Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
C-1 Survey Responses A P P E N D I X C Introductory Questions Q1 Consent Q2 Please fill in the following information about you and your agency. Agency City and State Transit Services Division â City of Tucson Tucson, Arizona Butte County Association of Governments (AOG) Chico, California Antelope Valley Transit Authority (AVTA) Lancaster, California North County Transit District Oceanside, California San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) San Diego, California San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (Muni) San Francisco, California Big Blue Bus Santa Monica, California Transfort Fort Collins, Colorado District Department of Transportation Washington, District of Columbia Space Coast Area Transit Cocoa, Florida Hernando County Transit Hernando County, Florida Votran South Daytona, Florida Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority St. Petersburg, Florida Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART) Tampa, Florida Athens-Clarke County Transit Athens, Georgia Regional Transportation Authority of Northeastern Illinois Chicago, Illinois Maryland Transit Administration Baltimore, Maryland Detroit Department of Transportation (DDOT) Detroit, Michigan Metro Kalamazoo, Michigan Metro Transit Minneapolis, Minnesota
C-2 Transit Agency Relationships and Initiatives to Improve Bus Stops and Pedestrian Access Kansas City Area Transportation Authority Kansas City, Missouri Missoula Urban Transportation District Missoula, Montana NJ Transit Newark, New Jersey Santa Fe Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Santa Fe, New Mexico GoCary Cary, North Carolina GoTriangle Durham, North Carolina New York City Department of Transportation (NYC DOT) New York, New York Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) Columbus, Ohio EMBARK Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Astoria, Oregon Lane Transit District Eugene, Oregon Rogue Valley Transportation District Medford, Oregon Salem Area Mass Transit District, dba Cherriots Salem, Oregon Rhode Island Public Transit Authority Providence, Rhode Island Memphis Area Transit Authority Memphis, Tennessee Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority Austin, Texas Sun Metro El Paso, Texas Trinity Metro Fort Worth, Texas VIA Metropolitan Transit San Antonio, Texas Connect Transit â Gulf Coast Center Texas City and Angleton, Texas Utah Transit Authority Salt Lake City, Utah Arlington Transit Bureau Arlington, Virginia Blacksburg Transit Blacksburg, Virginia Hampton Roads Transit Hampton, Virginia Roanoke Valley â Alleghany Regional Commission Roanoke, Virginia Pierce Transit Lakewood, Washington Intercity Transit Olympia, Washington Agency City and State
Q3 Do you personally have knowledge of the transit agencyâs bus stop and/or pedestrian infrastructure improvements (including knowledge whether the transit agency has programs or initiatives in place)? Q4 Do you know who has knowledge of the transit agencyâs bus stop and/or pedestrian infrastructure improvements? Q5 Please provide the contact information of the individual who has knowledge of the transit agencyâs bus stop and/or pedestrian infrastructure improvements. Q6 Does your transit agency have or participate in a bus stop and/or pedestrian infrastructure improvement program? Yes, we have our own program 70% Yes, we have our own program AND participate in another agencyâs program 30%
Yes, we have our own program AND participate in another agencyâs program 14 29.78% Number of Responses 47 Scope of Bus Stop Programs Q7 Which of the following was a desired outcome in your agencyâs program? Please check all that apply. Q6: Does your transit agency have or participate in a bus stop and/or pedestrian infrastructure improvement program? Number Percent Yes, we have our own program 33 70.21%
Q7: Which of the following was a desired outcome in your agencyâs program? Improve bus stop accessibility 45 95.74% Improve customer comfort 39 82.98% Improve safety and security for customers 38 80.85% Respond equitably to community requests for amenities and improved access at bus stops 38 80.85% Bolster ridership on the bus network 36 76.60% Take advantage of available funding opportunities 31 65.96% Improve bus stops in transportation-disadvantaged areas 30 63.83% Improve relationships/coordination with local agencies and developers 23 48.94% Lower trip demand on ADA paratransit service 18 38.30% Improve maintenance practices of infrastructure 18 38.30% Other 3 6.38% â¢ Better digital identification of bus stop location â¢ Connect to and extend sidewalks and paths when possible â¢ We are not an operating agency, so our program offers funding to municipalities and the operating agencies to improve pedestrian infrastructure to and around both rail stations and bus stops Number of Responses 319 Number Percent
Q8 Can you provide electronic copies of planning documents related to bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvement programs upon request? Q8: Can you provide electronic copies of planning documents related to bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvement programs upon request? Number Percent Yes 34 72.34% No 12 25.53% No response 1 2.13% Number of Responses 47 Yes 72% No / No response 28%
Q9 Which department within the organization contributes to the bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvement program? Please indicate âProgram Leadâ, âSupportâ, or âOther, specifyâ.
Lead 30 63.8% 8 17.0% 3 6.4% 4 8.5% 9 19.2% 16 34.0% 4 8.5% 12 25.5% Support 15 31.9% 26 55.3% 20 42.6% 27 57.5% 27 57.5% 19 40.4% 23 48.9% 1 2.1% No response 2 4.3% 13 27.7% 24 51.1% 16 34.0% 11 23.4% 12 25.5% 20 42.6% 34 72.3% Other (Lead Role) â¢ Bus Service Planning â¢ Capital Programs â¢ Customer Experience â¢ Engineering â¢ Equity & ADA Coordination â¢ Hired Contractor â¢ Planning, Transit Development Unit â¢ Project Management â¢ Project Management Office â¢ Streets â¢ Transit Analyst â¢ Transit Services Division Other (Support Role) â¢ Local University Number of Responses 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 Q9: Which department within the organization contributes to the bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvement program? Planning Operations â Fixed- route Operations â Demand Response/ Paratransit Maintenance Facilities Capital Improvements Community Outreach Other N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t
Contact for Other Agency Q10 What areas of the bus stop and pedestrian pathway to the bus stop does the other agencyâs program oversee and make improvements for? Please select all that apply. Q10: What areas of the bus stop and pedestrian pathway to the bus stop does the other agencyâs program oversee and make improvements for? Number Percent Bus stop immediate area (bench, landing pad, shelter) 10 21.28% Sidewalks leading to the bus stop 11 21.28% Intersections and crosswalks near the bus stop 10 21.80% Number of Responses 31
completes the most significant amount of pedestrian infrastructure in your service area. Please also provide information for a point of contact if you have it. Agency name Agency role in infrastructure improvements TPO Coordinator City Upgrading of sidewalks and bus stop pads as part of road projects City â Transportation & Capital Improvements Road building, reconstruction, curbs, curb ramps, sidewalks, bus shelter/landing pads City Assists with improving conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians City Construction and maintenance City â Department of Public Works DPW is a road agency that has jurisdiction over local streets; bus stop infrastructure is incorporated to varying degrees into street reconstruction and improvement projects with local DOT input City Sidewalks City Permitting, ADA review, private development requirements City Pedestrian and bicycle network plan and implementation City â Streets Division Repair sidewalks Q11 Please provide the name of the agency that is responsible for other bus stop and/or pedestrian infrastructure improvement program that benefits your transit agency. If there are multiple other agencies, please pick the one that
Q13 Which of the following best describes the current status of bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvements at your agency? No responses to Q13. Further Participant Information Q14 Do you know of any peer transit agencies that have bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvement programs and may be interested in this survey? Five participants responded âYes.â Q15 Please provide contact information for the peer transit agency that may be interested in this survey. Four participants provided agency names and contact information. No Active Improvement Programs Q12 Why did your transit agency discontinue its previous bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvement program? Please check all that apply. No responses to Q12.
