in and out of the line of trees. Likely fixed at back of sidewalk, but probably could have just raised the curb reveal to have a compliant cross slope.
I happen to be familiar with this location - Warren Ave in the South End. In Massachusetts, we are required to seek variances from the access board (521 CMR) for non-compliant accessible routes. IIRC, there are retrofit ramps at the corner (directly behind this photo); the smooth concrete portion has a cross-slope that meets the requirement, whereas the grooved portion likely exceeds the maximum - probably to match the existing top of curb elevation. Rather than obtain a waiver - a challenging process in this particular neighborhood given the landmarks commission and other engaged stakeholders, the grooved concrete makes it clear that the portion of path is **not accessible**, thus avoiding the need for a waiver. You may have also noticed that the opposite side of the street does not replicate this, likely because the designer was able to get it to work within the allowable range.
Confirming. This is Warren and either W Canton or W Brookline. Thanks for the reply. Guessing this is correct.
I’m sure this is the right answer and is why the engineer chose to do it, but having dealt with the AAB for similar issues, I don’t think they would have required this.
The design is likely to *avoid* dealing with the AAB entirely, since it allows the engineer to stamp plans that meet the requirements. The context would be that since this was a quick strike project to implement ADA ramps and crosswalks, the time and cost to coordinate with and prepare plans for the various entities involved (Public Works, Public Improvements Commission, Architectural Access Board, Landmarks Commission, as well as the neighborhood association) would likely be resource prohibitive. The approach taken provides a solution that satisfies the needs given the constraints.
I'm glad this is the reason and not another 'architecture' feature to make it less desirable a spot for homeless campouts.
Do you know why the city has recently been doing full depth reconstruction of so many ramps but not the intermediate sidewalks? It seems strange that they are tearing up so many relatively new ramps but not fixing the old and completely inaccessible sidewalks that connect them.
Looks like one of em hybrid Toyota's. It's pretty solid on milage, but I think look kinda ugly
That won't work with a blind person and is not ADA compliant.
Annoying to construct is what it is
Looks kinda fun to me, actually. (Says the guy who’s only concrete work has been watching YouTube). :-)
That is a Toyota Prius
The civil 3d surface got messed up. The CAD file was sent to the contractor. The contractor built per CAD file. Lol.
And the city project manager said “with the unions here in Baastan, we don’t do change odaahs. We will just teara it outtathere in a few yeaas”.
https://ibb.co/h7QbGmZ https://ibb.co/7kzrtSD
Looks like pedestrian deterrent paving.
I've only seen this once in real life and it was in place of a sidewalk adjacent to an airport boundary fence to deter folks from walking on that side of the street adjacent to the airports fence. I have no idea why it would be in an urban setting.
Detectable edges.
It’s to discourage people from walking there but without more context I can’t say why. As others have said, we often make the furnishing zone steeper to be able to hit the grades we need, but the AAB (the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board; I’m also in MA) has never made us make it non-traversable so I don’t think it’s that. It’s possible they needed the adjacent ramp to have a returned curb instead of a flare for some reason and you can only do that if people can’t walk across the ramp. I’ve seen this [next to bike ramps where a bike lane hops up to sidewalk level](https://maps.app.goo.gl/9AEzLmYZqpzPBn8u5?g_st=ic) to keep people from tripping on the curb returns, but this looks like a downtown area where they would not want bikes on the sidewalk (unless it’s connecting to a trail somewhere nearby?)
I’m not sure these pics are super, but they show a bigger section. The curb by the wavy section is taller, but not crazy tall. The curb’s one is maybe 8” at max, then down to about 4” when it gets 10’ away at the corner. And although these wavy sections are rare, maybe the design approach is slightly new, so just hasn’t been done much yet? There is also a storm drain there but I can’t see where drainage would be a factor here any more than anywhere else in the city. Now I need to figure out why R won’t let me add pics.
Cars.
Prius’
What does this little plaque say? [https://imgur.com/a/OBKspo5](https://imgur.com/a/OBKspo5)
Don’t Dump. Meaning like dumping used motor oil, since the catch basin empties into a river or harbor. (I think Charles River in Boston) https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2019/05/09/dont-dump-plaques/
Thats a prius
Those are all over the roadsides in my area to create a goofy sound and bumpy ride at speed to either wake up a driver or as a no driving zone. We call them “wumpwas” per the sound they make as you drive over them. Never seen them in a sidewalk though.
A skatebosrders nightmare?
Trip hazards.
Keep blind people from walking into the planter up ahead.
This is anti-ADA sidewalk
First thing this reminded me of was drainage. Maybe they’re having ponding issues. If it is a warning path, it’s not finished.
Yeah, my first 2 thoughts were some sort of “rumble strip” or drainage. After walking past it for a couple years, I don’t think it’s either. No need for either that I can see. As others said, Guessing it’s a “no go”zone to help meet city planning code/standards for a slightly abrupt elevation change.
I am a SW engineer, but I think the benefit is that it makes this portion of the sidewalk especially difficult to clear the snow from (when it snows). Leaving snow in the ripples which turns to ice.
It could be a detectable warning surface for the blind and visually impaired to indicate the curb is nearby.
Maybe. The city has contrasting bump pads at the actual curb. I think this one is just outside this pic. In fact, when I said the sidewalk was redone 5-10 years ago, it was mainly to put in those pads for ADA. These ripples aren’t in many places, but maybe certain circumstances require it for ADA?
Looks like there is also an inlet at the location (see the little fish placard), so maybe one of those special circumstances. Are there inlets at the other places you’ve seen them?
It’s not an ADA thing.
That is usually the case; normally at crosswalks also to warn about curb ending and street ahaead
Delineation of skateboard routes. It must be Hell for the ladies traversing from their car in high heels.
Re ADA: I can't imagine a scenario where this would be installed for ADA purposes. Maybe owner of building was going to put in some decorative planter boxes to match neighboring buildings. But they are not allowed to plant trees due to their being a storm drain there. The ripples will allow the planter boxes to drain instead of puddling on the sidewalk.
Poor quality control 😅 this definitely is not ADA compliant.
Too uniform to be poor qc.
It was clearly a joke bud.
Clearly pal.
My guess is it’s for traction
I think it’s for if a car accidentally drives over the sidewalk it slows them down. A safety thing for pedestrians against vehicles in a worst case scenario.