12,201 research outputs found
Advanced Low-Floor Vehicle (ALFV) Specification Research
This report details the results of research on market comparison, operational cost efficiencies, and prototype tests conducted on a novel design for an Advanced Low Floor Vehicle (ALFV), flex-route transit bus. Section I describes how the need for such a bus arises from a combination of diminishing transit funding from the federal government and demographic and transportation factors. Section II describes the unique features of this bus design that render it suitable for rural and urban operation, including improved transit passenger and wheelchair accessibility, reduced maintenance, structural design features, safety provisions, and the technical specifications of this design. Section III details the potential differences in capital and operational costs of procuring and operating this bus in a fleet. Potential cost reductions due to the long-life vehicle concept, maneuverability, operational savings (from APTA Bus Roadeo tests), and reserve fleet savings are explored. Section IV refers to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) new model bus tests (“Altoona Testing”). However, at the this time, the Altoona Bus Test Report for these tests is not yet released by the bus manufacturer, Ride Solution, Inc., as is its right under the Bus Testing Regulation. The report must be released to the public before this bus can be purchased by a transit agency using FTA funds. In addition to the standard Altoona Bus Test, additional research was conducted to determine the turning ability, suspension travel, ramp travel index, field of view for the driver, compliance to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, and timed assessment of wheelchair securement. Section IV also presents the results of these tests. Section V presents results from a market comparison that included the buses in this mid-size category that were tested at Altoona and are expected to be available for FTA grantees to purchase. The specifications and performance of the ALFV bus are compared with these buses. Section VI presents a flex-route utilization plan, and Section VII provides the results from a survey of transit professionals about their interest in the features of this bus design. Section VIII gives Ride Solution’s experience in developing the concept for ALFV. Conclusions of this report are presented in Section IX, followed by the references and appendices
Ergonomic standards for pedestrian areas for disabled people: literature review and consultations
As part of the project for the Transport and Road Research
Laboratory concerned with the development of design guidance for
pedestrian areas and footways to satisfy the needs of disabled
and elderly people, a thorough examination of the literature was
required. In addition the literature search was to be
complemented by a wide-ranging series of discussions with local
authorities, organisations representing the interests of elderly
and disabled people, and other interested agencies. This Working
Paper sets out the findings of this exercise.
The objective of the literature review and the consultations was
to identify the key impediments for elderly and disabled people
when using pedestrian areas and footways. The current guidelines
and standards relating to footways, pedestrianised areas and
access to buildings were to be identified and their adequacy
commented upon, as were the conflicts such recommendations raise
between various groups of disabled people and with able-bodied
people. The consultations were intended to provide greater
insights into what the literature highlighted, and to suggest
possible solutions.
The literature review produced over 400 key references and a list
of 35 impediments. A more detailed examination of the literature
and the consultations reduced this list to six key impediments
namely: parking; public transport waiting areas; movement
distances; surface conditions; ramps, and information provision.
The type and scale of problem created by the above impediments
for various groups of disabled and elderly people are discussed,
together with their measurement and assessment. The type and
adequacy of existing design standards and guidance relating to
these impediments are also outlined
Enhanced Accessibility for People with Disabilities Living in Urban Areas
[Excerpt] People with disabilities constitute a significant proportion of the poor in developing countries. If internationally agreed targets on reducing poverty are to be reached, it is critical that specific measures be taken to reduce the societal discrimination and isolation that people with disabilities continue to face. Transport is an important enabler of strategies to fight poverty through enhancing access to education, employment, and social services.
