PS to the above, 10 steps = inaccessible to everyone using baby carriages, carts, wheelchairs, walkers, etc. I don't know why you're arguing against accessibility issues.
 
"I've never heard objection about the term feeble" - well now you have, and you said "THE feeble" like you're assigning a label.
"Long lines of people waiting to use stairs and elevators?" - I said stairs, comma, and long lines of people waiting to use elevators. So no, not lines of people waiting to use stairs. Surely you've seen people waiting for elevators that don't have enough room to carry everyone waiting. Change what I've said by changing order of words and omitting a comma, and then argue with that. It's called strawmanning. You can disagree without pulling that trick, which is noticable to all.
Stop with the very black and white word definitions. There is no trick here ... other than someone trying to ignore the multiple definitions of word, and strawmanning (surely you mean strawpersonning us - how dare you assume my gender!) by literally twisting words.

With the recent addition of the additional staircase and elevators at Broadview in about 2005 or so, there are no issues there. Perhaps you are thinking about pre-2005 issues?

PS to the above, 10 steps = inaccessible to everyone using baby carriages, carts, wheelchairs, walkers, etc. I don't know why you're arguing against accessibility issues.
I've had no problems taking perambulators up and down stairs. But it doesn't matter. There's an elevator. I wouldn't want to take a walker or wheelchair on an escaltor, would you?

This discussion is leaving me feeling feeble.
 
Last edited:
They can do it provided it isn't in the middle of a platform between two tracks.

The image that you linked to is not, so of course they could.

Dan
Your nitpick misses the point entirely.

From earlier posts, mine and others'. One could say the London example is for a much wider platform than would be necessary for the Ontario Line, but the Sydney example is very similar in size:
1781899808323.png

1781899825773.png
 
The existing Osgoode station only has space for one more stairwell on the platform to go down from there, and perhaps the existing elevators could be extended downwards without having to add elevators there.
 
The existing Osgoode station only has space for one more stairwell on the platform to go down from there, and perhaps the existing elevators could be extended downwards without having to add elevators there.
The transfer to the Ontario line will be through the existing mezzanine. Easier to build
 
So you’ll have to go up to go down again to transfer from Line 1 to Ontario Line.
Yep. Up to the existing concourse, then over to the vertical shaft that's being built at the corner of Osgoode Hall. All the vertical access between the two lines is being built in that shaft. So you'd go down there, to the OL concourse, and then down again to the platform. It's clunky, but my understanding is that the logic was it means they don't have to underpin the existing Osgoode station (underpinning Eglinton station when they built Line 5 turned into a total mess which delayed the entire Crosstown), as they won't be building directly below it until you're down in the bedrock. So in theory, you're trading simpler (and ideally faster) construction for a worse transfer. Whether that's worth it or not is debatable.

Now if you want to get into the really dumb part of Osgoode's new design, if you want to get to Line 1 from the Simcoe entrance, you'd need to go down to the OL, all the way along the concourse, back up to the Line 1 concourse, and then down to the Line 1 platform. Presumably no one will intentionally do this and they'll just walk down the street to the Queen/University entrances, but there's absolutely going to be toruists/new residents/etc. who at least once will try to use the Simcoe entrance to get to Line 1 and have to traverse basically the entire station to do so.
 

Back
Top