Hey, there! Log in / Register
Owner of flight-attendant crash pad in East Boston denies it's a crash pad despite 'crash pad rules' posted on crash pad refrigerator
By adamg on Thu, 04/07/2022 - 2:08pm
GBH takes a trip up to Geneva Street, behind the Logan car-rental garage and peeks inside the crash pad that isn't a crash pad that ISD shut as illegal and unsafe this weekend.
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
In late stage capitalist
In late stage capitalist America, pad crashes you!
Trying to squelch a market need
Back before the Ambassador to the Holy See was the Mayor of the City of Boston -- there used to be a formalized category of "crash pads" or rooming/boarding houses or transient housing -- aka "high density housing generally without a contract" -- these were inspected and generally safe.
Some, however didn't like the "vibe" of these places and so they were banned -- yet of course the functional category persisted.
Depending on the sub-category of users -- and their finances -- some of these have been and are formally accepted and hence are excepted from being banned in Boston -- such as: long-term stay hotels, college dormitories, University and other Clubs, and executive condos However -- others such as "crash pads" for airline flight crews just exist on the margins as they have for many many years.
It's way past the time when the bureaucracies should accept the "wisdom of the marketplace" with respect to housing with the sole proviso that the facilities operate safely and without fraud or coercion.
Boston still has SROs
Legal ones, even.
Perhaps it needs more, but that's not really the immediate issue here, the immediate issue is that the landlord couldn't be bothered to meet even minimal fire-safety codes (how many smoke detectors do you need for two rooms and a kitchen?).
“Wisdom of the market” LOL
“Wisdom of the market” LOL
This remind anyone of Caddyshack?
Ty Webb: This your place, Carl?
Carl Spackler: Yeah, whatta ya think?
Ty Webb: It's really, uh... it's really awful.
Wonder if the other 19 people
Wonder if the other 19 people are happy the one person reported the place to ISD. They're going to be scrambling for a place to stay now.
Whatever they are….
… they are not dead in a fire or from carbon monoxide poisoning.
Isn't a crash pad kind of the
Isn't a crash pad kind of the best case scenario?? People using it only a few days a month, instead of cramming a ton of people in there all the time?
Probably good neighbors
They want to sleep and that's it. No parties, no cars, no pets.
If the place is not to code it should be vacated but beyond that it's pretty unobjectionable.
Thanks for the laugh Adam
That is one of your greatest headlines ever.
Is "safe landing pad" more
Is "safe landing pad" more appropriate?
I do not understand why this
I do not understand why this is such big news. For those of us who live in the area crash pads are a pretty normal thing. You never have all the occupants in the units at once. This case seems weirder because of its previous use but this is pretty standard.
Now, the question is who is the bozo who reported it for a faulty smoke detector? It did not occur to them that maybe twenty beds would be a tip off??? Next time just have everyone chip in a dollar and buy a new one.
Why it's big news
They were bunking in an unsafe building filled with flammable materials (only half was being used for the bunks, the other half was a still an active garage) with no smoke detectors and only one way out in an emergency.
There's a reason Boston has been particularly finicky about such things for the last, oh, eight decades or so. If you need some help with local history, by all means, just ask.
That's basically arguing that
That's basically arguing that the Cocoanut Grove tragedy could have been prevented with smoke detectors.
It's interesting to know that a place like this exists, I think because it's difficult to fathom a job where you suit up during the day and then bunk like a backpacker at night. But I think the level of obsession over smoke detectors in Boston is way overboard. Anyone who tries selling a condo in Boston learns about the scammy "smoke certificate" requirement, which results in you needing to pay $$ to on-duty BFD plus $$$ to off-duty BFD moonlighting for alarm companies, just to get a slip of paper valid for a couple of months saying your smoke detectors have working batteries which will needing replacing in six months anyway.
This isn't the 1800s when a fire could burn down an entire neighborhood. It's nuts to over-obsess over fire safety while advocating for fools who risk their lives daily pedaling a bicycle on city streets alongside cars.
Huh?
How about proper egress and occupancy limits? That is also cited for this property AND were major factors in the Cocoanut Grove Fire. That and the unnecessary presence of flammable materials in the building.
And last time I checked the history books, no one died in their sleep in Coconut Grove; usually smoke detectors make a difference if they are present when people are sleeping in a fire building.
Is every bike hater as crazy as this guy?
Seriously, that comment was so far out in left field, it's not even in the park. What the hell does fire safety have to do with bike riders?
I mean, you had a semblance of a point about the fire detection certificates, but then revealed yourself to no purpose.
Seek help
Or get a proper Festivus pole. That hobby horse of yours is collapsing under the load of your grievances.
It wasn't reported for a faulty smoke detector
You can read the articles if you want to know more.