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.

23 CHAPTER FOUR SEGWAYS, SCOOTERS, AND OTHER MOBILITY DEVICES ing Council composed guidance that states, “Transportation providers may establish their own general policies regarding Segways and other devices, just as they do with respect to pets or bicycles. However, when a device is being used as a mobility device by a person with a mobility-related dis- ability, then the transportation provider must permit the person and his or her device onto the vehicle.” The council determined that Segways do not qualify as wheelchairs and, therefore, if they exceed ADA size allowances, they do not need to be permitted (U.S.DOT and FTA 2005). FIGURE 11 Segway operating in the street (courtesy: Mauritsvink on http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Segway_Amsterdam.jpg). BART adopted a policy in 2008 when a Segway ran off the platform and onto the tracks, causing a train to hit it and resulting in widespread system delays. Because other manu- facturers are entering the market, BART’s policy discusses LITERATURE REVIEW ON SEGWAYS, SCOOTERS, AND OTHER MOBILITY DEVICES AND ACCOMMODATION POLICIES “The use of non-traditional mobility aids is increasing and there is confusion and lack of uniformity in how they are accommodated,” according to the 2008 Easter Seals Proj- ect ACTION Status Report on the Use of Wheelchairs and Other Mobility Devices on Public and Private Transporta- tion (Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates 2008). The report cites examples such as Segways, orthopedic strollers (pediatric wheelchairs or “wheelchair strollers”), scooters, and wheeled walkers with seats. Oxygen tanks can also be categorized as mobility aids when their use is essential for the rider to complete a trip. Figures 10 and 11 show a scooter and a Segway. FIGURE 10 Mobility scooter (courtesy: H. Cherin, Nelson\Nygaard Associates). Segway Policies The Segway, a recent innovation gaining popularity, can be one of the most troublesome to physically accommo- date because of its size and problems with maneuverability in a confined space. Although it is not an ADA-protected mobility device, the U.S.DOT’s Disability Law Coordinat-

24 [Helsinki, Finland] Mobility scooters with separate handlebars are not transported on buses, trams or the metro because they do not fit in the space designated for wheelchairs (Helsinki Region Transport 2010). [Valley Transit, Appleton, WI] Walkers may be brought aboard but should be folded whenever possible and must not block the aisle of the bus. Bicycles, tricycles, wagons, scooters and other wheeled devices that do not qualify as ADA mobility devices, are not allowed inside the bus (Valley Transit 2009). [Link Transit, serving Chelan and Douglas Counties, Washington] Riders may also bring on board necessary medical equipment, which is or may be needed when the rider is traveling on Link Transit. Riders are allowed to use a wheeled cart for transporting carry-on items. Additional examples include mobility devices, walkers, canes, as well as oxygen and monitors. There will be no additional charge for necessary medical equipment (Link Transit 2008). [Denver RTD] Disabled passengers may board with mobility devices, such as wheelchairs, electric scooters, Segways, walkers, and crutches, although such devices should be properly stored, as necessary, outside of the aisle and in the securement area of the vehicle (RTD: Americans with Disabilities Act 2010). SURVEY RESULTS Challenges and Concerns Respondents were asked to rate to what extent bringing a mobility device—including scooters and Segways—on board a transit vehicle was an issue, concern, or challenge (Figure 12). One major clarification elicited by the responses was that of a distinction between Segways and other mobility aids. Most of the agencies that added comments noted that they had either limited or no direct experience with Segways on their vehicles. Most scooter and other mobility aid-users are persons with disabilities; Segways can function as mobility aids, but are also familiar as transport or pleasure devices. Overall, 36% of all agencies noted that Segways, scoot- ers, and other mobility aids were somewhat of an issue. After that, the other responses were roughly equally distributed, with each hovering around 20%. Figure 13 illustrates potential reasons why Segways, scooters, and other large mobility aids were regarded as somewhat or very much an issue or concern. The top response in this case was concern for the safety of the passenger with the mobility aid. Comments helped clarify the frequency of this response: four agencies noted that, owing to either “non- traditional” scooter designs or inadequate vehicle facilities, the device as an electric personal assistive mobility device (EPAMD), rather than a Segway. Anyone wishing to use an EPAMD must apply and receive a free