LU and the DDA

[BestWestern]

My apologies in advance if this subject has been done to the death, which it might well have been, but I find it intriguing!

Has there been an agreed, accepted apprioach to the requirements of the Disability Descrimination Act for London Undergroud, bearing in mind the very obvious obstacles it faces in complying with the legislation? Presumably the hard facts of this particular situation are that many of LU's stations simply never will be compliant with the requirement to provide access to wheelchair users, owing to the structural constraints of the network. So does LU have plans in place to provide alternatives, for example a taxi or suchlike, or is the issue currently being pondered? Any thoughts very welcome!

 

[Metrailway]

LUL (and for that matter, other transport providers) just have to demonstrate that they've used reasonable efforts in providing facilities for the disabled. The act recognises that it is not practical to make all stations DDA compliant.
For instance, most stock by 2020 would be DDA compliant and there has been an effort to provide step - free access in several stations, when there was the money available.

 

[jopsuk]

it must be infuriating somewhat to those running the system these days that even where stations are only accessed by lifts, they're not always "accesible"- having short flights of step from lifts to platforms etc.

 

[BestWestern]

LUL (and for that matter, other transport providers) just have to demonstrate that they've used reasonable efforts in providing facilities for the disabled. The act recognises that it is not practical to make all stations DDA compliant.
For instance, most stock by 2020 would be DDA compliant and there has been an effort to provide step - free access in several stations, when there was the money available.

Ah, that would pretty much cover it then. There is always an escape from legislation when there needs to be!

 

[Metrailway]

Ah, that would pretty much cover it then. There is always an escape from legislation when there needs to be!

Imagine if there wasn't one - Most of the Underground would have to close for several years to get up to standard and cost a staggering amount. Probably be cheaper to just build parallel lines.

 

[Daniel]

On the bright side, the entire Victoria line is now DDA compliant apparently, with step-free access trains and platform ramps at all stations. Shame the stations aren't step-free though...

 

[Mojo]

On the bright side, the entire Victoria line is now DDA compliant apparently, with step-free access trains and platform ramps at all stations. Shame the stations aren't step-free though...

It's compliant with the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations, which, as the name suggests, does not include full accessibility for the stations too.

Pimlico does not have platform humps as it was granted an exemption.

 

[whhistle]

While I acknowledge that not all disabilities mean wheelchairs, it would be interesting to have some numbers of actual wheelchair users who use the Underground. Again, not meaning to sound mean or anything but if there are only 5 wheelchair users per line per year, does that equal spending the millions of pounds making older stations step-free and such? Obviously new stations should be fully DDA compliant and the LUL are making reasonable efforts to make all stations step free, but the point still stands.

Another good example is spending billions of pounds on a High Speed Rail link when it may save an extra 15 minutes. While I am a supporter of the HS2 link, it would be better to have trains running at 300mph/400mph to really cut journey times.

On an interesting note: Sir Richard Branson with his latest space programme has been looking at pointing some of the shuttles to America instead of space. UK to America in a couple of hours. . .

 

[BestWestern]

While I acknowledge that not all disabilities mean wheelchairs, it would be interesting to have some numbers of actual wheelchair users who use the Underground. Again, not meaning to sound mean or anything but if there are only 5 wheelchair users per line per year, does that equal spending the millions of pounds making older stations step-free and such? Obviously new stations should be fully DDA compliant and the LUL are making reasonable efforts to make all stations step free, but the point still stands.

Another good example is spending billions of pounds on a High Speed Rail link when it may save an extra 15 minutes. While I am a supporter of the HS2 link, it would be better to have trains running at 300mph/400mph to really cut journey times.

I would have to say that I agree with you. In fact, I would go as far as suggesting that if an operator is able to provide a reliable alternative - a taxi being the obvious example - and provided that it is a reasonable compromise to the original mode of transport in terms of the time taken for the journey etc, then that really ought to suffice in situations where the level of usage by those in wheelchairs or with severe mobility issues is low. I realise that some might be offended by this, but I feel that the principle of massive expenditure when not essentially required should be scrutinised beyond simply satisfying legislation.

 

[jopsuk]

While I acknowledge that not all disabilities mean wheelchairs, it would be interesting to have some numbers of actual wheelchair users who use the Underground. Again, not meaning to sound mean or anything but if there are only 5 wheelchair users per line per year, does that equal spending the millions of pounds making older stations step-free and such? Obviously new stations should be fully DDA compliant and the LUL are making reasonable efforts to make all stations step free, but the point still stands.

"No wheelchair users use the line. This is because it isn't wheelchair accessible. Therefore we shouldn't spend money to make it wheelchair accessible."
Your logic is rubbish.

 

[SS4]

While I acknowledge that not all disabilities mean wheelchairs, it would be interesting to have some numbers of actual wheelchair users who use the Underground. Again, not meaning to sound mean or anything but if there are only 5 wheelchair users per line per year, does that equal spending the millions of pounds making older stations step-free and such? Obviously new stations should be fully DDA compliant and the LUL are making reasonable efforts to make all stations step free, but the point still stands.