Bus Stop Infrastructure Elements Q16 The next several questions will collect some details about the elements considered in your transit agencyâs bus stop and/or pedestrian infrastructure improvements program. In order to maintain consistency, it is necessary to define some terms that will be presented in the survey. Q17 Indicate which infrastructure elements are included in your transit agencyâs bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvement program. Please check all that apply.
4 8 26 8 18 7 13 4 1 All/most of bus stops Shelters Benches/other seating Landing pad Lighting Sidewalks/pathways Crossings Curb ramps Detectable warnings Other 40 35 19 30 20 26 22 18 2 Some bus stops Shelters Benches/other seating Landing pad Lighting Sidewalks/pathways Crossings Curb ramps Detectable warnings Other 1 3 1 7 7 12 10 23 4 None/almost none of bus stops Shelters Benches/other seating Landing pad Lighting Sidewalks/pathways Crossings Curb ramps Detectable warnings Other 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 40 No response Shelters Benches/other seating Landing pad Lighting Sidewalks/pathways Crossings Curb ramps Detectable warnings Other
All/most of bus stops 4 8.5% 8 17. 2% 26 55.3% 8 17.0% 18 38.3% 7 14.9% 13 27.7% 4 8.5% 1 2.1% Some bus stops 40 85.1% 35 74.5% 19 40.4% 30 63.8% 20 42.6% 26 55.3% 22 46.8% 18 38.3% 2 4.3% None/almost none of bus stops 1 2.1% 3 6.4% 1 2.1% 7 14.9% 7 14.9% 12 25.5% 10 21.3% 23 48.9% 4 8.5% No response 2 4.3% 1 2.3% 1 2.1% 2 4.3% 2 4.3% 2 4.3% 2 4.3% 2 4.3% 40 85.1% Other (All/most of bus stops) â¢ Signage Other (Some bus stops) â¢ Real time signs â¢ Trash receptacles, bike racks Other (None/almost none of bus stops) â¢ Bike racks, bike share stations/racks, e-scooter parking areas Number of Responses 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 Q17: Indicate which infrastructure elements are included in your transit agencyâs bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvement program. Shelters Benches/ other seating Landing pad Lighting Sidewalks/ pathways Crossings Curb ramps Detectable warnings Other N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t
C-16 Transit Agency Relationships and Initiatives to Improve Bus Stops and Pedestrian Access Tools and Processes Q18 What kinds of data or tools do you use to measure importance and prioritize improvements of bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure elements as part of the program? Please check all that apply. Q18: What kinds of data or tools do you use to measure importance and prioritize improvements of bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure elements as part of the program? Number Percent Bus stop inventory data 45 95.74% Fixed-route on/off board ridership data 42 89.36% Paratransit ridership data 10 21.28% Anonymized customer home location data 42 89.36% Demographic data 23 48.94% Indexing or scoring system 15 31.91% Land use information 21 44.68% Proximity to community services 36 76.60% Other 7 14.89% â¢ Our program is competitive; awarded projects are primarily based off of applications received â¢ Requests from customers and other governmental agencies
Survey Responses C-17 â¢ Requests from constituents â¢ Public requests, frequency of headway â¢ Safety data (for pedestrian improvements at stop) â¢ Physical accessibility, bus ridership data â¢ Availability of staff time to think about, communicate, and process priorities Number of Responses 241 Q19 How are improvements for bus stops prioritized? Rank the options that you are using.