permit and carry it with them. EPAMD riders must dismount at the fare gates and push or pull the device. However, people with disabilities can ride the device within the station after an in-person dem- onstration of their ability to ride. Neither group of riders can ride the device on the platform or in the trains, and all must use the elevator to access the platform. Although people with disabilities can use their EPAMD anytime on BART, oth- ers may use it only under the same rules as bicycles, that is, generally during off-peak times or in the reverse commute direction (Cabanatuan 2008). A Segway user of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) system had an accident wherein she lost control of the device, sending it onto the track. BART’s Segway policy is very similar to WMATA’s, which adopted its policy first in 2005. WMATA’s policy pro- hibits Segways, which it calls automatic balancing wheeled conveyances (ABWCs), on its trains during weekday hours of 7:00 to 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 to 7:00 p.m. However, ABWC users with disabilities are allowed expanded access with a permit. ABWCs are never allowed on WMATA Metrobuses (Layton 2003). County Connection in Contra Costa County, California, is an example of a suburban bus operator that allows Seg- ways on its vehicles. In its policy the device is referred to as a two-wheeled automatic balancing device (ABD), which is defined as “any upright battery powered self-balancing wheeled personal transportation device.” Riders who are not disabled may not bring the device on board unless it can be folded and stowed under the seat. Persons using the devices as mobility aids owing to disability, upon medical verifica- tion, must go through an in-person orientation at the transit administrative offices, consisting of using the lift or ramp, securement of the device, and safety rules such as turning off power. They will then be issued a blue placard with a wheelchair icon to affix to the ABD, which must be secured in the wheelchair space of the bus (Policy for the Transport of Two-Wheeled Automatic Balancing Devices 2009). Both King County Metro in Seattle and Denver Regional Transit District (RTD) also allow people with disabilities to bring Segways on their buses but require that they be secured in the wheelchair area of the vehicle because of their weight and size (King County Metro 2009). In Denver, the bus driver must visually check that the Segway is secured properly (RTD: Americans with Disabilities Act 2010). Other Mobility Devices The literature is scarce on policies dealing with other types of mobility devices. The following are some specific state- ments on scooters, walkers, and medical equipment:

25 there is a lack of effective securement techniques for larger mobility items, which compromises passenger safety. The next most frequent response was boarding/alighting delay, after which were three vehicle capacity-related concerns of equal weight (12 of 25, or 48%). FIGURE 12 Indicate whether bringing Segways, scooters, and other mobility aids on your vehicles is considered an issue/ concern/challenge for your agency. FIGURE 13 If you indicated that Segways, scooters, and other mobility aids are a very important or somewhat important concern, why is it a concern for your agency? Overview of Agency Policies People with disabilities have been using scooters, walkers, and other mobility devices for decades. As a result, a major- ity of the transit agencies sampled (25 of 40, or 63%) have developed policies and guidelines for their accommodation on board transit vehicles (Table 11). Newer to the mobility scene, the Segway has led some transit agencies to develop comprehensive policies regarding the accommodation of these gyro-stabilized two-wheeled devices, whereas some agencies have never encountered Segways, and other agen- cies have developed policies specifically prohibiting them. Most agencies with policies regarding mobility devices that have not faced the issue of accommodating a Segway have not updated their guidelines since the 1980s and 1990s. Twelve of the surveyed agencies updated their policies for accommodating mobility devices after 2002, when the Seg- way was first introduced. Not all of these policies address the Segway: many of them recognize that all mobility devices that conform to size guidelines may be accommodated. TABLE 11 POLICIES: SEGWAYS, SCOOTERS, AND OTHER MOBILITY AIDS ABOARD REGULAR TRANSIT VEHICLES (REGULAR BUSES AND TRAINS) Yes 63% (25) No 37% (15) n = 40. Four of the surveyed agencies have never encountered a Segway and indicated that they have not developed a policy for that reason. According to a survey respondent from one agency, the agency does “not have a Segway policy at this time. However, if it is a mobility aid device, we would make arrangements, providing that it doesn’t affect safety, to