Members Present:
- Al Cormier, Cor Al Services, Chair
- Spiros Bastas, Royal Taxi
- Jo-Ann Bentley, Canadian Hearing Society
- James Bisson, Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario/City of Mississauga
- Earl Black, Independent Living Resource Centre
- Mark Brose, Transportation Action Now
- Silvan Bruno, GO Transit
- Tony Carnovale, Community Living Ontario
- Katrina Carrera, Association des municipalités Francophones de l'Ontario
- David Carroll, Ontario Motor Coach Association and School Bus Association
- Sandy Chan, Ministry of Education (represented by Vanissa Szeto)
- Alex Grant, HAGI Community Services for Independence (represented by David Stephens)
- Sharon Hambleton, Ontario Federation of Labour (May 30 only)
- Blyth Helman, Ottawa-Carleton District School Board
- Glenn Johnston, Toronto Transit Commission
- Kim Lambert, Ministry of Transportation (represented by Rob Barnes)
- Caroline Lonsdale, Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
- Lesley Anne MacDonald, Canadian National Institute for the Blind (May 29 only)
- Alex Milojevic, Assocation of Municipalties of Ontario, City of Brampton, member of OCTA/CUTA
- Susan Enid Mintz, The Kidney Foundation of Canada (May 30 only)
- Tim Nolan, Council of Ontario Universities
- Kelly Palecnzy, Ontario Community Transportation Association
- Lloyd Pollock, Dignity Transportation Incorporated
- Danielle Svec, Life Skills Institute (Bloorview Kids Rehab)
- Tanya Wanio, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
Absent Members:
- George Ansell, Ministry of Northern Development and Mines
- Valmay Barkey, Ontario Community Support Association
Support Unit:
- Nancy Bestic, Canadian Standards Association
- Kevin Boehmer, Canadian Standards Association
- Bob Sherman, Accessibility Directorate of Ontario
- Linda Markowsky, Accessibility Directorate of Ontario (absent)
- Mike Dodd, Canadian Standards Association, Transportation SDC Secretary
- Mansur Rahim, Accessibility Directorate of Ontario Liaison
- Jill Sawchuk, Accessibility Directorate of Ontario
- Michael Sullivan, Accessibility Directorate of Ontario
- Nelly Tion, Accessibility Directorate of Ontario
- Scot Weeres, Accessibility Directorate of Ontario
M4.1 Call to Order
M. Dodd, project manager at Canadian Standards Association, called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. on May 29.
M4 .2 Housekeeping and Facility Safety
M. Dodd advised members of the housekeeping issues and facility safety procedures for the meeting.
M4.3 Opening Remarks and Membership Introductions
A. Cormier welcomed everyone to the meeting.
M4.4 Approval of the Agenda
The agenda was accepted as distributed.
M4.5 Approval of the Minutes to the Last Meeting
The minutes to the last meeting held on April 27 - 28, 2006 were sent out by e-mail on May 15, 2006.
There were some suggestions for the minutes to Meeting 3 and the Support Unit was asked to reissue them. The revised minutes were presented to the members on May 30. Members asked to have until June 2 to review the revised minutes.
M4.6 Membership
The membership of the Transportation Standards Development Committee (T-SDC) was reviewed. It was announced that
- V. Barkey would replace S. Thorning on the committee as a representative of the Ontario Community Support Association; and
- A decision was made to not replace B. Brown on the committee at this point in the process. M. Brose’s objection to this decision was noted.
M4.7 Action Items from the Last Meeting
M4.7.1 Transportation School Buses
Action Item 1. M2.4.2 – R. Barnes to investigate whether school buses fall within provincial jurisdiction.
R. Barnes reported that MTO’s Carrier Safety Policy Office staff would not be reporting back on jurisdictional responsibilities. Instead, they would make a presentation at this meeting regarding the T-SDC’s proposed performance requirements and MTO’s existing safety requirements.
- At the last meeting V. Szeto indicated that she could report back on what is being done across the province by the school boards to address accessibility on school buses.
- At Meeting 4, V. Szeto presented on school transportation. The concepts covered in her presentation were considered and revisions were made to the draft initial proposed standard in the addition of a new Clause 9.3.
- D. Smith of MTO made a presentation on a comparison of the draft initial proposed performance requirements and the current MTO safety requirements. Many barrier areas in the draft initial proposed standard were identified as being advanced, in terms of technical specifications, than what is in Ontario Regulation 629.
M4.7.2 Provincial Jurisdiction of Water-based Transportation
Action Item 2. M2.4.3 – R. Barnes to investigate if a freighter canoe, water taxis and harbours fall within provincial jurisdiction.