C-18 Transit Agency Relationships and Initiatives to Improve Bus Stops and Pedestrian Access Q19: How are improvements for bus stops prioritized? Number Percent Worst condition 31 65.96% Fixed-route ridership 39 82.98% Route type (e.g., high-frequency or network connective routes) 23 48.94% Paratransit ridership 5 10.64% Observed problems by operators/staff 31 65.96% Customer complaints 37 78.72% Street or bus corridor type 10 21.28% Adjacent land uses (senior centers, hospitals, schools, etc.) 28 59.57% Other infrastructure projects 23 48.94% Bus network redesigns 9 19.15% Costs 22 46.81% Space available 24 51.06% Other 5 10.64% â¢ High-need communities are prioritized â¢ Non-ADA compliant â¢ ADA â¢ Our franchisee who operates bus shelters chooses location based on profitability â¢ ADA â¢ Bus stop study priority list Number of Responses 287 1 2 3 4 5 Fixed-route ridership 28 5 1 2 2 Worst condition 4 8 4 3 5 Observed problems by operators / staff 3 5 4 6 5 Space available 3 1 4 6 2 Customer complaints 2 8 8 10 3 Other infrastructure projects 2 4 5 3 3 ADA 2 0 0 0 0 Adjacent land uses (senior centers, hospitals, schools, etc.) 1 4 4 7 5 Route type (e.g., high-frequency or network connective routes) 0 8 6 2 0 Bus stop study priority list 0 1 0 0 0 Costs 0 0 4 2 2 Street or bus corridor type 0 0 3 0 1 Paratransit ridership 0 0 1 0 1 Bus network redesigns 0 0 0 1 1 Options that are being used for bus stops prioritization Ranking Number of Respondents
Survey Responses C-19 Agreements with Local Entities Q20 Does your transit agency have a formal or informal agreement with a local government entity (s), such as cities, counties, state departments of transportation, or private developers concerning bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvements? Q20: Does your transit agency have a formal or informal agreement with a local government entity (s), such as cities, counties, state departments of transportation, or private developers concerning bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvements? Number Percent Yes 29 61.70% No 17 36.17% No response 1 2.13% Number of Responses 47
C-20 Transit Agency Relationships and Initiatives to Improve Bus Stops and Pedestrian Access (If Q20 = Yes) Q21 Please indicate how many agreements (maximum 5). Q21: Please indicate how many agreements (maximum 5). Number Percent 1 7 14.9% 2 6 12.8% 3 4 8.5% 4 2 4.3% 5+ 4 8.5% No response or no agreement 19 40.4% Other 5 10.6% â¢ We have IGAs with local communities; usually 10 communities are awarded every other year. â¢ We are the local government entity. â¢ Agreements with small regional communities. â¢ We are the City and transit agency both. â¢ A state act authorizes the agency to require/request improvements be mandated through the permitting of new development along existing routesâusually a new shelter/bench/ADA improvements. Number of Responses 47 17 7 6 4 2 4 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Yes No N um be r o f R es po nd en ts Agency has agreement(s) but numeric answer was not provided 5+ agreements 4 agreements 3 agreements 2 agreements 1 agreement Agency does not have an agreement
Survey Responses C-21 Q22 Please provide the following information on the [Loop â First/Second/Third/Fourth/Fifth- Max 5] agreement. o Entity(s) _______________________________________________ oName (if applicable) ________________________________________________ o Formal agreement, yes or no___________________________________________ o Start year in YYYY format _____________________________________________ o Length of agreement_____________________________________________ oActive, yes or no_____________________________________________ Q23 Is this agreement one of the following? oMemorandum of Understanding (MOU) oMemorandum of Association o Informal, no official document oOther The following table includes answers to both Q22 and Q23.
Agency name Agreement ID Entities Name (if applicable) Formal agreement? Start year Length of agreement Active? Document type Connect Transit (TX) 1 Gulf Coast Center & City of Texas City Interlocal Agreement Yes 2005 Reviewed Annually Yes MOU 2 Gulf Coast Center & City of Lake Jackson 3 Gulf Coast Center & the City of Clute 4 Gulf Coast Center & the City of Angleton 5 Gulf Coast Center & the City of Dickinson Missoula Urban Transportation District (MT) 1 City of Missoula - No - - Yes Informal 2 Montana Department of Transportation - - - - Athens-Clarke County Transit (GA) 1 - - - - - - Informal 2 - - - - - - Other Trinity Metro (TX) 1 TxDOT Tarrant District Yes 2019 N/A Yes Other Votran (FL) 1 City of Edgewater - Yes 2016 N/A Yes MOU 2 New Smyrna Beach - - - - No Other Metro (MI) 1 City of Portage - Yes - As Needed Yes Other 2 City of Kalamazoo - -
3 Road Commission of Kalamazoo County - - 4 Michigan Department of Transportation - - 1 year VIA Metropolitan Transit (TX) 1 City of San Antonio Transportation & Capital Improvements No 2007 13+ Yes Other 2 Texas Department of Transportation - 2017 3+ 3 City of Kirby - Yes 2016 2 No4 City of Converse - 2017 1 year 5 City of Castle Hills - 2016 3 Memphis Area Transit Authority (TN) 1 City of Memphis - No - - Yes Informal Arlington Transit Bureau (VA) 1 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority - Yes 1967 In Perpetuity Yes MOU 2 Virginia Dept. of Rail and Public Transportation - Yes Fiscal Year Annual Other 3 Virginia Department of Transportation - No - 4 Northern Virginia Transportation Commission - Yes Grant Application Term per Grant MOU
NJ Transit (NJ) 1 Local Townships generally have ownership of shelters, several hundred - - - - - Other 2 - - - - - - 3 - - - - - - 4 - - - - - - - 5 - - - - - - - Rogue Valley Transportation District (OR) 1 City, Private Builder - No Unknown Unknown Yes Informal Butte County Association of Governments (CA) 1 Local City City of Chico No 2005 Ongoing Yes Informal 2 Private Business Stout Outdoor Yes 2009 10 years, with two 5- year options Yes MOU Transit Services Division â City of Tucson (AZ) 1 Regional Transportation Authority of Pima County - Yes Annual (2019) 12 months Yes Other2 Pascua Yaqui Tribe - 3 Pima County - Utah Transit Authority (UT) 1 Salt Lake City - Yes 2019 20 years Yes Other
Sun Metro (TX) 1 TxDOT - Yes - - Yes MOU 2 City of El Paso - - - - Informal North County Transit District (CA) 1 City of Del Mar - Yes - - Yes MOU 2 City of Encinitas - - - 3 City of Escondido - - - 4 City of San Marcos - - - 5 City of Solana Beach - - - Capital Metro (TX) 1 City of Austin Yes 2008 Yearly Yes Other San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (Muni) (CA) 1 Outdoor Advertising Company Clear Channel Yes Unknown Unknown (multi-year) Yes - 2 Public Works Department San Francisco Public Works Department Unknown - - - - Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART) (FL) 1 Hillsborough County Advertising shelter ordinance Yes 2004 - Yes Other 2 City of Tampa 2006 - Other 3 City of Tampa City corridor 2002 - No MOU Blacksburg Transit (VA) 1 Virginia Tech, Town of Christiansburg - Yes 2010 - Yes Other
MTS (CA) 1 City of San Diego - Yes 1993 Ongoing Yes MOU Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (FL) 1 City of St. Petersburg - Yes 2019 Agreement is for construction & maintenance of 12 shelters Yes MOU 2 Woodlands Square and City of Oldsmar - 2018 Agreement for 1 shelter and maintenance 3 Allure Gateway - - 2019 Construction and maintenance of 1 shelter
Agency name Agreement ID Shelters Benches Landing pad Rear-door areas Lighting Sidewalk/ pathways Crossings Curb ramps Detectable warnings Other Connect Transit (TX) 1-5 Transit Transit Transit Transit Both Both Both Transit Transit - Missoula Urban Transportation District (MT) 1-2 Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Partner Partner Partner Partner - Athens-Clarke County Transit (GA) 1 Partner Partner Partner Partner Partner Partner Partner Partner Partner - Trinity Metro (TX) 1 Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit - - Votran (FL) 1 Transit - Transit - Partner Partner Partner Partner - - 2 Transit Transit - - Partner Partner Partner Partner - - -Metro (MI) 1-4 Transit Transit Transit Transit Partner Partner Partner Partner Partner VIA Metropolitan Transit (TX) 1 Transit Transit Partner Partner Transit Partner Partner Partner - - 2 Transit Transit Partner Partner Transit Partner - - Partner - - 3 Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit - - - - Transit (Bus stopping pad in roadway) 4 Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit - - 5 Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit - Both Transit - Memphis Area Transit Authority (TN) 1 Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Both Partner Transit Transit - Q24 Does the entity in the agreement with the transit agency assume responsibility for making improvements to any of the following bus stop or pedestrian pathway elements? Please check all that apply.