assist the customer as best as possible.” Accommodating Scooters When agencies that operate buses indicated having a policy covering mobility devices, they were asked whether scoot- ers were allowed on buses. Twenty-one of 22 agencies (95%) allow scooters unconditionally on buses if they meet size standards. The remaining agency, SunTran, requires four- point securement for scooters on buses, and the passenger must transfer to a seat. Most agency respondents commented that their agency would allow any manual or battery-pow- ered mobility device that fits on a bus. Nine of 21 agencies require the scooter to be no larger than 30 in. by 48 in., the size of a “common wheelchair.” None of the other agencies have specific size limitations or requirements for buses. All of the rail agencies allow scoot- ers, and one agency indicated that the only size limitation is that scooters must be able to fit in elevators to access rail platforms in the train station. Weight limits generally reflect ADA standards of 600 lb. Accommodating Segways Although scooters are universally accepted on board buses, Segways are not. Thirteen of 23 agencies (57%) have policies that allow Segways on buses; the other 10 agencies (43%) pro- hibit Segways (Table 12). All of the agencies that operate rail allow Segways aboard trains, subject to some limitations. Agencies that allow Segways on board buses generally allow them only for people who use them as a mobility device. Of the 13 agencies with policies to accommodate Segways on buses, only three allow anyone to bring a Seg- way on board; the others allow them only for people who use them as a mobility device.

26 Agency Limitations and Requirements for Mobility Devices Five agencies require an inspection of at least some mobil- ity aids, including Segways and scooters, before they can be used on transit. These include the three agencies that require Segway permits—SunTran, CCCTA, and BART—as well as Greater Glens Falls Transit and UTA, if mobility devices are to be used on paratransit. Vehicle capacity is the primary contributing factor to whether or not an agency specifically includes a limitation in its policy on the number of mobility devices allowed on a vehicle. Eighteen of 23 agencies (78%) have a policy that limits the number of mobility devices allowed on vehicles, primarily on their buses (Table 15). In most cases, these limits match those of wheelchairs, with most bus operators indicating vehicles have two, sometimes three, wheelchair securement areas that are also to be used for other mobility devices (see Figure 14). Two of the 23 agencies commented that a limit on the number of mobility devices is at the driv- er’s discretion. TABLE 15 THE POLICY LIMITS THE NUMBER OF MOBILITY DEVICES ALLOWED ON VEHICLES Yes 78% (18) No 22% (5) n = 23. FIGURE 14 Passenger uses a motorized wheelchair on the bus lift (courtesy: H. Cherin, Nelson\Nygaard Associates). Passengers with scooters and other mobility devices must secure these devices in the wheelchair spaces (18 of 24 agen- cies, or 75%). On trains, where securement is not generally required (or available), the only limitation in most cases is TABLE 12 SEGWAYS ALLOWED ON SOME OR ALL OF BUSES Yes 57% (13) No 43% (10) n = 23. Six of the agencies that operate rail allow Segways on the trains, and they all allow them to be brought on trains by anyone, although some agencies such as WMATA and BART have restrictions regarding the times that Segways can be used on trains by people who do not require them as a mobility device. Most agencies do not require a permit to use a Segway, but three of the 15 agencies (20%) that allow Segways require a permit (Table 13). SunTran riders must have a note from a doctor that says the device must be used so a permit can be issued. CCCTA requires Segway users to go the agency’s office to demonstrate their ability to maneuver the Segway on ramps and lifts, and in securement areas. BART offers two types of permits: one for people who use a Segway as a mobil- ity device and one for users who do not have disabilities. TABLE 13 SEGWAY PERMIT ISSUANCE Yes 20% (3) No 80% (12) n = 15. Accommodating Other Mobility Devices Twenty-four of the agencies surveyed have policies for mobil- ity aids other than scooters and Segways, and 18 of them (82%) allow other mobility aids on transit (Table 14). Almost all agencies that allow for other mobility aids indicated that walkers are the most common on board vehicles, but canes and crutches were also noted. Some agencies, such as Com- munity Transit, require walkers to be folded or secured with straps. A few agencies specifically noted in the survey com- ments that any mobility device is accommodated except those powered by gasoline or other combustible fuels. TABLE 14 THE POLICY ALLOWS OTHER TYPES OF MOBILITY AIDS (OTHER THAN SEGWAYS, SCOOTERS, AND WHEELCHAIRS) Yes 82% (18) No 18% (4) n = 22.