This project aims to further the understanding of the mobility and access issues experienced by people with disabilities in developing countries, and to identify specific steps that can be taken to start addressing problems. A major objective of the project is to compile a compendium of guidelines that can be used by government authorities, advocacy groups, and donor/loan agencies to improve the access of people with disabilities to transport and other services in urban areas
How a Diverse Research Ecosystem Has Generated New Rehabilitation Technologies: Review of NIDILRR’s Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers
Over 50 million United States citizens (1 in 6 people in the US) have a developmental, acquired, or degenerative disability. The average US citizen can expect to live 20% of his or her life with a disability. Rehabilitation technologies play a major role in improving the quality of life for people with a disability, yet widespread and highly challenging needs remain. Within the US, a major effort aimed at the creation and evaluation of rehabilitation technology has been the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) sponsored by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research. As envisioned at their conception by a panel of the National Academy of Science in 1970, these centers were intended to take a “total approach to rehabilitation”, combining medicine, engineering, and related science, to improve the quality of life of individuals with a disability. Here, we review the scope, achievements, and ongoing projects of an unbiased sample of 19 currently active or recently terminated RERCs. Specifically, for each center, we briefly explain the needs it targets, summarize key historical advances, identify emerging innovations, and consider future directions. Our assessment from this review is that the RERC program indeed involves a multidisciplinary approach, with 36 professional fields involved, although 70% of research and development staff are in engineering fields, 23% in clinical fields, and only 7% in basic science fields; significantly, 11% of the professional staff have a disability related to their research. We observe that the RERC program has substantially diversified the scope of its work since the 1970’s, addressing more types of disabilities using more technologies, and, in particular, often now focusing on information technologies. RERC work also now often views users as integrated into an interdependent society through technologies that both people with and without disabilities co-use (such as the internet, wireless communication, and architecture). In addition, RERC research has evolved to view users as able at improving outcomes through learning, exercise, and plasticity (rather than being static), which can be optimally timed. We provide examples of rehabilitation technology innovation produced by the RERCs that illustrate this increasingly diversifying scope and evolving perspective. We conclude by discussing growth opportunities and possible future directions of the RERC program
Appraisers and the Fair Housing Law: Accessibility Requirements for the Disabled
In 1988 the Fair Housing Act of 1968 was amended to include the "handicapped" as being protected from discrimination in multiunit housing. The three general categories of discriminatory acts are refusal to make or allow reasonable physical modifications to a covered multiunit dwelling, refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules and practices, and failure to follow certain design and construction standards. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has issued Fair Housing Accessibility Guidelines, which provide technical guidance on multiunit dwelling design and construction standards. This study examines these guidelines and the impact the Act may have upon value when discriminatory practices are observed.
An Analysis of the Service Provider’s Legal Duty to Make Reasonable Adjustments: The Little Mix Saga
The recent dispute between a mother and organisers of a Little Mix concert is a controversial issue for the entertainment industry. Although the Supreme Court decision in Paulley v FirstGroup plc 2017 UKSC 4
has attempted to clarify this duty placed on service providers, the law still remains unclear whether this duty involves access to an experience enjoyed by non-disabled individuals. It is argued that this is partly due to the legal uncertainty of the reasonable adjustment duty contained in the Equality Act 2010 . This intervention will discuss the dispute in detail as it leaves service providers unclear as to what is, and is not, a reasonable adjustment for the purposes of discharging their legal duty to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010 . Any ruling in this case might clarify the nature of the duty and the extent to which an organiser is required to make reasonable adjustments for disabled individuals where the core service is an ‘experience’. How far this duty extends remains uncertain. The author will consider how the failure to make reasonable adjustments may in some cases exclude disabled service users from mainstream activities enjoyed by non-disabled individuals. Theoretical models used to explain disability will also be explored to assist in understanding the duty owed by a service provider
Justice in transport policy
For the last hundred years or so, transport and planning systems have been based on the assumption that people had access to a car. What happens to people who have no such opportunity? Rural shops and facilities close, urban city centres degenerate leaving poorer people with little or no local goods and services. The increase in movement accorded to that part of the population with access to a car has left the other part of the population worse off than they had been before. This has had particularly bad consequences for those members of society who are already losing out, especially poor, elderly, disabled and young people. These people are dependent on others: neighbours, family or friends (if they have them), or what society chooses to dispense (if they do not).This is often seen as a transport, urban or rural planning problem. However, it is much more serious than that. People are being left without access to fundamental aspects of society: health care, education, legal and electoral rights in addition to affordable nutritious food. As a result they are losing out on the benefits of living within a society because the transport system is unable to accommodate their needs. The direction taken by transport and planning over the past hundred years or so has managed to open up enormous opportunities for some elements of society at the expense of restricting access to basic rights for others.The problem now is that society has designed itself to be inaccessible for certain parts of the population who have no means of reaching what are often considered basic aspects of modern life. These people are excluded from full participation in society as a result of a conscious decision to encourage movement rather than access. This has the unintended consequence that those who are unable, for whatever reason, to avail themselves of the means of movement, are also unable to obtain independent access to activities to which they are theoretically entitled as of right. This is inherently unjust.Transport should be available to all in a form that they can use independently because it is the means by which access to the fundamental activities is obtained. In general, this means what we might call ?public transport?: a transport system which the public is able to use. This suggests that the default transport system ? the one that should be designed and implemented as a starting point ? is the public transport system in its widest sense. Design for car traffic is secondary: it includes one part of the population at the expense of the rest. Devising measures that will help planners to plan such a system and which will demonstrate that access is sufficient is a matter of urgency. Such a measure would allow society to decide exactly what it means by ?sufficient? transport ? e.g. maximum walking time to a doctor?s surgery, fresh food, school ? and to allocate funds accordingly. The provision of accessible transport is a necessary element of making a just society
- …