Rogue Valley Transportation District (OR) 1 Transit Transit Partner Partner Transit Partner Partner Partner Transit - Butte County Association of Governments (CA) 1 Transit Transit Transit - Both Partner Partner Partner Partner - 2 Partner Both Partner - Both - - - - - Transit Services Division â City of Tucson (AZ) 1 Both Both Both Both Partner Partner Partner Partner Partner - 2 Transit Transit Transit Transit Both Both Both Both Both - 3 Partner Partner Partner Partner Partner Partner Partner Partner Partner - Utah Transit Authority (UT) 1 Transit Transit Partner - Partner Partner Partner Partner - - Sun Metro (TX) 1 Transit Transit Transit Transit Both Both Both Both Both - 2 Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Both - NJ Transit (NJ) 1 Partner Partner - - - - - - - - Arlington Transit Bureau (VA) 1 Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Both Both(Signage) 2 Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Partner (Funding for New and State of Good Repair) 3 Transit Transit Both Both Transit Both Both Both Both Partner (Right-of-Way Permitting) 4 Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Partner (Grant Funding)
Blacksburg Transit (VA) 1 Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Both MTS (CA) 1 Transit Transit Partner Partner Both Partner Partner Partner Partner - Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (FL) 1 Both - Both - Both Both - - - - 2 Both - Both - Both Both - Both - - 3 Both - Both - - Both - Both - - North County Transit District (CA) 1 Transit Transit Both Transit Transit Partner Partner Partner Partner - 2 Transit Transit Both Both Transit Partner Partner Partner Partner - 3 Transit Transit Both Both Transit Partner Partner Partner Partner - 4 Transit Transit Both Both Transit Partner Partner Partner Partner - 5 Transit Transit Both Both Transit Partner Partner Partner Partner - Capital Metro (TX) 1 Transit Transit Transit Transit Transit Both Both Both Transit - San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (Muni) (CA) 1 Partner Partner - - - - Transit - Partner - 2 - - Partner - - Partner - Partner - Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART) (FL) 1 Transit - - - - - - - - - - 2 Transit - - - - - - - - - 3 Transit - - - - - - - - -
Q25 Would you be able to share a copy of this agreement with the research team? Q26 Please upload the copy of this agreement. Q27 What are key issues in working with developers and inclusion of transit agency interests in developments and construction? Please check all that apply.
â¢ Early contact with transit agency before construction â¢ Developer agreement on paying for improvements â¢ Funding improvements â¢ Incorporating the transit improvement in the development review process â¢ Minimizing bus stop impacts, e.g., from new driveways or lengthy periods of construction adjacent to the right-of-way â¢ Interest by developers in bus stop issues â¢ Cost of constructing improvements â¢ Getting surveys/easements â¢ Legal requirements of all parties â¢ Inclusion in planning and design process before permitting â¢ Ensuring that new developments are sited in locations with existing transit access â¢ Location of bus stops and potential conflicts with the design of the development â¢ Risk and maintenance â¢ Ongoing maintenance of new infrastructure Number of Responses 89 Q27: What are key issues in working with developers and inclusion of transit agency interests in developments and construction? Number Percent Limited right-of-way 32 68.1% Slope requiring extensive construction/reconstruction 18 38.3% DBE requirements 5 10.6% Environmental clearances 7 14.9% Finding qualified contractors 3 6.4% Procuring shelters quickly 7 14.9% Other 17 36.2% â¢ Competition for space with landscaping, sidewalk cafes, etc. â¢ First, last mile connections â¢ Making sure the requirements are stipulated in the permit reviews; sometimes missed until too late
Communication and Coordination Q28 How does the transit agency communicate the following information? Please check all that apply.
Q28: How does the transit agency communicate the following information? Share information on bus stop/ped. improvements, relocations, consolidations, or new locations Receive comments and feedback from the community on bus stop/ped. improvements Number Percent Number Percent Community meetings 24 51.1% 32 68.1% Workshop events 15 31.9% 20 42.6% Website announcements or portals 28 59.6% 24 51.1% Flyers and brochures 16 34.0% 8 17.0% Postings at bus stops/intersections 31 66.0% 12 25.5% Other 2 4.3% 3 6.4% â¢ Local municipalities and transit operators take the lead on this â¢ Customer service calls, online submittals â¢ Social media, customer service rep. â¢ Public Board meetings/minutes â¢ Unsolicited customer feedback via email, phone, social media â¢ Customer service Number of Responses 116 99
Q29: Does the transit agency coordinate bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvement projects (such as Number Percent street reconstruction, utility upgrade, trail, or sidewalk projects) to coincide with/piggyback on other infrastructure projects? Yes 40 85.1% No 6 12.8% No response 1 2.1% Number of Responses 47 Q29 Does the transit agency coordinate bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvement projects (such as street reconstruction, utility upgrade, trail, or sidewalk projects) to coincide with/piggyback on other infrastructure projects?