There appears to be a self-fulfilling prophecy. The tube does not need step free access because wheelchair users don't use the tube which acts against making the necessary arrangements.

For what it's worth I agree, especially in times of fiscal restraint. I do not mean to sound callous but it's not like there is no other transport available in London and it's not like TfL's newest stations are inaccessible as well as works in some parts, I believe Tottenham Court Road will be wheelchair accessible on the Northern line when it reopens there.

 

[whhistle]

"No wheelchair users use the line. This is because it isn't wheelchair accessible. Therefore we shouldn't spend money to make it wheelchair accessible."
Your logic is rubbish.

Perhaps, but perhaps not. A simple poll of 1000 wheelchair users in and around London would give an answer.

 

[NSEFAN]

Is the provision of wheelchair access not an on-going scheme, i.e as stations come up for refurbishment and as stock is replaced?

 

[BestWestern]

Is the provision of wheelchair access not an on-going scheme, i.e as stations come up for refurbishment and as stock is replaced?

Well yes, up to a point, but the issue is that many deep level Tube stations simply don't have the space or infrastructure to go wheelchair friendly. It's a project of biblical proportions to install lifts etc aT every single location, particularly as many places would require major earthworks to install the shafts etc.

To be entirely honest - and I'm sticking my neck out a bit here I realise - I think there is also a safety issue in all of this.

If you are a wheelchair user and you are in a situation where you need to get out of a station or off of a train quickly - i.e. a serious fire or, God forbid, a terrorist attack - frankly you are going to be well and truly stuck. You can't use a lift if there is a fire. The chances of people stopping to carry you up the fire escape stairs/escalators are not great. If they do, it's going to be a long journey up. If you need to evacuate a train the same applies. Probably worse, seeing as people can only escape from either end of a Tube train, and if you can't get up and join the exodus, you might well end up under people's feet. It's not pleasant, but we know that this sort of thing happens in these situations. People will always panic.

Taking all of that on board, if I were a wheelchair user I think I would have serious misgivings about going down the Tube. I might well find a bus to be considerably more agreeable. So, whilst the legislation makes things very fair for us all, does anybody else feel that there might actually be a vital point of safety in all of this that we are overlooking in the interests of being 'PC'?

 

[Greenback]

Well yes, up to a point, but the issue is that many deep level Tube stations simply don't have the space or infrastructure to go wheelchair friendly. It's a project of biblical proportions to install lifts etc aT every single location, particularly as many places would require major earthworks to install the shafts etc.

To be entirely honest - and I'm sticking my neck out a bit here I realise - I think there is also a safety issue in all of this.

If you are a wheelchair user and you are in a situation where you need to get out of a station or off of a train quickly - i.e. a serious fire or, God forbid, a terrorist attack - frankly you are going to be well and truly stuck. You can't use a lift if there is a fire. The chances of people stopping to carry you up the fire escape stairs/escalators are not great. If they do, it's going to be a long journey up. If you need to evacuate a train the same applies. Probably worse, seeing as people can only escape from either end of a Tube train, and if you can't get up and join the exodus, you might well end up under people's feet. It's not pleasant, but we know that this sort of thing happens in these situations. People will always panic.

Taking all of that on board, if I were a wheelchair user I think I would have serious misgivings about going down the Tube. I might well find a bus to be considerably more agreeable. So, whilst the legislation makes things very fair for us all, does anybody else feel that there might actually be a vital point of safety in all of this that we are overlooking in the interests of being 'PC'?

Interesting. You have made several very good points there. As someone who does not use the Tube if it can be help, I can see that the practicalities may well be extremely off puting for a wheelchair user even if accessibility was perfect in every location.

However, there is a wider aspect to accessiblity in that it is now generally accepted to apply to other sections of the community than the disabled (of whom wheelchair users are only a small percentage anyway). It's now considered desirable to have step free access for the less mobile, both to avoid unnecessary accidents and to encourage the use of public transport.

The question for me is how far should this go? Clearly there comes a point where the cost of converting a largely Victorian infrastructure cannot be justified, particurlarly where there are alternative public transport options available.

 

[Mojo]

If you are a wheelchair user and you are in a situation where you need to get out of a station or off of a train quickly - i.e. a serious fire or, God forbid, a terrorist attack - frankly you are going to be well and truly stuck. You can't use a lift if there is a fire.

It depends on the type of lift. For example the current project to bring step free access to the Northern line at Bank includes an evacuation/firefighter lift which can be used during emergencies.

There's currently a huge project nearing completion to bring step free access to Green Park station. I'll try and find out what types of lifts they are using here and whether they are safe for use in an evacuation.

 

[Rational Plan]

The thing is, many of the stations they say are compliant are only accessible from street to platform. Not from platform to train. Only new lines are compliant. The cost of rebuilding the central stations is huge. I some times wonder whether if it would be better to rebuild outer suburban stretches so they can be at least used as part of a network.

