A controversial thread about handicapped people

[GraphicMatt]

The TTC doesn't really have anything to do with these decisions - they wouldn't be able to get provincial money if they didn't commit to making services accessible.

I think a commitment to accessibility ends up benefitting everybody, though. Look at the stop announcements/signs on the buses & streetcars. They added them for accessibility reasons, but they're a great extra for all riders.

It's not really fair to see things as a zero-sum game in this case. There wouldn't be more service if there were less accessibility.

 

[Second_in_pie]

I think a commitment to accessibility ends up benefitting everybody, though. Look at the stop announcements/signs on the buses & streetcars. They added them for accessibility reasons, but they're a great extra for all riders.

But it'd be nice if the odd TTC driver actually called out the stops and tried to look like they enjoy their job. I'd love to be a TTC driver for a day and make people actually feel welcome in the system; calling out each stop on my own, making smalltalk with passengers, smiling, giving directions.

Actually, one of my role models is (hilariously enough) an unnamed Vancouver bus driver. If I could meet him again or get his msn or something it'd definitely be fulfilling. On a vacation to Vancouver, me and my family got on the bus with only dollar bills (somebody obviously expecting to get change.) He notified us that there wasn't any change machine, and that we could only pay in coins.
But instead of kicking us off the bus, he asked us where we were going. "Stanley Park" we replied.
"Okay, well you go have a good time, get a snack while you're there and come back with a bunch of change." He said, and let us on the bus, even giving us a transfer while he was at it.
Came back to the Stanley Park bus loop, and sure enough he was waiting there for us. I was about to pay a double fare back for the trip to the park and he said "forget about it." He turned off the automatic stop announcements after it got a stop wrong, and did the rest of the trip himself. He was truly dedicated to his job and obviously cared for the customers not just as people who put money in the fare box but as people as well. Now, I try to do all my work just as he does.

It's not really fair to see things as a zero-sum game in this case. There wouldn't be more service if there were less accessibility.

Actually, with this talk of low-floor busses having lower capacity, wouldn't they need to run more busses so more passengers could be carried..?

EDIT: And it's actually a human rights issue for all this accessibility. I'm pretty sure it's international, as I know that New York's doing it, and other provinces have their own versions of accessibility laws that've been beefed up considerably over the past decade or so. So really, it's illegal for the TTC to not be providing this service, and the Province very well could get into some serious trouble if they change laws so the TTC doesn't have to run a fully accessible system.

 

[EnviroTO]

I think the TTC spends way to much money to cater to handicap. Honestly all of these low floor buses, proposed low floor streetcars, subways with wheel chair hookups, stations being retrofitted with elevators all cost a lot of money. Do the TTC see returns for this? From my observations I say no.

The TTC operates at a loss providing service for the car impaired or easy commute impaired. Should we really be wasting all this money? Does the city see returns for this?

StIdes, I will make you a deal. If you cut off your legs I will join your campaign to reduce spending on accessibility.

 

[GraphicMatt]

We're facing a rapidly aging population, a large bunch of whom are moving back to urban cores as they get older. We're going to need to make sure our public services can cater to people in their 70s and 80s who can suffer mobility limitations.

So Stides doesn't even need to necessarily cut his legs off. He just needs to get old.

 

[knlaruw]

First post here, *looks nervously*

Remember that a handicap is not the fault of the person, a disabled person is only handicapped when their environment or the attitudes of others acts as a barrier. Trying to ride a bus that is inaccessible to them makes them handicapped. People who are arthritic, have poor vision, blind, deaf are effectively handicapped if their surroundings create barriers for them. It's amazing how eye-opening accessibility training is. Even scotoma or macular degeneration made climbing five stairs and opening doors incredibly difficult, despite the fact I could see somewhat.

Keeping high floored buses may be more efficient for able bodied people, but climbing stairs for someone with severe arthritis or poor vision, for example, is unnecessarily difficult.

Also, here in Waterloo I often see wheelchairs and scooters getting on the bus.. Unless the hydraulic ramp is broken..

 

[nfitz]

I have been riding the TTC for almost 30 years. ... I have not even once seen someone with a wheel-chair get on a bus.

I have a hard time believing that. I use the 25 frequently, and you do see wheelchairs. On occasion recently, there was even 2 - though the first had gotten off before the second had gotten on.

I can't say I've ever seen one in rush hour though ...

As for the subway; I can probably count on the figures of one hand the number of trips I've had with elevators at both end ... except sometimes when I get on/off at Main ... but if I do that then I'm taking a streetcar.

I'm not sure the subway stations have hit critical mass yet really, in terms of the number of stations that are accessible.

 

[joeclark]

Dude, this isn’t about cost/benefit ratios

This isn’t about “return on investment,â€*because if that were your criterion, we’d have a subway line from Union to Eglinton and that would be that.

Your anecdotal observations are about as useful as mine, e.g., I saw a young guy in a chair on the subway tonight. That and $3.62 buys you a soyaccino at Red Rocket.

 

[kettal]

The more wheelchair-bound people who use the bus, the worse it is for them. I mean, with only one or two spots for a wheelchair, who would want to wait bus after bus for a spot?

I'm not being insensitive, just logical. The wheelchair-bus combo has diminishing returns. We're digging ourselves into a hole with it.

