Sharon Yetman's Subway Safety Plan (Better barrier for subways 'an obsession')

[kEiThZ]

I'm sorry I have to. There is only one invention in the world for platform safety (for the most part). How much profit do you think they make. Hords.

You say money by contracting out a sliding door company, a post and headers company, without the massive costs for a "middle man". You like would still have a project manager, but just to keep things on schedule, safe etc.

BS. Once you deploy products that are certified to the appropriate standards (not Walmart doors), you can bet they won't work out cheaper. Doing the design and integrating posts from one company, doors from another, switches from a third, will simply make things more expensive, not less.

 

[Darwinkgo]

There is a reason it is very unlikely we will get full height doors in Toronto, except for maybe Union Station (and others? haven't looked around the other centre platform stations much) which have big air vents with louvers already.

 

[subway safety]

There is a reason it is very unlikely we will get full height doors in Toronto, except for maybe Union Station (and others? haven't looked around the other centre platform stations much) which have big air vents with louvers already.

Does anyone know anything as to why the TTC has been not complying to the Ontario Building Code (as I read it) for not putting up "non-climbable guards" at Downsview and the Sheppard line since the 1995 Safety Requirements with Stations" Building Code 3.3.1.17?

Also Why would they are not have been installed since they renovated all those yello lines on all 69 stations. When they renovated those yellow line, why wouldn't they have to comply to the building code (the most recent version 1995) which happens to include platform safety?

 

[subway safety]

There is a reason it is very unlikely we will get full height doors in Toronto, except for maybe Union Station (and others? haven't looked around the other centre platform stations much) which have big air vents with louvers already.

Does anyone know anything as to why the TTC has been not complying to the Ontario Building Code (as I read it) for not putting up "non-climbable guards" at Downsview and the Sheppard line since the 1995 Safety Requirements with Stations" Building Code 3.3.1.17?

Also Why would they are not have been installed since they renovated all those yellow lines on all 69 stations. When they renovated those yellow lines, why wouldn't they have to comply to the building code (the most recent version 1995) which happens to include platform safety?

 

[Darwinkgo]

Does anyone know anything as to why the TTC has been not complying to the Ontario Building Code (as I read it) for not putting up "non-climbable guards" at Downsview and the Sheppard line since the 1995 Safety Requirements with Stations" Building Code 3.3.1.17?

Also Why would they are not have been installed since they renovated all those yello lines on all 69 stations. When they renovated those yellow line, why wouldn't they have to comply to the building code (the most recent version 1995) which happens to include platform safety?

I would bet since trains are federally regulated, that specific building requirements for train platforms are different.

Set aside that likelyhood however and examine the building code. Remember also that the code is not set in stone, that exceptions are given all the time, and that all you need to do to be in compliance is legally argue that the subway platforms are a loading dock (as they are given a specific exception). This could be a reason why new stations don't need doors. Low floor stations don't need doors under the specific requirements you state anyways, and in theory a low floor station serving the subway train but with stairs up to the doors, would only require guards on the side of the stairs, not as a barrier between people and the track. That last point provides a great legal argument that the requirement doesn't need to apply, as a low floor platform is not more inherently dangerous that a high floor one (besides the accidental falling threat, which you could argue is ameliorated by providing a safe zone under the platform edge).

As for old stations, you are taking a very narrow view of grandfathered. You have to be modifying the specific element for changes to be required. For example, you couldn't build barriers that were too short or climbable. But when you replace tiles, or preform normal maintenance you are not required to bring a building up to code. It would be an undue burden on everyone to make changes across our entire society. There is a reason there are newly renovated office buildings that are not wheel chair accessible and were still approved, even with new elevators and other major interior work. The building code is not some grand doctrinaire.

As you can see in these building code commission decisions, the code is not set in stone. In this case the commission allowed a climbable guard. In this case the commmission allowed a low height guard.