R. Barnes reported that R. Di Mauro from MTO’s Legal Services Office would be reporting back on jurisdictional responsibilities at this meeting.
R. Di Mauro presented and suggested that
- Water taxis can be considered ferries and the jurisdictional analysis for water taxis is the same as that for ferries.
- The issue of freighter canoes was not as clear, especially if the freighter canoe is operated by an Indian Band.
- Provincial laws of general application can apply to harbours, which fall within federal jurisdiction, as long as the provincial legislation has nothing to do with navigation and shipping, which is under federal control, is of a local and private nature, does not contradict any federal legislation, and does not significantly impact the operation or management of the harbour.
M4.7.3 Terms of Reference for Consultants
Action Item 3: M3.9.1 – S. Weeres to provide a copy of the Terms of Reference for the Readiness Assessment-Costing Consultants to the T-SDC for information.
- A copy of the Terms of Reference for the Readiness Assessment-Costing Consultants was circulated at the meeting.
- In addition, members requested a copy of the Terms of Reference for the Interjurisdictional Analysis Consultants; this was also circulated to committee members at the meeting (on May 30).
M4.7.4 Boarding and De-Boarding a Conveyance
Action Item 4 M3.10.2 – G. Johnston to revise Clause 6.13.1 for clarity.
- This item will now come under the task force on fixed route transit during their review of Clause 5 in Draft 3.
M4.7.5 Signage on a Conveyance
Action Item 5 M3.10.2 – T. Nolan and L.A. MacDonald to review Clause 6.17 and suggest clearer wording.
- Support Unit staff agreed they should review the proposal and recommend how it might be incorporated into the revised draft initial proposed standard .
M4.7.6 Application of the Clauses to the Conveyances
Action Item 6 M3.10.2 – CSA to revise the draft initial proposed standard to include information on the clauses that apply to the various conveyances.
- A list of the conveyances was placed under each clause in Draft 3. The T-SDC was asked to review the list during their review of each clause and determine if the list was relevant, inclusive, and complete.
M4.7.7 Inclusion of Rental Vehicles in the Draft Initial Proposed Standard
Action Item 7 M3.10.2 – The ADO to report back at the next meeting about the potential of including rental vehicles in the draft initial proposed standard .
- It was recommended that rental vehicles not be included in the current draft initial proposed standard as they were not considered to be a part of “passenger transportation service”. However, it was suggested that the SDC could gauge interest in the development of a standard for rental cars during the public review process. In the meantime, the ADO will consider a potential standard pertaining to rental cars for the future.
M4.7.8 Report on Accessibility from Transit Authorities
Action Item 8 M3.10.2 – K. Paleczny to report back on what is being done across the province by the transit authorities to address accessibility.
- K. Paleczny made a presentation on conventional (i.e., mass) and specialized transit services in Ontario . Many of the statistics reported in the presentation were gathered from 2004 CUTA information. Her presentation will be made available to the members of the T-SDC.
- It was suggested that the issue of governance (e.g., advisory councils) be addressed in the draft initial proposed standard . T. Nolan had submitted a proposed clause pertaining to governance to be reviewed by the committee.
M4.7.9 Report on Accessibility from Taxi Operators
Action Item 9 M3.10.2 – J. Bisson to report back on what is being done across the province by taxi operators to address accessibility.
- J. Bisson reported that a survey had been developed but it was not posted early enough to collect input. J. Bisson reported that results should be available for discussion at the next meeting in June.
M4.8 Task Force Reports
M4.8.1 On-Demand Services
L. Pollock reported that the On-demand Services Task Force had not met. The issue of fares still needed to be resolved and CSA will set-up a meeting to resolve the issue before the T-SDC’s next meeting. The On-Demand Services Task Force will meet and submit written work for distribution to the T-SDC by June 15.
M4.8.2 Specialized Transit
D. Svec reported that the Specialized Transit Task Force met via teleconference on May 19. CSA staff reported that the task force had discussed the issue of cross boundary travel and had information to add to the clause on specialized transit. The issue of geographic routes was still open and the task force needed to meet to resolve this issue. The Specialized Transit Task Force will meet and submit written work for distribution to the T-SDC by June 15.
M4.8.3 Readiness/Costing Task Force
K. Paleczny reported on the work of the readiness/costing consultants. Her report included information on where the consultants started with the seed document and explained how they would analyze the transit systems to determine readiness and the gaps that needed to be bridged. She also went through an example to demonstrate how the costs to bridge the gaps would be determined. Kelly offered to send the presentation to the members of the T-SDC.
