This is the archival website for the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA). It is not kept up to date. Please visit the SFMTA website for current information. SFMTA Multimodal Accessibility Advisory Committee (MAAC) > May 17, 2012, minutes |
|
Minutes of the Call to order: A meeting of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency's Multi-modal Accessibility Advisory Committee was held at the offices of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency on May 17, 2012. The meeting convened at 1 p.m., Vice Chair Lee presiding, and Mr. Wong, Secretary. Members in attendance: Les Clark, Ed Evans, Jessica Ellis, Marc Grossman, Miro Kielbus, David Longa, Jeanne Lynch (via phone), Bruce Morgan, Vernon Smith, Roland Wong, Byron Yan, Kevin Lee, Joseph Flanagan, Randall Glock Members not in attendance: Jan Copriviza, Elizabeth Dawson, Jean Kempf, all of whom had excused absences Guests in attendence: jakkee bryson, Jean M. Green, Jane Redmond Approval of Agenda: Motion was made by Mr. Glock and seconded to approve the agenda with the insertion between items 3 and 4 of a presentation on the subway platform display and public address system, to be presented by Mr. Frank Lau. Motion Carried. Approval of Minutes: There were no minutes to approve at this meeting. Minutes from the April meeting will be included with the meeting materials for the June 21 meeting. Public comment: Jakkee Bryson stated that she is concerned with lack of sensitivity drivers on 14 and 49 Lines are displaying along the South Van Ness reroute. Drivers are not kneeling the bus; deploying lift. There is a general lack of sensitivity to seniors and people with disabilities Items for Discussion: Subway platform display and PA system Frank Lau, Engineer, SFMTA Frank Lau gave a presentation on the design proposals for the new platform display signs and public address system for use in the Muni Metro. The presentation covered the proposed signage in the subways, with a proposal to move to a much larger, colored sign with room for three lines of display. The third line of text, located at the bottom of the display, would be used for public announcements. The other two lines would display Next Muni arrival information for each line. The display would depict each line using the existing "bubbles" for the lines, with two bubbles depicting a two car train, and one bubble depicting a one car train. Beside each bubble would be the arrival prediction for the next two runs of each train line. When a train arrives the Next Muni prediction information will shift to the bottom of the display. The Route of the arriving Train displayed in larger text, which will occupy the entire two topmost lines of the display screen. The existing public address system will be replaced. The new one will announce all text displayed on the new display systems. It should also have much improved acoustics. We are also proposing to place a display sign on the concourse level of each station, near the fare gates. This display sign will display info on arriving trains on the side facing the non-paid area of the station, and surface transportation arrival information on the side of the display screen facing the paid area. Two signs will be provided on the concourse area, one for inbound, one for outbound. All of the new display signs are double sided. Member Comments on this item: Mr. Kielbus: Will any changes to routes or short lines be communicated? Also, yellow text would be more beneficial than the white text, due to the higher contrast levels. The white text is just not as easy to see. Also, can we make sure any emergency announcements are made via text--evacuations, etc.? Mr. Glock: If the prediction information is run to off next muni, I hope that it is accurate. What you are proposing here is good -- What is the time line for implementation? Answer: 2013 is the estimated date for implementation for these displays on the Platform Level. Placement of the displays on the Mezzanine Level has not approved by BART yet, but this will be included in the Request for Proposals as an option. Mr. Morgan: You talked about the public address system, does this cover the public address system on the actual train-- It is lousy. The public address system in the stations is also bad. Mr. Yan: I see that the signs on the platform level do not have inbound out outbound displayed on them, only the ones on the mezzanine do. Why is this? Answer: Signs on the platform level are placed on either the inbound or outbound side of the platform, and only visible from that side. Because of this, we do not need to indicate which direction the information is for. Mr. Longa: I hope you are planning to do a better job of cleaning the new displays than you are doing with the present displays -- The displays out on the T Lie are so dirty you can barely read them. Mr. Wong: Would you provide copy of this Power Point to the SFMTA