Laserfiche WebLink
79 Member Felice expressed her disappointment and preference that the Roselawn <br />80 station be installed now; opining that the statistics may prove unfair, especially <br />81 when the current facilities were among the worst bus stops, especially during the <br />82 winter months given their lack of maintenance. While recognizing the need to <br />83 consider ridership as part of their decision-making, Member Felice noted that <br />84 currently riders were often forced to stand on Snelling Avenue, and therefore they <br />85 may be using alternative loading areas or other means of transportation; and <br />86 opined that the station would be used much more if the amenities were improved. <br />87 Member Felice asked that staff carefully monitor the situation. <br />88 <br />89 Mr. Culver agreed that there may be a latent demand for people wanting to use it, <br />90 but the facilities were not available for them to do so; and opined that it was <br />91 difficult to measure that with modeling and projections. Mr. Culver noted that <br />92 Councilmember McGehee suggested improvements that would provide some <br />93 protection for riders from wind and elements at Roselawn if a station was not <br />94 going to happen. <br />95 <br />96 Chair Stenlund suggested, if a future station was intended for installation, that <br />97 Metro Transit install utility infrastructure now versus ripping up Snelling Avenue <br />98 again in the future, which he thought would significantly impact any future <br />99 stations even if ridership and/or funding improved. <br />100 <br />101 Mr. Culver suggested a discussion by City staff with the Met Council for a bid <br />102 alternate that would include a Roselawn station; allowing that to be taken <br />103 advantage of and preparation of the site now, short of another alternative. <br />104 <br />105 As part of their construction procesi�%, chwartz noted the possibility of Metro <br />106 stalling fiber along Snelline. <br />107 NW <br />108 4F discussion ensued about BRT stops, frequency and timing issues; how <br />0109 BRT buses operate without a fare box allowing them to stop at every stop along <br />110 the route; and transit -oriented development along the Snelling Avenue corridor <br />111 that is currently guided for land use. <br />112 <br />113 Mr. Culver reported that staff would be receiving and scoring proposals later this <br />114 week for a consultant for the I -35W Interchange at Cleveland Avenue, with <br />115 federal grant funding assisting with those improvements; and anticipated award <br />116 by the City Coucil on a design consultant at their August 11, 2014 meeting with <br />117 2015 construction planned. <br />118 <br />119 As a follow-up to last month's PWETC discussion on bicycles on sidewalks and <br />120 whether they are prohibited, Mr. Culver provided a bench handout, attached <br />121 hereto and made a part hereof, of Minnesota State Statutes 169.222, Subd. 4(d), <br />122 defining a "Business District" and Roseville City Code, Chapter 1001.10 <br />123 Definitions of "sidewalks." Also, in his quick search of codes in the Cities of <br />124 Minneapolis, St. Paul, Shoreview, St. Louis Park, and several other metro <br />Page 3 of 15 <br />