Q30: Does the transit agency coordinate bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvement projects (such as street reconstruction, utility upgrade, trail, or sidewalk projects) to coincide with/piggyback on other infrastructure projects? Number Percent Yes 40 72.3% No 6 25.5% No response 1 2.1% If âYesâ: â¢ Coordinate with utilities â¢ Occasionally coordinate with private development projects to make bus stop improvements â¢ We participate in site plan review with the local cities â¢ Transit agency and local municipalities take the lead on this coordination but has been done â¢ Coordinate with private developers to construct improvements during the completion of their project â¢ We coordinate via state DOT Development Review process â¢ We require contractors to upgrade adjacent/connecting bus stops with capital projects â¢ When road improvements are scheduled, we work with the department conducting the improvement Q30 Does the transit agency coordinate with utility companies or private development projects to make bus stop and/or pedestrian pathway improvements?
â¢ Both utility and private development projects â¢ Developing entities are required by City to make ADA clear path improvements â¢ When new development is going in, we work with the planners to coordinate bus turnout locations â¢ Often condition of approval for development projects â¢ Via land use planning â¢ When we can and developers are willing â¢ Occasional development projects â¢ Local DOT also does plan review and requires developers to provide ADA accessible bus stops, where necessary â¢ Private development via state act; public utility service â¢ Mainly at beginning of project; during permitting stage of application â¢ Property owners or city projects â¢ Often require private development projects to include bus stop enhancements (specifically, widened sidewalks) â¢ Incorporate transit in development â¢ When streets are reconstructed, we may put concrete bus pads in the street, or make bus stops physically accessible on the sidewalk, or build pedestrian refuges to improve street crossing safety â¢ Developers mostly â¢ Coordination with private development projects â¢ When the city requires coordination from new developers, they contact us, and we try to work with them Number of Responses 47 â¢ Work with developers on making stops accessible and providing shelters foundations or custom shelters where ridership warrants â¢ When improvements work with private developmentsâ interests and transit agencyâs plans and guidelines; typically, this most occurs to better connect transit customers to new major employment sites or medical facilities in the area â¢ Private development projects are reviewed for current bus stop location conditions and desired improvements â¢ Only with developers â¢ Public utility â¢ Sometimes....it depends if the municipality contacts us and asks for assistance
Accessibility and Equity Q31 Does the transit agency receive and act upon feedback from community organizations focused on persons with disabilities and seniors on bus stops? Q31: Does the transit agency receive and act upon feedback from community organizations focused on persons with disabilities and seniors on bus stops? Number Percent Yes 45 95.7% No 1 2.1% No response 1 2.1% Number of Responses 47
Q32: Does the transit agency have an ADA transition plan which considers bus stops and pedestrian infrastructure? Number Percent Yes 34 72.3% No 11 23.4% No response 2 4.3% Number of Responses 47 Q32 Does the transit agency have an ADA transition plan which considers bus stops and pedestrian infrastructure?
âOtherâ specified responses ranked: Ranked 1 â¢ Lack of easement/ROW Ranked 2 â¢ Limited ROW â¢ Lack of sidewalks, which are the responsibility of municipalities â¢ Limited budget, low town priority Ranked 3 â¢ No 5' x 8' landing area â¢ Narrow rights-of-way with inadequate space for compliant bus stops â¢ Missing safe crosswalks to a ramp and sidewalk Ranked 4 â¢ Boarding pad slope 1 2 3 4 5 Broken/incomplete sidewalks 25 9 5 5 1 Barriers in the pedestrian pathway 11 9 18 5 2 Lack of curb ramps 4 18 12 2 9 Missing/incomplete shelters 3 3 4 13 17 Missing/lack of seating areas 1 3 3 19 16 Other 1 3 3 1 0 Infrastructure issues from a user perspective for persons with disabilities using fixed-route transit Ranking Number of Respondents Q33 Please rank the following infrastructure issues from most challenging to least challenging from a user perspective for persons with disabilities using fixed-route transit, based on your agencyâs understanding. Ranked 6 â¢ Lighting
Q34 How does the transit agency ensure equity of bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvements throughout the service area? â¢ The transit agency ensures equity of bus stop improvements by ensuring all stops are in good working order. â¢ Currently, stops along high-ridership routes are prioritized for improvements. We are developing a stop improvement prioritization system that will consider demographics and social equity along with ridership and stop performance factors. â¢ We have shelter placement guidelines that inform our investments based upon serving the most people and serving customers who may especially benefit from shelters. https://www.metrotransit.org/shelter-guidelines. â¢ We are not an operating agency, so our transit operators take the lead on this. However, through our program, the agency does provide additional funding to high-need communities. â¢ The transit agency works directly with all local cities and municipalities on improvements to be made at stop locations. However, these partners are responsible for the actual improvements with the exception of shelter installations which we determine location. â¢ GIS analysis. â¢ Consideration of where improvements are planned are covered in the districtâs Title VI Civil Rights Plan. This includes an equity analysis of where we have chosen to make improvements in relation to minority, low-income, and limited English proficient populations in our service area. â¢ We use a holistic approach to determine upgrade priorities (ridership, key destinations, etc.). â¢ Title VI analysis. â¢ By conducting a review of the current stop inventory and ridership. â¢ We review the bus stop usage annually and look at high stop locations as well as those serving areas with seniors or those with disabilities to determine if stop improvements are planned with road agency projects or additional community projects (such as sidewalk extensions). â¢ Stay in compliance with our Title VI program and policies. â¢ All improvements are based on a scoring system that relies primarily on ridership information and is applied uniformly throughout our service area.