27 policy is “ineffective.” That respondent commented that “sig- nificant variance in mobility device design makes securement difficult and time consuming” and noted that many mobility devices “are not designed for transport securement.” FIGURE 16 Segways, scooters, and other mobility devices: Which of the following types of assistance may operators provide (buses) (n =31)? FIGURE 17 How effective do you think the agency’s policy governing Segways, scooters, and other mobility devices is (n = 23)? Some of the concerns raised by survey respondents were with scooters: that they can be large and difficult to secure on buses. Four of the respondents with policies cov- ering mobility devices commented that their agency had not yet addressed Segways or other two-wheel mobility aids because they had not yet been raised as an issue. Three of these respondents noted that they expect the issue to arise in the future and that their agency will need to amend its poli- cies when the time comes. All agency representatives—whether their agency has a policy in place or not—were asked if their agency had ever considered implementing restrictions on Segways, scooters, or other mobility devices but had not done so. Nine of the 38 respondents (24%) replied that their agencies had considered restrictions (Table 16). One agency—Metro Transit in Madison, Wisconsin— had prohibited Segways on all vehicles, but after an on-site demonstration by an individual who uses one as a mobility aid and getting input from the individual on securement rec- ommendations, the agency changed its policy (see the brief space on the train for mobility aids (see Table 15). None of the agencies operating rail services identified a specific limit to the number of scooters, Segways, or other mobility aids on trains. Among the agencies surveyed, only TriMet’s policy specifically requires that two-wheeled mobility devices be stored underneath a seat if they cannot be otherwise secured. Driver Assistance Eleven of 21 agencies (52%) require drivers to assist passen- gers with Segways, scooters, and other mobility devices (see Figure 15). The other 10 agencies that responded noted that drivers may assist passengers with these mobility devices. As shown in Figure 16, of the agencies that operate buses, almost all of them expect operators to offer ramp or lift access and to secure their mobility aid. Only six of the 21 agencies (29%) encourage or allow operators to assist with passengers’ belongings. FIGURE 15 Driver assists a passenger using a walker with wheels off a fixed-route vehicle operated by TheBus (courtesy: J. Goldman, Nelson\Nygaard Associates). Effectiveness of Policy for Segways, Scooters, and Other Mobility Devices Survey respondents were asked to rate the effectiveness of agency policies regarding Segways, scooters, and other mobility aids (Figure 17). Seventeen of 23 respondents (74%) indicated that the agency’s policy was “effective” or “very effective.” Five rated the agency’s policy a “3” (“neither effec- tive nor ineffective”), and one indicated that the agency’s

28 summary). One large agency that operates buses and trains had very restrictive policies for Segways initially but relaxed them once it was clear they were not significantly impacting operations. Another agency considered a permit program for Segways but decided against it. TABLE 16 RESTRICTIONS REGARDING SEGWAYS AND OTHER DEVICES WERE CONSIDERED, BUT NOT IMPLEMENTED Yes 24% (9) No 76% (29) n = 38. One agency had sought to limit any mobility device that could not be tied down or secured within the vehicle. The sur- vey respondent from that agency commented that sometimes mobility equipment includes notices “placed on it by the man- ufacturer stating that it is not to be used on transit vehicles.” SEGWAYS, SCOOTERS, AND OTHER MOBILITY AIDS ON PARATRANSIT Although one might presume that any mobility aid would be accommodated by paratransit vehicles, the survey results illustrate this is not the case. The U.S.DOT provides only guidance regarding Segways, and many agencies have not considered Segways to be mobility aids that are accommo- dated on paratransit vehicles. The survey results suggest the disparity among answers (near-universal coverage of scoot- ers and other mobility aids versus half accommodation of Segways) is the result of Segways not having been addressed at the federal level in the United States; as a result, some agencies are still developing their Segway policies both on regular routes as well as on paratransit services. Only two agencies commented that their policy for these devices is the same on paratransit as on fixed route services. Many explained, either referencing the act