M4.8.4 New Task Force on Fixed Route
With the changes to the layout of the draft initial proposed standard on accessible transportation , it was suggested that a task force on Fixed Route Transit be created to review the content of Clause 5 in Draft 3. The following members volunteered to participate on this task force:
- Kelly Paleczny
- Glenn Johnston
- Alex Grant
- Silvan Bruno
- Alex Milojevic
- Katrina Carrera
- Rob Barnes
The task force will review Clause 5 and report their findings as part of the Transit Resource Group, which has a meeting scheduled for June 8. K. Carrera and R. Barnes will be invited to participate during discussions on the draft initial proposed standard at the Transit Resource Group meeting.
The Fixed Route Transit Task Force will meet and submit written work for distribution to the T-SDC by June 15.
M4.9 Report from the Transportation Consultants
M4.9.1 Readiness Assessment-Costing Consultants
Due to the thorough report provided by K. Paleczny on readiness/costing, it was felt that discussion with the consultants was unnecessary at this time.
M4.9.2 Inter-jurisdictional Research Consultants
M. Carpenter of IBI was available to explain some of their research pertaining to the committee’s discussion on the draft initial proposed standard.
M4.10 Work in Progress
M4.10.1 Review of Draft Initial Proposed Standard (Draft 3)
CSA staff explained that the committee’s revisions from Meeting 3 had been incorporated into Draft 3. In addition, staff had
- considered gaps identified by IBI;
- reorganized the clauses in a more logical manner;
- introduced classes into the scope;
- identified general requirements;
- reintroduced the applicability checklists for each clause; and
- technically edited the draft.
It was agreed that, due to the number of changes in Draft 3 and the short time the T-SDC had to review the document, any discussion of the draft initial proposed standard during the meeting would be tertiary.
CSA provided the committee with a comparison of Draft 3 with relevant CSA standards and Regulation 629. Copies of the relevant CSA standards were provided to the committee for their consideration in determining appropriate accessibility standards for fixed route vehicles.
It was agreed that the Specialized Transit and On-Demand Services Task Forces have a brief meeting to review similarities and differences between their services and how they are addressed in Draft 3.
CSA staff agreed to prepare a redline/strikeout version of the draft initial proposed standard so that the members of the T-SDC could see the changes from Draft 2 to Draft 3.
It was noted that a letter had been sent from the chair of the T-SDC to the chair of the Customer Service-SDC with a list of the items that the T-SDC felt belonged in the customer service proposed standard. The Customer Service-SDC was considering the recommendations and would report back to the T-SDC on those matters.
The Support Unit will provide the T-SDC with a list of other items that the T-SDC recommended be deferred to other committees (i.e., built environment and information and communications) before the next meeting for their review.
It was indicated that health care facilities that offer transportation and community transportation agencies may not be adequately addressed in Clauses 8 and 9 of Draft 3.
Action M4.10.2 – C. Lonsdale to review the draft initial proposed standard to determine if health care facilities that offer transportation and community transportation agencies were adequately addressed in Clauses 8 and 9 and to send proposed wording to the Support Unit before June 15.
CSA was asked to make sure the terms “attendants” and “companions” were defined in the draft initial proposed standard .
M4.10.2 Review of Classes
CSA staff introduced the concept of classes that was presented in the draft initial proposed standard (Draft 3) . It was agreed that it was still a work in progress and at the very least, the classes would need to be revised to align with changes in the scope.
M4.11 Review/Update of the T-SDC Work Plan
The T-SDC agreed that two additional meetings (in July and August) were required in order to submit the initial proposed standard to the Minister for public review.
| Meeting |
Milestones and Deliverables |
Completed |
Comments |
4
May 29 - 30 |
Agree to measures, policies, practices or requirements
Define classes and progressive implementation time-frames
Work with readiness and cost feasibility consultant
Review/update committee work plan
Prepare meeting minutes/progress report
Submit progress report to Minister |
In progress
In progress
Yes
Yes
Yes
In progress
|
Classes proposed in Draft 3
|
|
5
June 22 and June 23 |
Agree to classes and progressive implementation time-frames
Reach consensus on initial proposed standard
Review/update committee work plan
Prepare meeting minutes/progress report
Submit progress report to Minister
|
|
|
|
July 24 and 25
August 28 and 29 |
Reach consensus on initial proposed standard
Review/update committee work plan
Prepare meeting minutes/progress report
Submit progress report to Minister
Submit initial proposed standard to the Minister |
|
|
|
6
October or November
(estimated - following public review) |
Consider public review comments
Reach consensus on final proposed standard
Review/update committee work plan
Prepare meeting minutes/progress report
Submit progress report to Minister
Submit final proposed standard to the Minister |
|
|