MAAC? Mr. Yan: How do you figure out which line is arriving first on these new displays? Answer: You would look for the line with the smallest number nest to it. That line will be the next to arrive at the station. Mr. Evans: Sorry I am late. Which sign will be displayed where? These are to replace the current scrolling signs? Public Comments on this item: Ms. Green: Is it possible to display the route information in alphabetical order? The current way of organizing the lines looks confusing. Answer: The lines are currently arranged in the order that these routes leave the subway tunnel; with the N and J off to one side, and the K, L M, and T on the other. Ms. Williams (SFMTA Staff): Any signage we place on the Mezzanine level needs to also be placed at the station elevator(s). Also, the public address system should include announcements about elevator outages. Announcement: On Monday will be poster in station announcing public comment period May 21 -June 24. There will also be an in station demonstration of these new display from June 4-8. What constitutes a major service change Julie Kirschbaum, Manager, Operations Julie gave a presentation on what a major Service Change is. Part of title 6 requirements are to define a major service change so that we can consider the effects this change will have on minority and low income populations. Staff has developed a definition but the SFMTA is seeking public comment to see if we need to expand/ re define our definition. The current definition is: A) A system wide change of 5 percent or more service hours. This can be a decrease in service or an increase. B) Any change to a specific route which changes the route's service hours by 25 percent or more. C) Any change in the span of service for a specific route by more than 4 hours. D) Any introduction of a new route. E) Any elimination of a segment of a route that is greater than 1/3 of a mile. As an example, both the service cuts and recent service restorations meet this definition. A small tweak, such as beefing up am peak service does not currently qualify as a major service change. If we eliminated the 14 to Daly City and instead had the 14L cover the same route, this does not constitute a major service change. Only if service along the route is entirely eliminated. SFMTA Staff is looking for input from the SFMTA MAAC. Member Comments on this item: Mr. Glock: Most of what you are thinking of is good; sounds like a major change is defined as a major service change. The process is good. I think we should have public hearings on major changes and major routes, and come to the SFMTA MAAC on smaller service changes. Ms. Lynch: Speaking for the Richmond District, we are going to continue to, and already have, an increase in 38 Line ridership. Buses are more and more packed. Why is the 38 Geary not included in Travel Time Reduction Proposals? Why is the Geary corridor not being included for service improvements? Answer: The reason the 38 Geary is not included is that Transit Effectiveness Project calls for improvements on this line already. In addition to the improvement called for in the Transit Effectiveness Project, we are also converting the 38 Geary into a Bus Rapid transit Line. We recently received a bond for improved transit signal priority on the entire 38 line, which should improve things on this line. Ms. Lynch: There is lots of opposition to Bus Rapid Transit out in Richmond. Has this had an impact on the existing transit out here, is there less transit offered as a response to the opposition to the plans for Bus Rapid Transit? Answer: No. Mr. Morgan: Are the upcoming changes in service on the 8x something that is a major service change? Answer: No, the 8x Shuttle was a supplement to the 8x. It served the same route, and was done to relieve crowding on 8x for people who did not want to take the detour, which was put in place due to construction of the Central Subway. Beginning this summer we will be rerouting everything off Stockton. Mr. Kielbus: Two things. I think continued use of the old paper passes is not too beneficial; Clipper allow you to collect data on customer trips, which is much more use to the SFMTA is planning these types of changes. I believe that changes to service requiring customers to make multiple transfers may have a negative impact on customers, and could also constitute a major service change. Is there any analysis of multiple transfers and the impact that this has on customers? Also in a similar vein, is there any plan to have a multiple transfer discount? Mr. Evans: Has there been any study on effects of school children crowding certain transit lines? What about the Impact of reduced school trippers? Mr. Wong: Can we receive an electronic copy of these definitions and examples? Announcement: Feedback on this topic is needed by the next meeting (June 21). Proposed Updates to the SFMTA Stroller Policy John Haley, Director of