 

[starrymarkb]

The thing is, many of the stations they say are compliant are only accessible from street to platform. Not from platform to train. Only new lines are compliant. The cost of rebuilding the central stations is huge. I some times wonder whether if it would be better to rebuild outer suburban stretches so they can be at least used as part of a network.

That's what the new humped platforms are for, but it is a rolling program. In theory the Victoria line is now almost all accessible train to platform but not platform to street. Humps are a cheap and easy solution, and while access to the platform only is not ideal, it allows for interchange and escape if overcarried.

 

[Mojo]

There is also the manual boarding ramps project which is ongoing, but likely to only be short-term due to issues regarding staff.

 

[DavyCrocket]

It depends on the type of lift. For example the current project to bring step free access to the Northern line at Bank includes an evacuation/firefighter lift which can be used during emergencies.

There's currently a huge project nearing completion to bring step free access to Green Park station. I'll try and find out what types of lifts they are using here and whether they are safe for use in an evacuation.

As an aside, Green Park has had step free access to the street for sometime, since the JLE was constructed.

On the long walkway from the Piccadilly line to/from the Jubilee there is the Arlington Street emergency exit. This has a double helix staircase and a fireman's lift. I've certainly been in it with wheelchair users twice!

 

[BestWestern]

There is also the manual boarding ramps project which is ongoing, but likely to only be short-term due to issues regarding staff.

That is of course another issue; even once a wheelchair user can reach the platforms, how do they bridge the gap between platform and train? Are we to see LU staff coming out with ramps, as we do on mainline rail, during the evening peak on a packed Tube platform? Really not practical.

 

[Rational Plan]

Forgetting wheelchairs for a moment reconstructing platforms so they are level and flush with trains would be a boon for the elderly and people with pushchairs. Compared to Lifts it's a straight forward job.

 

[Mojo]

As an aside, Green Park has had step free access to the street for sometime, since the JLE was constructed.

I thought this was only between the Jubilee and Piccadilly lines? It certainly wasn't to all lines at the station for normal passenger service.

 

[DavyCrocket]

I thought this was only between the Jubilee and Piccadilly lines? It certainly wasn't to all lines at the station for normal passenger service.

The passageway connects those two lines. I can't recall if theres a lift from the Victoria!

 

[whhistle]

Then again (and I point out I don't wish to offend anyone), the nature of a disability is exactly that, a disability. A less able bodied person than what is considered "normal". Unfortunately, the draw-back with having a disability is that you will more than likely not be able to lead what is considered a "normal" life.

I just don't think spending billions of pounds, creating months of inconvienence and ruining victorian architecture is worth it for (in the grand scheme of things) a minority of people. I'm not saying projects from now on shouldn't give consideration to people with disabilities of all kinds, but some things just can't be done. Yes, it's not fair, but unfortunately that is the nature of having a disability.

Somebody, somewhere will always be discriminated against.
A good example of this is supermarkets. Surely, as someone who would say they are not disabled (although I wear glasses, which I could say is a disability) and who doesn't have any children, that means I am not allowed to park close to the supermarket entrance. So, because I do not have any children and am not disabled, I am discriminated against. It's all swings and roundabouts, but like I say, somebody, somewhere will be on the crap end and that's just the way life is.

 

[swt_passenger]

TfL have just publish a consultation draft of their policy in this area:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downlo...-accessibility-implementation-plan-report.pdf

Presumably it covers many of the points discussed in this thread?

 

[BestWestern]

Then again (and I point out I don't wish to offend anyone), the nature of a disability is exactly that, a disability. A less able bodied person than what is considered "normal". Unfortunately, the draw-back with having a disability is that you will more than likely not be able to lead what is considered a "normal" life.

I just don't think spending billions of pounds, creating months of inconvienence and ruining victorian architecture is worth it for (in the grand scheme of things) a minority of people. I'm not saying projects from now on shouldn't give consideration to people with disabilities of all kinds, but some things just can't be done. Yes, it's not fair, but unfortunately that is the nature of having a disability.

Somebody, somewhere will always be discriminated against.
A good example of this is supermarkets. Surely, as someone who would say they are not disabled (although I wear glasses, which I could say is a disability) and who doesn't have any children, that means I am not allowed to park close to the supermarket entrance. So, because I do not have any children and am not disabled, I am discriminated against. It's all swings and roundabouts, but like I say, somebody, somewhere will be on the crap end and that's just the way life is.

I agree. A very sensible view IMHO.

 

[jon0844]

Pimlico does not have platform humps as it was granted an exemption.

Why? It hardly impacts on anything. What it does do, however, is make you wonder why the platforms aren't raised throughout!

 

[Mojo]

What do you mean "why?" Installation costs a million and requires a full weekend line closure.

 

[jon0844]

A million to raise a platform? Bloody hell, I'm in the wrong job!!

Still, it gives me something to suggest if anyone asks me what I'd do if I won a million on the Lottery!