Strollers, Carts, and Other Large Items on Buses and Trains (2011)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

71 CHAPTER TEN CONCLUSIONS type of stroller is allowed) whereas other policies offer strict prohibitions (i.e., only folding strollers stowed under a seat are allowed). Generally, rail operations are less restrictive in terms of what types, dimensions, or quantities of large items passengers may carry on board, while buses, with limited capacity and dedicated securement areas for wheelchairs, have more restrictive policies. The data collected and sum- marized in this synthesis highlight considerations for many of the large items reviewed. WHEELCHAIRS AND MOBILITY AIDS With ADA law in the United States, most agencies have significant direction with regard to developing policies to accommodate wheelchairs. Because mobility aids include a large class of assistive devices, some of which are also used as recreational vehicles (e.g., Segways), agencies have had difficulties defining what they can safely accommodate on their vehicles. Several agency representatives commented that clearer guidance at the federal level and incorporated into the ADA would make it easier to develop appropriate policies for what passengers could carry on transit vehicles. Safe transport of mobility devices is a priority, but some agencies feel that they are unqualified to make a determina- tion about whether certain devices are suitable for transit, as demonstrated by survey responses about the structural integrity and transportability of wheelchairs in general. Tie- downs and securement systems are designed primarily for wheelchairs; several agencies struggle trying to secure Seg- ways, as well as certain types of common scooters, because their vehicles are not equipped properly or securement tech- nologies have not caught up with new devices. Based on the survey comments, when agencies collabo- rate with people with disabilities—either on an individual basis or through their advisory committee(s)—to develop new policies or refine existing policies, they usually consider their policies to be more effective as a result of this collab- orative approach. STROLLERS Transit agencies are less comfortable with their stroller poli- cies than with wheelchairs and mobility aids. The Ottawa Although the information described in the various literature reviews and the survey results focuses on policies in place and the effectiveness of these policies, this topic has much to do with how staff and riders interact with one another. When someone boards a transit vehicle, he or she typically looks for a place to sit or stand. The process of entering a bus or train and finding a place may go unnoticed on most transit vehicles: other than a greeting, the operator is not required to do any- thing special, and other riders may only need to step aside for a new passenger. However, when a passenger boards with a large item or uses a mobility device, operators and other transit riders are impacted. Luggage, carts, or strollers require other passengers to move away or help make room. Wheel- chairs or scooters require operators to use a ramp or lift and passengers to clear the designated tie-down area. As the sur- vey responses reveal, large items can cause delays, conflicts among passengers, and more responsibility for the operator. As a result of the complexities surrounding large items on transit vehicles, many agencies have developed policies to guide what may be taken on board a vehicle, how many items may be carried, where items may be stored or used, and the agency’s role in terms of providing direction and assistance. The information presented in this synthesis covers a broad range of policies and issues as they have been addressed by a selected group of representative North American transit agencies. Although the information obtained from the survey cannot be used to generalize policies at all transit providers or how these policies are applied, the findings highlight the complications associated with large items on transit vehicles and that a human element exists. Many agencies adopt policies with strict guidelines, but operators are challenged to enforce them and in many cases develop solutions based on the spe- cific circumstances. Thus, this synthesis presents frequen- cies of responses to survey questions and is supplemented by extensive commentary from agency representatives. The survey of 42 transit agencies (100% response rate) evidenced the variation among policies in accommodating large items on transit vehicles: almost all agencies have regu- lations in place regarding wheelchairs on vehicles, but many agencies have never encountered a Segway and therefore have no policies that address them, and nearly one-quarter of the agencies have no policies regarding carrying luggage or carts on board transit vehicles. Even if an agency has a policy in place, some policies make allowances for items (i.e., any