Operations john.haley@sfmta.com | 415.701.4588 Mr. Haley updated the MAAC on the stroller policy. We currently do not have a formal policy, just a guideline to have customers fold their stroller. Mr. Haley talked to various interested parties to discuss their concerns. If the SFMTA makes any changes, they will be communicated through an operator bulletin. Currently, we are leaning toward allowing customers with strollers to request and use lift, board with the stroller unfolded and be allowed to keep the child in the stroller. The only requirement on customers would be to not to block the isle and to put the brake on the stroller. There would be no designated area for a stroller; it would be up to parent to make sure the child is safe. This policy is still evolving, but this is current thinking on this issue. Member Comments on this item: Mr. Glock: The main issue is getting on the bus with all the clutter that is currently on the bus. There are too many objects; strollers are getting bigger, which only adds to the clutter, carts, blockages, etc. I like the current practice, it seems to be working. Answer: From a safety and operation perspective, we agree that the current policy works, but the concern is that it is not customer friendly. Mr. Kielbus: Has anyone asked drivers about this? Are there currently issues with drivers confronting customers in strollers? What is the current condition regarding complaints from customers on strollers not being accommodated? Has there been any increase in stroller usage or complaints on this? Answer: We currently do not have any data on stroller usage. Everything we have is anecdotal. Complaint wise, most deal with customers being inconvenienced by having to fold their stroller. We do not have data, such as a five year trend on if these complaints are increasing. Regarding drivers, most are comfortable with existing policy. We also do not want to designate zones for strollers, as this may invite passenger conflicts and place an additional burden on drivers. New Business: Mr. Kielbus: I am concerned with the upcoming policy change on All Door Boarding; what effect will this have on Seniors and Disabled. Mr. Evans: I am concerned with the continued lack of enforcement at the bus shelters. Smoking, vagrants, etc. -- All of this continues with no attempt to stop it. Also, the buses need to pull into the bus zone, and not stick out in the travel lane. Also, I do not like Friday's planned trip to view the bus in the Woods Yard. This is a bad idea. Why can't we have them move the bus here? Mr. Glock: Could we have an update on the Better Market Street Plan? Also on Van Ness Bus Rapid Transit and the larger Transit Effectiveness Project in general. Mr. Evans: Could we also have a presentation on enforcement -- or get someone in here who can address the smoking at shelters issue? SFMTA MAAC Member and Officer Nominations The following individuals were nominated for a two year term of membership on the SFMTA MAAC, commencing on July 1, 2012 and ending on June 30, 2014:
The following individual was nominated for a one year term as secretary to the SFMTA MAAC, commencing on July 1, 2012 and ending on June 30, 2013:
The following individuals were nominated for a one year term as Chair of the SFMTA MAAC, commencing on July 1, 2012 and ending on June 30, 2013:
The following individuals were nominated for a one year term as Vice-Chair of the SFMTA MAAC, commencing on July 1, 2012 and ending on June 30, 2013:
The following individuals were nominated for a one year term as Liaison of the SFMTA MAAC, commencing on July 1, 2012 and ending on June 30, 2013:
Important Announcement and Clarification: At the meeting the membership dictated that members could not be nominated for more than one office. It was decided that members who had nominated themselves for more than one office should choose which office they wanted to run for. After the meeting it was discovered that this action is specifically prohibited in Robert's Rules of Order. Our bylaws dictate that we follow Robert's Rules of Order. To remedy this, staff contacted each member who previously had un-nominated themselves for a given office and gave them the option of re-nominating themselves. All individuals who had previously been asked to un-nominate themselves chose to re-nominate themselves. The above list of nominees reflects this. SFMTA Staff apologizes for any confusion this has caused. Announcements: The Mayor's Office on Disability will be meeting to discuss the Transit Effectiveness Project on Friday, May 18, from 1-4 p.m. in City Hall, Room 400. On Friday, May 18, CARA will be meeting with State legislators here in San Francisco at the State Building. This is part of the greater Senior Lobby Day, which is happening nationally. Adjourn: The meeting was adjourned at 3 p.m. |
©2000-2013 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency. All rights reserved. |
311