My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016-01-26_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2016
>
2016-01-26_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2016 3:00:49 PM
Creation date
1/21/2016 2:16:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
1/26/2016
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
245
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
125 Member Lenz suggested taking another look at the potential of shelters as the BRT <br />126 sorts itself out and ridership adjusts accordingly. <br />127 <br />128 Member Cihacek questioned if the City owned the property on which the shelters <br />129 were located. <br />130 <br />131 Mr. Culver noted that the City or County owned the rights-of-way on which all of <br />132 the shelters were located; and per the agreement with OutFront Media, it would be <br />133 their responsibility to restore the rights-of-way to their original condition (e.g. <br />134 removing anchor bolts and concrete pads for riders to stand on versus grass). <br />135 However, Mr. Culver suggested that the concrete pads be left in place to facilitate <br />136 riders. <br />137 <br />138 Chair Stenlund suggested a potential adopt -shelter program as another option, <br />139 involving community volunteers for shoveling one or more shelters, noting the <br />140 location of shelters #19 and #20 as examples of nice amenities in the community. <br />141 However, Chair Stenlund advised that he wasn't opposed to not urchasing them <br />142 either. <br />143 <br />144 Member Cihacek questioned the ramifications if volunteers didn't c ntinue their <br />145 commitment for maintenance. <br />146 <br />147 Member Lenz questioned how many of the shelters didn't currently have sidewalks <br />148 to access those shelters. <br />149 <br />150 Mr. CulvI noted that was a good question, and estimated that probably a fair share <br />151 may not have sidewalk access. Mr. Culver further noted that Metro Transit had <br />152 installed concrete pads last year at several bus stop locations along County Road B, <br />153 even those without shelters and some in the middle of the boulevard; and some <br />154 having pedestrian ramps leading to the middle of the street. While not seeming to <br />155 have much logic for those installations, Mr. Culver reported that the intent was <br />156 apparently to make sure of handicapped accessibility from the paved surface. <br />157 <br />158 Member Lenz suggested removal of shelters, but leaving the pads and let things <br />159 marinate for a few years to decide how to approach transit in Roseville in the future. <br />160 <br />161 At the request of Member Seigler, Mr. Culver reported that the benches adjacent to <br />162 some shelters were owned by another group and they would stay in place at this <br />163 time. <br />164 <br />165 Chair Stenlund suggested removing all shelters as well as the concrete pads and <br />166 restoring those areas to grass in accordance with the agreement in place. Chair <br />167 Stenlund questioned the legacy OutFront Media was leaving the City of Roseville <br />168 in leaving the pads, and the possible future expense for the city to remove the <br />169 concrete pads at a later date, noting their removal and disposal would prove <br />170 expensive, as well as turf establishment. <br />Page 4 of 18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.