Laserfiche WebLink
263 Mr. Lamb noted that area for further Metro Transit review, and advised that they <br /> 264 attempted to work with counties and cities, and assured the PWETC that it was <br /> 265 not their practice to not attempt sidewalk access as needed even with limited <br /> 266 funding available. <br /> 267 <br /> 268 Member Lenz opined that there shouldn't even be bus stops at those sites, since <br /> 269 no one maintains or cleans them, summer or winter; and while recognizing the <br /> 270 spacing concept, further opined that a stop at those sites wasn't practical. <br /> 271 Member Lenz suggested longer stops between or flagged stops as an option <br /> 272 versus grass verges not allowing safe boarding. <br /> 273 <br /> 274 Mr. Lamb advised that he would report those concerns to Metro Transit's <br /> 275 engineering staff during capital discussions; and asked that Member Lenz contact <br /> 276 him personally at Metro Transit with the specific stops of concern. <br /> 277 <br /> 278 As another example, Member Seigler noted a bus stop (e.g. a bus stop sign only) <br /> 279 in front of his home that he personally maintained. <br /> 280 <br /> 281 From a maintenance point of view, Member Lenz clarified that she wasn't <br /> 282 suggesting Metro Transit should maintain those grass verges she had referenced, <br /> 283 but to not make them bus stops in the first place if they are unsafe for use. <br /> 284 <br /> 285 Chair Cihacek refocused the discussion on maintenance for bus stops versus <br /> 286 shelters, opining stops were obviously of higher concern due their lack of <br /> 287 protection for boarders. Also, Chair Cihacek asked the procedure to install a sign, <br /> 288 where and who was responsible for installing them. <br /> 289 <br /> 290 Mr. Lamb advised that, if in a public right-of-way, Metro Transit had the ability <br /> 291 to put a stop anywhere reasonable, but worked with the appropriate municipality's <br /> 292 public works department to do so. <br /> 293 <br /> 294 Chair Cihacek suggested that Metro Transit work with municipalities such as <br /> 295 Roseville for parks with empty parking lots to install a stop nearby, since those <br /> 296 areas typically already had pedestrian facilities related to them. Chair Cihacek <br /> 297 suggested this may allow all parties a more convenience and cost-effective option <br /> 298 by using that existing infrastructure as opposed to moving a stop 10' one way or <br /> 299 another. <br /> 300 <br /> 301 Mr. Williams duly noted that idea, offering to definitely look at that option, noting <br /> 302 use of church parking lots as park and ride facilities in those areas without a larger <br /> 303 Metro Transit park and ride facility in place. <br /> 304 <br /> 305 By putting a bus stop sign by existing facilities, whether on a sidewalk or by a <br /> 306 commercial or park area, Chair Cihacek opined that it would allow Metro Transit <br /> 307 to capture existing infrastructure versus relying on a homeowner for maintenance <br /> 308 of the stops; and with a shared and intentional maintenance program versus <br /> Page 7 of 17 <br />