â¢ Primarily through mapping bus stop amenities during its Title VI update every 3 years and including points for predominantly low-income and minority census tracts in the scoring of bus stop improvement prioritization. â¢ We employ a corridor approach with emphasis on ridership and location. â¢ Annual shelter, seating, lighting and pedestrian connectivity campaigns. Title VI analysis. Improvements are largely based on highest ridership stop locations, but with considerations towards populations with physical limitations as well. â¢ The agency serves over 12,000 bus stops. Due to state law, they are owned and maintained by local municipalities. The agency is generally responsible for bus stops signs, while towns maintain shelters and benches. The agencyâs Bus Stops, Signs, & Shelters department surveys bus stops on a rotating basis using field crews and replaces or fixes broken signs, and reports shelter conditions back to municipalities for repairs. â¢ For initiatives that originated with our agency (e.g., new shelter purchase): Adherence to consistent criteria outlined in the service standards; analysis by City Council district to ensure geographic distribution; for service equity analysis, many improvements are initiated by road agencies, in which cases the distribution is not within our control. â¢ New stops are placed with consideration to low-income and minority access and comply with ADA clearance and slope requirements. Existing stops are inventoried and improved based on the order of increase in ridership and any ADA clearance or incline issues addressed at the time of improvement. All connecting sidewalks and crosswalks are the responsibility of the city and are improved at the cityâs time frame and discretion. â¢ Regardless of location, we try to make improvements to the more heavily used and popular stops. â¢ We have a Bus Stop Improvement Framework that takes these elements into consideration. â¢ Transit Dependent Index. â¢ We utilize GIS and our Trapeze systems to examine ridership, bus stop spacing (trying to adhere to 1/4 mile or less between stops), demographic data, employment data, as well as direct interaction with riders through surveys and other means. â¢ By ensuring that any improvements are spread across the service area and allocated based on need factors. â¢ The agency uses a prioritization ranking matrix with several screening criteria that allows the agency to have a baseline of stops that need improvement. Changes in the list occur, but the general rule is that we will address the stops in order of those with the highest âscore.â â¢ This is a consideration in our Title VI Program, and we have an inventory of stops to ensure compliance. â¢ The agency developed a list of priority stops based on a complete inventory of stops and the need of users (seniors and PWD) around the stops. Equity is addressed based on age and disabilities.
â¢ With limited funds allocated to stop improvements, the agency prioritizes placement of new features over replacementâthis increases the accessibility system wide, working towards having a greater balanced system. The agency assumes that due to our ridership demographics, we have higher levels of amenities for stops in areas that may have higher population of the underserved members. We are currently updating the information in our bus stop database and will be able to better answer this question once we have an accurate and complete database of existing infrastructure to overlay with our E&I geographies. â¢ Our Bus Stop Enhancement Program main goal is to make every single bus stop accessible. Existing stops are being selected based on need/use. This responsible financial program allows for better utilization and allocation of the overall resources in order to obtain better and faster results to accomplish our main goal: to provide excellent and safe service. â¢ Planning process as previously reported. â¢ It is a collaboration between capital projects and planning department. â¢ We prioritize improvements based on a combination of fixed-route ridership levels and specific equity metrics through our Service Equity Strategy. â¢ The agency has standard operating procedures for bus stop placement that ensures equity throughout the service area. â¢ We typically examine the car ownership rates near our major corridor projects and ensure geographic equity throughout the city, which typically allows for great diversity in populations who receive improvements. We are also responsive to requests by community members or elected officials. â¢ We prioritize improvements based on a bus stop safety and accessibility study that was completed a few years ago, and by a combination of customer feedback, bus operator input, resources available, and input from the Townâs (mostly volunteer) corridor/sidewalk committee. â¢ Periodic audit of stops to update inventory and note compliance issues. â¢ When adding shelters, we look at making sure they are distributed equally throughout the county (while taking ridership into account and stop-level ridership; areas with more ridership will have more amenities). Highest ridership stops get priority of amenity improvements. â¢ The equity perspective of bus stop improvements focuses mainly on the placement of bus shelters as Title VI considerations are considered within the shelter scoring method and prioritization. Beyond shelters, the agency does not explicitly have a proactive bus stop improvements program and relies on customer feedback and available funding to make improvements to stops.
Funding Considerations Q35 What local funding sources (non-federal or state) are used in bus stop and pedestrian improvements? Please check all that apply.
Sales tax 12 25.53% General local contributions from the municipality/county 24 51.06% Specified contributions from the municipality/county 14 29.79% Specialized sources (rental revenues, advertising, etc.) 4 8.51% Business contributions 5 10.64% Other 15 31.91% â¢ Federal formula funds/state funds. â¢ Federal CMAQ funding. â¢ GO bond. â¢ City Foundation for Excellence. â¢ The agency uses state funds for signs; towns maintain amenities. â¢ As a municipal department, we are budgeted for local operating costs (including maintenance staff for bus stops). Capital costs are generally grant funded or incorporated into projects managed and funded by road agencies. â¢ Property tax. â¢ The majority of our shelter improvements come from an agreement we have with a local outdoor sign provider. In exchange for being able to sell ad space on the public ROW (on our bus shelters), they purchase, install, and maintain the shelters. â¢ We donât have a dedicated funding source for bus stop improvements. We typically utilize CDBG funds or FTA funds with the local match provided by the Cityâs General Fund. â¢ The cityâs general capital funds. â¢ Private developer funded. â¢ Federal and state transit funds, mostly with local match requirements. â¢ General fund, which includes payroll tax, fare box, and advertising. â¢ Business contributions for specific projects. â¢ Grants and capital programming. Number of Responses 74 Q35: What local funding sources (non-federal or state) are used in bus stop and pedestrian improvements? Number Percent
Q36 How much per year is allocated for bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure maintenance and improvements? Please enter the average amount from your current or most recent budget year. Please also enter the number of bus stops and enter the answers in the boxes below. Agency name Budget Bus stops Missoula Urban Transportation District Federal grant dependent Metro Transit $4 million over 6 years (2014â2019) Improved 437 bus stops (excluding development & street reconstruction projects) Regional Transportation Authority of Northeastern Illinois Approximately $5 million, with 20% covered by CMAQ funding for our whole program, which goes beyond bus stops Estimate 10 bus stops impacted (most are rail stations) Space Coast Area Transit $1,350,890 946 EMBARK It depends 1,400 Salem Area Mass Transit District, dba Cherriots $660,000, including federal grants for a bus stop improvement program Up to 75 Athens-Clarke County Transit $75,000 525 Transfort $200,000 20 Trinity Metro $1.5 million 100 Votran Approximately $128,000 Approximately 2,580 Metro Varies per year ($10,000â$30,000) 44,124 Hampton Roads Transit Varies; depends on funding availability and discretionary grant opportunities Varies; $1.0 million is typical VIA Metropolitan Transit $1,343,842 6,898
Memphis Area Transit Authority $500,000 5,000 Arlington Transit Bureau $855,000 35â50 Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) $1,040,000 50 NJ Transit 14,000 City of Detroit Department of Transportation (DDOT) 5,600 Rogue Valley Transportation District $210,000 483 Butte County Association of Governments $0 budgeted as it is contracted out; we have a net cost of $0 Approximately 543 stops, including 154 sheltered stops Transit Services Division â City of Tucson 0 0 Big Blue Bus $80,000,000 Approximately 300 Utah Transit Authority $1,000,000 100 Kansas City Area Transportation Authority Unsure, inconsistent budget (except for maintenance) usually based on specific projects or grant funding District Department of Transportation Based on existing infrastructure projects Based on existing infrastructure projects Pierce Transit $112,600 2,200 Sun Metro $500,000 80â110 Capital Metro $2.6 million 164 Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART) $14,000 (not including staff salary and benefits) 2,200 Rhode Island Public Transit Authority $100,000 NYC DOT 15,000 Blacksburg Transit $60,000 8 GoTriangle Agency name Budget Bus stops
Agency name Budget Bus stops Lane Transit District $200,000 1,300 MTS $200,000 4,300 Antelope Valley Transit Authority (AVTA) Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority $1,585,056 4,500 Infrastructure Investment Benefits Q37 For each of the following measure used at your transit agency (as applicable), please indicate using a scale of 1 (made significantly worse) to 5 (made significantly better) the effect bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure investment has had on the factors presented below.