directly or express- ing its requirements directly, that they follow the standard reg- ulations set forth by the ADA. Segways are not yet a universal device; one midsized agency explained, “we have never been asked to transport a Segway” on paratransit. In responding “no” to accommodating Segways, VOTRAN clarified, “We have not [had] requests for Segways. We accommodate other mobility aids, walkers, scooters, etc., as outlined by ADA.” Figure 18 presents information about which mobility aids are accommodated on paratransit vehicles. Several agencies also noted the ADA’s definition of “wheelchairs in common use” in reporting their paratransit policies. A Canadian agency (not governed by ADA) added that “Scooters, wheelchairs (with occupant) must have dimensions and weight that can be safely accommodated on the vehicle lift.” FIGURE 18 Are Segways, scooters, and other mobility aids accommodated on paratransit vehicles (n = 29)? MARTA encourages riders not to stay on their scooter on the vehicle lift, unless necessary. According to the agen- cy’s public information, “Scooters are often unstable on lift equipment, and they may exceed the ADA allowable dimensions and weight. Some scooters also come with a warning from the manufacturer that they should not be used as seats on moving vehicles. Customers may ride standard scooters on the lift, but it is strongly recommended that our customers transfer to a Paratransit vehicle seat, whenever possible” (MARTA 2010). Another common theme in the agencies’ responses was that of proper securement of mobility aids on paratransit vehicles. “Oversize wheelchairs,” a small agency noted, “can present a problem as they cannot always be tied down with conventional straps.” Two agencies mentioned that their policies include driver assistance in the securement process, with one describing the procedure: “Drivers must leave their seat to assist and secure [a] mobility device using a 4-point restraint if possible.” It added that “passengers cannot be denied ridership if we cannot secure.” ONE AGENCY’S EXPERIENCE: METRO TRANSIT, MADISON, WISCONSIN—LEARNING SAFE OPERATION OF A SEGWAY FROM A USER Staff at Metro Transit first became aware of Segways in Madison when, in 2005, a local bicycle shop began to rent them for people to use on the local bike trails. Recogniz- ing that the transit system might encounter passengers at a bus stop expecting to bring them on buses, the agency rented two Segways for staff in operations, maintenance, and administration to try on the vehicles. Staff boarded and alighted on the bus lifts and ramps, tried to navigate them down the narrow aisles of the vehicles, and tried to secure them with the vehicle tie-downs. Based on their tests, staff made recommendations to the Transit and Parking Com- mission for establishment of a formal policy that would pro- hibit Segways from being allowed on buses until there was a way to secure them. The policy was passed and remains in place today.

29 Three years later, a young man in his 20s with a disability contacted agency staff regarding his need for a Segway as a mobility device and his interest in taking the Segway on the bus to attend school. Although the agency’s policy prohib- iting Segways was in place, staff invited the man to dem- onstrate how he used his Segway. According to the Transit Service Manager, “He went to Metro Transit’s garage and demonstrated agility and excellent control of the device. He showed he could maneuver quickly and safely up a ramp and within a bus. He pulled a bungee cord out of his backpack and secured the device in the wheelchair securement area” (Gullickson 4/8/2010). Impressed by what they saw, staff determined there was no reason to deny access to this man. They made an informal allowance to accommodate him and his Segway on buses. Later the same year, after an insurance company audit of the system turned up questions about allowing the Segway aboard the vehicle, agency staff invited the insurance com- pany to meet with the man who used the Segway. Following another demonstration of how he boarded and maneuvered on the bus, the insurance company’s attorney agreed that the Segway presented no hazard. The insurance company drafted a new Segway policy for use by its transit agency clients, supporting Metro Transit’s accommodation of the Segway-using passenger. Although nobody else has requested to bring a Segway on board Metro Transit buses, the Transit Service Manager notes that Metro Transit will accommodate other persons with disabilities using Segways as a mobility device. The agency had hoped to purchase tie-downs designed for Seg- ways but has been unable to find a manufacturer that pro- duces them.