Laserfiche WebLink
217 their business in or on the shelter, Mr. Williams reported the business took on <br /> 218 some of the maintenance responsibilities. <br /> 219 <br /> 220 Mr. Williams noted that Metro Transit supervisors drove routes to monitor stops <br /> 221 and shelters; assuring the PWETC that Metro Transit took customer feedback <br /> 222 seriously and used that as a tool to track and grade their performance. However, <br /> 223 with limited personnel available, Mr. Williams noted that snow removal <br /> 224 frequently trumped all else, with safety being their first concern and <br /> 225 consideration. <br /> 226 <br /> 227 Specific to citing bus stops, or determining whether or not a stop or shelter is <br /> 228 placed, Member Lenz asked how much influence Metro Transit had in applying to <br /> 229 counties or cities to mitigate lacking sidewalks. <br /> 230 <br /> 231 Mr. Williams responded that, in cases where shelters are indicated, and <br /> 232 considering Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA) and access issues, if an <br /> 233 alternative site is close and would provide better access (e.g. mid-block versus at <br /> 234 an intersection), that would be considered. As to Metro Transit exerting pressure <br /> 235 on Ramsey County, Mr. Williams noted that they could only make requests, and <br /> 236 that everyone had their respective budgets and competing interests for those <br /> 237 available funds. <br /> 238 <br /> 239 Regarding bus stop and shelter planning, Chair Cihacek asked to what extent <br /> 240 Metro Transit took into consideration area amenities (e.g. access) to save <br /> 241 maintenance costs. <br /> 242 <br /> 243 Mr. Lamb responded that for the last 1.5 years, Metro Transit's planning had been <br /> 244 run by city and county staff to make sure adequate sidewalk and pedestrian ramps <br /> 245 were available at that location. If stops are proposed mid-block, Mr. Lamb noted <br /> 246 the necessity of a curb cut and pedestrian ramp and crosswalk also being <br /> 247 available. <br /> 248 <br /> 249 In terms of bus stops specifically, Mr. Lamb advised that he wasn't as involved <br /> 250 with those locations, admitting he had observed a fair number without adequate <br /> 251 area and/or sidewalks. However, since spacing didn't require as much of an <br /> 252 investment from Metro Transit, Mr. Lamb opined that more flexibility may be <br /> 253 available and considered in deploying ramps or placing stops in areas indicating <br /> 254 high handicapped or wheeled device access was needed. Mr. Lamb advised that <br /> 255 additional pedestrian improvements would be considered there through a cement <br /> 256 block at the stop or an ADA ramp for boarding purposes to address accessibility <br /> 257 for boarders. <br /> 258 <br /> 259 Specific to bus routes 4227 and 4229, across County Road C and at Victoria <br /> 260 Street, Member Lenz noted the inability to cross or access that area to board if <br /> 261 using a wheelchair. <br /> 262 <br /> Page 6 of 17 <br />