72 example (chapter nine) illustrates the complexities of man- aging strollers and the impact that a vocal ridership group— mothers with children—can have on a transit system’s policies and reputation. Efforts by some transit agencies to limit strollers to those that fold or to specify a stroller’s allowable dimensions for transport have been questioned by rider groups as unjust, possibly even discriminatory against parents, often low-income women. Although some agencies have reached out to riders with strollers by creating stroller- only areas or providing both written and oral information in the languages spoken by mothers on transit, others have had difficulty addressing their challenges. Among the stroller policies that transit agencies have deemed most effective are those that minimize an opera- tor’s involvement: strollers must fit through vehicle doors and be kept out of aisles. Platform-level boarding on trains, along with new technologies in bus ramps, have made it easier for riders to bring large strollers on board vehicles: easier boarding may be a disincentive for carrying small, collapsible strollers. Helsinki’s pram button to keep doors open longer or Portland TriMet’s button on its MAX trains to activate bridge plates are examples of simple technol- ogy enhancements that allow more time for safer boarding and alighting. The results of the survey and the literature review are inconclusive with regard to whether a child in a stroller is safer than a child taken out of a stroller, and different agen- cies have policies that reflect the two different perspectives. The dissimilarity of the two types of policies points to the value of additional research on this topic. BICYCLES Exterior racks or underbody storage compartments on buses allow transit agencies to offer an amenity to bicycle users without the complications of bringing bicycles on board vehicles. Nevertheless, some agencies’ bus routes have exte- rior bike racks that are at capacity, forcing them to allow bikes on buses or to retrofit vehicles with larger racks. Like- wise, most rail operators have policies that make accom- modations for bikes inside vehicles. Some have created designated bicycle areas or installed bicycle mounting racks or hooks. Commuter rail operated by some agencies includes cars designated for transporting bicycles. However, owing to high passenger loads, several agencies restrict bikes at peak hours or in peak directions. Some solutions have been tried. An innovative program, such as Caltrans’ Bay Bridge operation, is an example of supplementing limited rail capacity by operating bicycle- carrying vans between rail stations. Rented lockers at bus and rail transit centers allow users to secure bicycles when they transfer to public transit. Many agencies have not yet explored the potential for accommodating—or even encour- aging—portable, folding bikes on buses and trains. As com- munities grapple with “last mile” transit solutions (providing local feeder bus services or other modes that connect transit hubs with riders’ destinations), bicycles can play an impor- tant role in a multimodal solution. LUGGAGE Most transit riders do not transport luggage on a daily basis. Thus, local riders with luggage are often leaving town or returning home from another city, and many passengers with luggage are visiting from elsewhere. Visitors with luggage may be unaware of the agency’s policies governing luggage in advance of trying to board a transit vehicle. To address the needs of persons with suitcases and sup- port efforts to keep aisles clear, several transit agencies have experimented with luggage racks on bus routes or trains that serve an airport (e.g., MTA in New York City and Bos- ton’s MBTA Silver Line). Other agencies, such as TheBus in Honolulu or SamTrans in San Mateo County, California explicitly prohibit luggage on some bus routes that serve the airport, not only for capacity purposes but in some cases owing to private competition. Luggage racks may be suitable for routes that serve airports, but for most transit services, open space solutions offer greater flexibility, allowing more standing passengers or general capacity for large items. CARTS, PARCELS, AND OTHER ITEMS Three groupings of transit agency policies generally exist regarding carts, parcels, and other items on buses and trains. Concerned that policies limiting grocery bags or carts might unfairly impact transit-dependent riders, the first group of agencies allows as much as the rider can carry in one trip without assistance (e.g., Ottumwa Transit Authority and Sioux Area Metro). Many of these are smaller agencies that acknowledge some flexibility exists in how the driver accommodates these riders. A second group of agencies defines specific size limits or restricts the number of bags or parcels on transit (e.g., Link Transit or Las Cruces RoadRUNNER Transit), based on what an agency deems reasonable for an individual to carry by himself or herself. The third group of agencies has policies that rely on indi- viduals to maintain control of their carry-on items on their lap or under their seat, effectively limiting the quantity or size of items that may be brought on board. Several of these larger agencies acknowledge that operators have a lot of dif- ferent duties, and measuring carts or counting bags adds yet another responsibility.

73 Most transit agencies respond to changes in societal pri- orities by implementing new policies or adjusting existing ones. Wider and taller strollers, sometimes accommodat- ing two children and allowing for storage, are designed to address the demands of families that use them. Large suit- cases with wheels allow travelers to independently trans- port their belongings to airports and train stations. Dollies and grocery carts mean transit-dependent individuals are not restricted to their neighborhood market, and can carry purchases from big-box retailers on buses and trains. New devices offer independence to people who previously had limited mobility options, but many of them come in nonstan- dard shapes and sizes. With greater numbers of aging adults in our society, many with mobility aids, or more parents using transit with their children, transit agencies will be pressed to adapt their vehi- cles and policies. Agencies implement policies to address shortcomings, such as capacity of existing equipment, or to ensure the safety of passengers and staff. Depending on community priorities, vehicle types, services offered, or rid- ership demands, some agencies are more constrained than others. Nevertheless, some agencies consider themselves more successful than others in developing policies (and enforcing them) to help them cope with these constraints. This synthesis provides an opportunity for agencies to share their policies and procedures, while illustrating that no sin- gle set of policies will be appropriate for all. Further opportunities for research include the following areas: • Equipment tests and other research techniques might be valuable to evaluate oversized wheelchairs and other new mobility devices to determine whether they could be accommodated on transit vehicles. Further study could evaluate the potential utility and safety of bungee cords, belts, or other tools that riders may use to secure mobility devices. Research might consider universal securement devices that could accommodate the array of mobility aids, as well as other large items, used on transit vehicles. • Research regarding strollers on transit vehicles might focus on (1) stroller types and size trends, (2) vehicle configurations for best accommodating strollers (i.e., stroller seating area, high-floor versus low-floor), and (3) findings about strollers in vehicle accidents, mak- ing a determination on whether children could remain in or be removed from strollers on transit vehicles. Information gathered for this synthesis offers little direction for transit agencies in establishing a policy based on child safety findings, pointing to a gap in cur- rent transportation research. • Further research about bicycles on transit might include opportunities to evaluate promotion of folding bikes on transit vehicles or for transit agencies to offer bicycles to bus or train riders at transit stops or stations. The examples of bike rental facilities in Stockholm, Sweden; Paris, France; and Long Beach, California, show that some communities are moving in this direction. • Tests may be conducted to examine how the vari- ous policies regarding bringing large items on board, including grocery carts, wheelchairs, and different types of mobility aids, impact riders’ independence, well-being, and overall mobility. • Safety evaluations of large items as hazards or potential projectiles on buses and trains may provide some risk management tools for transit agencies. Current infor- mation to help agencies determine policies for items other than wheelchairs, based on passenger safety issues, is limited. • An evaluation of vehicle configurations and new tech- nologies might be conducted to determine how to bet- ter accommodate luggage, carts, groceries, and other large items. Research might look at capacity and utility of transit vehicles with modular/flexible spaces versus vehicles equipped with storage areas or racks. • Bus operators’ capacity to enforce agency policies, given their other responsibilities, is another topic noted in this report. Further research might help define a “rea- sonable” expectation for bus operators. Given that the overwhelming majority of bus agencies in the survey rely on drivers for enforcement, such research might assist agencies in refining operator responsibilities.