The attached comments from the Paratransit Coordinating Council where applicable have been addressed in this final draft of the Plan. To: Bill Welch The PCC has reviewed SamTrans' 1996 ADA Plan Update and would like to offer the following comments: Page 3: The progress report indicates that 1/96 is still the planned implementation date for Santa Clara intercounty service. Page 4: San Francisco intercounty service has been omitted from the progress report. Page 8: San Francisco intercounty service has been omitted from timetable. Page 9: SamTrans is not in compliance with service area criteria, since there is no paratransit service provided to San Francisco residents who live within the SamTrans service corridor. Since this is within the agency's service area, it is not a coordination issue. Page 11: SamtRans is actually in compliance on the subscription trip item, since the level of denials would be considered acceptable to the FTA, and the subscription cap therefore does not apply. (Conversely, if the trip cap is considered a constraint which would trigger the subscription requirement, then SamTrans is out of compliance with item 16 on the previous page.) Page 12: Please explain (or correct) the dramatic decline in revenue hours projected for 1996. Page 13: Please explain the derivation of the 8,400 SSA paratransit trips, and how are these related to the 43,000 trips quoted in the footnote? Page 14: We believe that the $455,000 for capital expenses should be included in the projections for 1996. If this is the case, the following numbers would need to be changed; Line 3, Line 4, and Line 6 (1995 and 1996), and Lines 4 and 5 on Table 6. Page 18: The number of wheelchair boardings indicated in Table 18 is very low for a service the size of SamTrans'. Please indicate the method for arriving at this estimate. Page 26: If the startup date for Santa Clara service has been changed, this page needs to be corrected.
|