Q37: For each of the following measure used at your transit agency (as applicable), please indicate using a scale of 1 (made significantly worse) to 5 (made significantly better) the effect bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure investment has had on the factors presented below. Fixed-route ridership (higher) Paratransit ridership (lower) Actual changes in operating cost/trip (lower) Estimated changes in operating cost/trip (lower) Area business activity (higher) Customer complaints on amenities and access (lower) N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t Made significantly worse 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 2.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Made somewhat worse 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% No impact 4 9.8% 9 22.5% 1 48.8% 20 48.8% 8 20.5% 3 7.3% Made somewhat better 18 43.9% 10 25.0% 20 9.8% 4 9.8% 10 25.6% 19 46.3% Made significantly better 10 24.4% 0 0.0% 4 2.4% 0 0.0% 3 7.7% 12 29.3% N/A or not measured 9 22.0% 21 52.5% 1 36.6% 17 41.5% 18 46.2% 7 17.1% Other â¢ We are currently in the middle of a major bus stop improvement project and outcomes are not yet known â¢ These metrics are captured by the third-party contractor that manages the operations of the Cityâs transit system; I do not have this data readily available; my apologies â¢ Pedestrian safety at stops (made significantly better) â¢ Senior staff, Town Council notices (made somewhat better) Number of Responses 41 40 27 41 39 41
Q38 Using a scale of 1 (not a problem at all) to 3 (major challenge), please indicate your agencyâs experience with the bus stop improvement program issues presented below. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Generating buy in with all stakeholders Maintaining goals and measurement in the context of changing priorities of the transit system, financial budgetâ¦ Coordinating with jurisdiction(s) that have right-of-way at neighboring bus stop pathways Coordinating with other transit operators that use the bus stops Working with developers and private property owners Ensuring equity of bus stop and pedestrian improvements in all parts of the service area Gathering and managing bus stop inventory data Measuring benefit of bus stop and pedestrian improvements Funding availability for bus stop and pedestrian improvements Coordination within the agency on bus stop and pedestrian improvements Establishing agencyâs design criteria Not a problem at all Slight problem Major challenge
Generating buy in with all stakeholders Maintaining goals and measurement in the context of changing priorities of the transit system, financial budget pressures, etc. Coordinating with jurisdiction(s) that have right-of-way at neighboring bus stop pathways Coordinating with other transit operators that use the bus stops Working with developers and private property owners Ensuring equity of bus stop and pedestrian improvements in all parts of the service area Gathering and managing bus stop inventory data Measuring benefit of bus stop and pedestrian improvements Funding availability for bus stop and pedestrian improvements Coordination within the agency on bus stop and pedestrian improvements Establishing agencyâs design criteria N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r N um be r Pe rc en t N um be r Pe rc en t Pe rc en t Pe rc en t Not a problem at all 20 45.5% 20 46.5% 14 32.6% 35 83.3% 7 18 42.9% 18 42.9% 25.6% 54.8% Slight problem 17 38.6% 12 27.9% 22 51.2% 7 16.7% 25 21 50.0% 16 38.1% 37.2% 40.5% Major challenge 7 15.9% 11 25.6% 7 16.3% 0 0.0% 11 Pe rc en t 16.3% 58.1% 25.6% 3 7.1% 8 19.1% N um be r 9 18 13 Pe rc en t 22.5% 45.0% 32.5% N um be r 11 16 16 37.2% N um be r 23 17 2 4.8% N um be r 29 10 2 Pe rc en t 70.7% 24.4% 4.9% Other â¢ Having sufficient project management staff to coordinate project delivery â¢ Identifying locations to meet ADA requirements that connect to existing sidewalk (major challenge) â¢ Working with civic associations (major challenge) â¢ Allocating staff time to plan and hire contractors among various other duties (major challenge) â¢ Placement in front of private residences and businesses who donât support bus stop (major challenge) â¢ Transition from maintenance staff to contractors (maintenance can no longer install shelters) (major challenge) Number of Responses 44 43 43 42 43 42 42 40 43 42 41 Q38: Using a scale of 1 (not a problem at all) to 3 (major challenge), please indicate your agencyâs experience with the bus stop improvement program issues presented below.