 

[Fred.S]

I've also rarely seen anyone in a wheelchair use a bus or subway, and understand what StIdes means, and it's a valid concern (we do spend a lot of money on accessibility). However, I've found low-floor to be very beneficial for myself and others. Nothing scientific, but some personal observations and anecdotes:

- There's a lot of elderly in the Bloor-West and Roncesvalles areas, and I've seen them struggle to get on streetcars and older high-floor busses. This slows down boarding for them and everyone.
- I've also seen (and am sure many of you have) many people struggle with strollers and those wheeled baskets. Usually the driver will help out, but again it really slows things down at stops.
- I ride a bike most places and dont normally take it on the TTC (99% of the time my bicycle is faster than a bus/streetcar), but have had the odd flat tire. It's much easier to get a bike (or any other large object) on the low-floors (although the bike racks sort of make that point moot now)
- I actually sprained my knee pretty badly two weeks ago, and learned first hand how difficult things got when I was pretty much reduced to one leg and crutches. For a week, to put it simply, STAIRS SUCKED.

I think low floor (as well as accessible stations) has had many more benefits than some people realize, especially for those that rely solely on the TTC for transportation, shopping, moving stuff etc. Wheelchair accessibility could be viewed as a nice by-product of making the system better for everyone.

When low-floor meets all-door loading on the new streetcars, think how much more efficient things will be. To turn it around, what if we had to climb 4 or 5 stairs to enter/exit a subway car during rush hour?

 

[drum118]

How do you expect scooter, IE use the subway when over 50% of the stations are non accessibly in the first place?? TTC was supposed to be 100% accessibly for buses by 2010, but that been push back to 2011/2012.

Many accessibly rider and people with walkers or stroller refuse to use the lift on the high floor buses with good reason. I have seen them in action and agree with them.

As point out, low floor bus's speed up both load and unloading time faster than high floor.

If sidewalk areas were at the same height of the low floor buses, there would be no need for the ramp system.

Yes, low floor vehicles have 10-15% less space than high floor, but not as bad as the Orion VI that see 35% less space.

TTC is the only system in the GTA to use non standard seating with Hamilton right behind them.

Hamilton use rear doors as well York VIVA buses for accessibility access and this needs to happen to other systems.

If load standard were used correctly for off peak, everyone should have a seat, but various riders chose not to use them for various reason. At peak time it a a given that you may not get a seat.

90% of riders with accessibility issues is not caused by there choosing. The other 10% is cause by themselves. They all want to be treated equal.

Today you find people bring things onto the transit system that would not be done 20-30 years ago.

MTO expect all transit system fleet in Ontario 100% accessibly by 2012. The only exception is TTC streetcar fleet and MTO did want it 100% by 2015 a few years ago.

There are very few systems in NA ordering high floor buses with most manufacture phasing them out by 2010.

There are very few systems world wide order high floor buses that are new.

Buses in the GTA seat 37-39 depending on the system.

Streetcars are a different story going from high floor to 100% low floor. Until the last few years they were 70% and now moving to 100% low floor. The ones that have high floor use high platforms and that not going to change with out a major rebuilt.

The US has the ADA requirements where Ontario has the ODA with similar requirements and less teeth to enforce it.

As TTC system becomes more accessibly, Wheel Tran is scaling back how riders use it as well who use it and reducing the size of the fleet. Cost saving to everyone.

 

[adma]

I've seen wheelchair/scooter people use the TTC, and buses laying down their ramps for them. Enough said.

 

[Darwinkgo]

What about the loss of seating? Believe it or not im sure there's a lot of people who dont ride transit because they cant sit down. Less seats also means less seats for people with mobility issues.

Studies show people put a much higher preference on frequent reliable service that they can get on because there is space (which I guess is three factors) than being able to get a seat.

The seat is not a core component of transit, it is a bonus. If not having a seat is really impairing some people from taking transit instead of driving then they must really be on the margin with almost no economic incentive to do so. Would anything other than PRT really give them an incentive then? I don't think so.

Accommodating those marginal users would just increase the operating deficit .

 

[kEiThZ]

Studies show people put a much higher preference on frequent reliable service that they can get on because there is space (which I guess is three factors) than being able to get a seat.

The seat is not a core component of transit, it is a bonus. If not having a seat is really impairing some people from taking transit instead of driving then they must really be on the margin with almost no economic incentive to do so. Would anything other than PRT really give them an incentive then? I don't think so.

Accommodating those marginal users would just increase the operating deficit .

To play devil's advocate...aren't most handicapped persons also marginal users of transit (from the revenue generation sense). I do agree with increasing accessibility but StIdes does have a bit of a point when it comes to seating. I have heard more than a few people say that they drive instead of having to stand for 30-40 mins on the bus and subway (which is not all that uncommon during rush hour). The solution in my books though, is to increase the number of buses. It's not to reduce accessibility which will become more and more essential as our population ages.

 

[Darwinkgo]

I was using marginal users in the economic incentive sense. IE: the cost of them driving is less than the lets call it "the standing penalty". I think many people say "I would take transit but there are no seats" but when it comes down to it even with a seat on a bus won't they wouldn't convert. It is just an easy excuse to get out of explaining why they make their choices.

Now, who knows whether they would convert to a seat (or maybe even standing) on a streetcar, LRT, subway, or GO Train due to "rail bias" which reduces the perceived cost of transit.

 

[gnille1]

Not that I'm racist, but...

Not that I don't like immigrants, but...

Not that I have anything against old people, but...

Always a solid way to start a sound argument. If you're interested in accessibility issues and transit, you might want to have a look at the upcoming changes under the Accessibility for Ontarian's With Disabilities Act:

http://www.accesson.ca/mcss/english/pillars/accessibilityOntario