 

[Asterix]

Does anyone know anything as to why the TTC has been not complying to the Ontario Building Code (as I read it) for not putting up "non-climbable guards" at Downsview and the Sheppard line since the 1995 Safety Requirements with Stations" Building Code 3.3.1.17?

Do you think it might be because trained professional civil engineers, architects and other building people came to the conclusion that it is not a violation of section 3.3.1.17 of the Building Code? Might it be possible that these trained experts know more about the Building Code than your simple perusal of it?

Can you name a single expert who agrees with you that no platform doors are a violation?

 

[Asterix]

Does anyone know anything as to why the TTC has been not complying to the Ontario Building Code (as I read it) for not putting up "non-climbable guards" at Downsview and the Sheppard line since the 1995 Safety Requirements with Stations" Building Code 3.3.1.17?

Just to refresh your memory since you never bothered to answer this question the last time you raised this issue:

http://urbantoronto.ca/showthread.p...or-subways-an-obsession-)&p=377953#post377953

"So just to be clear, the Chief City Manager (for whom you are not listed in publicly available documents listing lobbyists to city officials) told you that your perusal of the Building Code had discovered a glaring flaw that was overlooked by all the TTC in-house engineers, by all the engineers in the outside companies contracted to do the TTC construction, by the provincial building inspectors who must also sign off on the work and by the hundreds, if not thousands of professional engineers, architects and construction professionals who ride the death-defying TTC subway everyday?"

 

[PinkLucy]

I am astounded that all of those engineers and other highly paid and skilled professionals missed that. Wow. Boggles the mind. <Insert emoticon of your choice>

 

[subway safety]

I am astounded that all of those engineers and other highly paid and skilled professionals missed that. Wow. Boggles the mind. <Insert emoticon of your choice>

Well folks,

It took two years to get an appointment with the TTC. I did it.

I feel it inappropriate to comment. But One thing is for sure.

I now have been contacted by a team of professionals in the Provincial Government who are anxious to hear of my "master plan on how to fix transit & transportation at the same time.

I am also working closely with several of the main Mayoral Candidates of promise and they get it.

The question is did TTC get it, or are they going to arbitrarily take?

I have inside information that there already is a plan in place for the Yonge Bloor Solution. The question is it my invention, a portion of my invention, and are they going to ignore me, as they tried to do for 2 years.

I think it's time to contact a lawyer.

 

[kEiThZ]

^ It's not your invention. Don't worry. But do feel free to blow cash on retainer fees.

 

[PinkLucy]

Is this inside information the announcement a few weeks ago? You know, the one that was all over the news.

 

[kEiThZ]

Scratch what I said earlier. Sue the TTC. I would love to see your patent defended in court.

I hope when you got the patent that your lawyer told you that the most important part about the patent is defending it. It's going to be entertaining to watch you defend a patent that probably counts as an obvious idea or a known practice (things you can't patent). Good luck.

 

[Asterix]

I am also working closely with several of the main Mayoral Candidates of promise and they get it.

You mean you've sent your ramblings to the candidates whose demonstration so far that "they get it" is spouting off about how they will magically build subways here, there and everywhere, pulling the billions of dollars to do so out of some fantasy hat that doesn't exist? Yeah, they're obviously all over the more micro-level details of operating a transit system.

How's your efforts to be properly listed on the city lobbying registry going since you are having all these city meetings?

 

[ITcomputer]

Who will no doubt have a good laugh when they do here the "master plan"

 

[Mapleson]

Two years? Does that mean your 18 month window until public disclosure on your patent is over? I'm interested in the physical embodiment of the general idea that you went after.

Or did you not get a patent to stop people stealling your big secret idea(s)?

But overall, I don't think you can sue anyone because your invention is not patentable. But maybe I'm wrong and most lawyers will be as dumb as the politicians and beauricrats that have stopped you so far. If you look hard enough, I'm sure you'll find one that'll take your money, I mean case.