News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 4.8K     0 

EastYorkTTCFan said:
So no official source at all just some group that doesn't want to work with others but wants to use the courts instead.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? The TTC has had 35 years to fix accessibility issues with the transit system. They are building second exits for the safety of their able bodied passengers when stairs have almost no chance of failure, but building single elevators in stations for accessibility and have a really poor history of fixing elevators, escalators, and automated doors quickly. Until the penalty for delayed accessibility is higher than the cost of fixing these problems there will be little incentive for the TTC to prioritize this properly.

The TTC needs to start procuring doors, escalators, and elevators differently with more focus on commonality, durability, simplicity, easily swapped components, and SLAs that ensure quick repair. Also, they need to have a backup plan for when things fail that is not a major burden to their customers.

Imagine if the rule was that if an elevator was out of service the affected station or platform would be taken out of service. How long would able bodied people put up with a sign that says sorry we are really slow at fixing things but follow these easy steps to get off at this station: continue two more stations cross over to the other platform, double back one station, and take the bus to the stop on the street upstairs. Whatever their reaction is, multiply that by the frustration of restricted mobility whole trying to carry out those convoluted instructions.

Yes, if the TTC doesn't meet accessibility standards they do need to be sued. If there is no punishment for not paying taxes then before long nobody will pay taxes and similarly if there is no downside to creating an inaccessible system in a poor state of repair then we will have an inaccessible system in disrepair.
 
drum118 said:
... but will see legal action after that date where single elevator are located as they are out of service or out of action up to 6 months. This forces accessibility riders to travel to another station and do a long travel on the surface to their station if its the elevator to the surface.
Click to expand...
As I've pointed out before, TTC can simply mitigate any elevator outages by putting in service a wheel-trans shuttle to an adjacent station.

I'm yet to see a heritage subway system that's anywhere close to TTC in elevator installation - especially in Europe.
 
drum118 said:
Only have to look at ACAT to see the reason why other groups are doing what they are doing. Some of those groups have past ACAT members on them.

If one has listen closely over the past decade or so, They will hear the accessibility issues raised time after time across the GTA on all types of projects at all levels.
Click to expand...
Ok i get that people want more elevators but why is the solution to have a law suit? The TTC followed the minimum building code which is what they are legally required to do. As anyone who watched any of Mike Holmes' renovation shows will know "minimum code sucks" but when you have to follow it and don't have the money to be able to do better than it it's what you have to do.
 
EnviroTO said:
What are you talking about? The TTC has had 35 years to fix accessibility issues with the transit system. They are building second exits for the safety of their able bodied passengers when stairs have almost no chance of failure, but building single elevators in stations for accessibility and have a really poor history of fixing elevators, escalators, and automated doors quickly. Until the penalty for delayed accessibility is higher than the cost of fixing these problems there will be little incentive for the TTC to prioritize this properly.

The TTC needs to start procuring doors, escalators, and elevators differently with more focus on commonality, durability, simplicity, easily swapped components, and SLAs that ensure quick repair. Also, they need to have a backup plan for when things fail that is not a major burden to their customers.

Imagine if the rule was that if an elevator was out of service the affected station or platform would be taken out of service. How long would able bodied people put up with a sign that says sorry we are really slow at fixing things but follow these easy steps to get off at this station: continue two more stations cross over to the other platform, double back one station, and take the bus to the stop on the street upstairs. Whatever their reaction is, multiply that by the frustration of restricted mobility whole trying to carry out those convoluted instructions.

Yes, if the TTC doesn't meet accessibility standards they do need to be sued. If there is no punishment for not paying taxes then before long nobody will pay taxes and similarly if there is no downside to creating an inaccessible system in a poor state of repair then we will have an inaccessible system in disrepair.
Click to expand...
It's not their fault it's because they are following the minimum building code which is written by the province and isl something that needs to be changed from them.
 
If you follow the minimum building code and want to really save money then get rid of the escalators and doors. Why stop at the removal of the motivator between Lowther and Spadina? Go full minimalist but equitable minimalist.
 
EnviroTO said:
If you follow the minimum building code and want to really save money then get rid of the escalators and doors. Why stop at the removal of the motivator between Lowther and Spadina? Go full minimalist but equitable minimalist.
Click to expand...

They are.

They are removing the escalators from the Line 1 Platforms (At Spadina Station) to make room for the elevators. Completely idiotic move.
 
Last edited:
Northern Light said:
They are.

They are removing the escalators from the Line 1 Platforms to make room for the elevators. Completely idiotic move.
Click to expand...
Are they?

Because looking at the drawings of the revamp of Bloor-Yonge, that's certainly not the case.

The only case that I can think of with this is the south end of Spadina, which admittedly we've all rehashed already.

Dan
 
smallspy said:
Are they?

Because looking at the drawings of the revamp of Bloor-Yonge, that's certainly not the case.

The only case that I can think of with this is the south end of Spadina, which admittedly we've all rehashed already.

Dan
Click to expand...

Sorry if I ran afoul of the topic, I saw the reference to Spadina and the movator in the quote and responded with Spadina in mind.

I didn't notice any specific station being mentioned in the quote.

I am not aware of any other escalator removals, current or proposed, by the TTC.
 
Some pictures I got of the Museum Secondary Entrance into Queen's Park progress.
IMG_6157.JPG
IMG_6158.JPG
IMG_6159.JPG
IMG_6160.JPG
 
Richard White said:
I thought Warden station already had the construction contract approved?
Click to expand...

Partial. Two-stages. The second contract is the bus terminal itself. First phase was the subway platform/main building.
 
Does Broadview legally need a second entrance building or does it's extra stairs outside meet code? Purely fantasy but it would be cool if another entrance could be worked into a theoretical redevelopment of that Pizza Pizza. Or maybe the Burger King. I would like some of these Line 2 second entrances to actually be on Danforth Ave.

Also unrelated but are all those turn lanes on fully necessary? They squeeze the bike lanes... I'm not a traffic management expert though!
 
LemonCondo said:
Does Broadview legally need a second entrance building or does it's extra stairs outside meet code?
Click to expand...

To my understanding, the second set of stairs does meet the fire code requirement as a second, completely independent, point of egress.

LemonCondo said:
Purely fantasy but it would be cool if another entrance could be worked into a theoretical redevelopment of that Pizza Pizza. Or maybe the Burger King. I would like some of these Line 2 second entrances to actually be on Danforth Ave.
Click to expand...

A further entrance to Broadview off the west end of its platforms is entirely possible, though not likely a near-term priority.

The entrance would likely be within/adjacent to the property currently occupied by the seniors residence on the west side of Broadview.

Its exceedingly unlikely any entrance meant to connect to the platforms here would come from Danforth as the TTC wants the shortest possible route to the surface, both for evacuation purposes and to keep costs down.

An entrance off Danforth is not out of the question, but it would likely have to connect to the existing mezzanine which is very tight, any such program could likely occur only with a redevelopment of scale of those Danforth-facing properties.

LemonCondo said:
Also unrelated but are all those turn lanes on fully necessary? They squeeze the bike lanes... I'm not a traffic management expert though!
Click to expand...

I'm not a transportation planner either..........

But I would say this:

The Left turn lane from EB Danforth to NB Broadview is almost certainly necessary, lots and lots of cars make this turn daily.

The Left turn lane from WB Danforth to SB Broadview is also pretty busy, though much less so.

My instinct; but it would have to be modeled out, is that the right hand turn lane from WB Danforth to NB Broadview might be removable.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top