C-52 Transit Agency Relationships and Initiatives to Improve Bus Stops and Pedestrian Access Q39 What lessons learned could your agency share with the industry regarding bus stop and pedestrian infrastructure improvements? â¢ We are in the middle of our first ever major bus stop improvement project and will have more insight once the project is completed later this year. â¢ We have an excellent story to tell about why we invest in bus stops and how we have tracked our investments. https://metrocouncil.org/Council- Meetings/Committees/Transportation-Committee/2020/January-13,-2020/Info-1_Better- Bus-Stops.aspx; http://www.startribune.com/metro-transit-hopes-signs-end-the-mystery- at-bus-stops/567042492/. â¢ We can share details on our Access to Transit Program, which is a competitive program that provides funding for primarily bicycle and pedestrian access to transit improvements. We run our own call for projects and then bundle the projects together into one CMAQ application, and the RTA covers either all or a portion of the local match amount. â¢ One of the biggest hurdles is although there is a need for compliance with ADA regulations and improvements or having sidewalks, accessible pathways or landing pads installed, many local municipalities do not have this considered as a budget item or the means of funding the projects. â¢ Anyone considering this a comprehensive bus stop improvement project needs to understand it is not as simple as managing a single large project. Each stop location has its own particular issues that need to be addressed individually. â¢ That itâs a crucial element in transit to be able to provide a safe and comfortable service in all communities. â¢ Coordinating with local road agencies that have projects occurring and doing the upgrades to bus stops at the same time has saved our agencies thousands of dollars per year. We coordinate to have the stop improved as part of the Complete Streets process in the State. When able, the bus stops pads are upgraded and connected to sidewalks, allowing the transit system to focus on new signage and shelters/benches. Have conversations with local businesses and developers early to learn about what they are doing, how the transit system can link to their business, and what upgrades to the bus stop they would like to see in order to get their support and financial contributions. We have had new shelter pads installed with the transit system providing the shelter. This partnership has happened over a dozen times in the past 5 years and benefits the transit system by not having to hire a contractor to do the concrete and other infrastructure work. Monitor the bus stop improvements if some other agency is doing the work. What is ADA to the transit system is not necessarily compliant to a contractor who doesnât work with ADA requirements. Without monitoring, we have had concrete pads poured out of compliance and have the contractor brought back in to fix improvements made to meet the needs of the bus stop.
Survey Responses C-53 ramps and is dependent upon the municipality for improvements and approvals for the placement of bus stops, and passenger amenities. The municipalities do not coordinate with the agency for private development and take into consideration transit service or bus stop placement. The majority of our capital funds for bus shelters, bus stop passenger amenities comes from federal and state funding sources. Sometimes some of the six municipalities approach the agency to pay for the installation of new shelters at specific locations due to requests made by citizens to city council members. Every new shelter added into the system has an ongoing maintenance and cleanliness increase in costs that the cities fail to recognize and support in the approval of the annual budgeting process. Out of the agencyâs 2,700 bus stops, currently around 250 of them have bus shelters. â¢ We learned that we need good contacts within the various cities and the state DOT that we work with to get in at the beginning of any infrastructure programs they do. Need to have good relationships with contractors and internal procurement processes in place so we can have quick action (task orders to on call contractors to build/install) and fabricate/manufacture. Need to conduct regular internal review meetings. We continue to have challenges with real estate (easements), connecting infrastructure or lack thereof or its poor condition; working around obstructions like water lines and other utilities in the ROW. â¢ Bus stops and pedestrian infrastructure conditions can rapidly deteriorate or change, which makes inventory difficult without a significant staff primarily devoted to managing and monitoring bus stops. â¢ Our County enjoys a robust transportation program of which bus service is a major component; therefore, bus stop improvements have been supported. Right-of-way can be major hurdle because the state DOT owns much of the County roads. Also, costs for obtaining easements can be a limiting factor in ADA improvement upgrades. â¢ The agency developed an activity index to rank and compare the activity levels of all bus stops. It has been useful when making service changes to decide whether or not to keep a stop, the type of improvements needed based on use, etc. Data comes from the NTD surveys. â¢ Coordinate projects with road agencies wherever possible and encourage road agencies to keep your agency up to date on projects. Develop clear, consistent standards for improvements, and share them widely. Inform partner agencies of what your priorities are. Standardize improvements to simplify maintenance. Hire sufficient dedicated in- house maintenance staff and solicit their input on aspects of project design. Ensure that all improvements that are installed can be kept in good repair; donât let the capital program outpace the capacity of the maintenance team. Coordinate improvements with any pending or future bus route and bus stop changes. Become familiar with the various funding sources that are available and the associated requirements (e.g., Section 106 review). Ensure that the project timeline allows for these requirements to be fulfilled by the staff assigned to the project. â¢ We are a regional transit authority that has 44% of its operations funded by six individual municipalities. The agency has no control of the public right-of-way curbs, sidewalks and
C-54 Transit Agency Relationships and Initiatives to Improve Bus Stops and Pedestrian Access locations. Send letters to residents ahead of time notifying those who will have a stop located near their property. This gives you time to work with the residents before installing the stop. â¢ One thing that is very frustrating is that (because of ADA laws) you cannot make slight improvements to a shelter/location. If it is an older shelter and some easy/slight improvements would benefit it, you are not allowed to do that. If you make any change/improvement to the shelter/location, then the whole project must be in full ADA compliance. That discourages making small cost-effective improvements. Granted all locations should be in ADA compliance, but not being able to make small improvements is a deterrent to a better system. â¢ Bus stops can be an afterthought of some jurisdictions, especially with regard to funding and maintenance; having a dedicated funding source for both is of paramount importance. â¢ Bus stops really could use a full-time caregiver, but few agencies give them that much resources. â¢ It took the agency several years to develop the bus stop master plan and it is constantly being updated and improved, so the best advice is to just start one. Create a draft document for comment and feedback and move toward a final draft knowing that the document will most likely change many times over the years and the agency evolves. â¢ This is a priority for the local DOT and elected officials in the city; however, we rely on existing infrastructure projects to fund design and construction, so it isnât always equitably distributed (geographically) around the city. â¢ When doing systemwide redesigns or branding changes, spend more time in the general ridership to inform, educate, and obtain public feedback before final design of the improvement. â¢ Probably one of the main lessons learned is that the pedestrian infrastructure is a shared responsibility between the transit agency and the governmental departments such as Streets & Maintenance, Capital Improvements and the Purchasing Departments. Itâs a collaborative effort to ensure the best product for the community and that the improvements go beyond a âsmallâ bus stop area. The pedestrian improvements should apply to the entire city so walkability could then be a safe reality. â¢ I believe the most challenging lesson learned is to coordinate with local business and property owners. It is a matter of making them understand how important public transportation is and how they can benefit from it. â¢ Coordinate early with local jurisdiction and department of transportation regarding permitting requirements. â¢ Work closely with the jurisdictions as each have their own set of regulations. If installing new route stops, schedule additional time for any resident or city changes to stop
Survey Responses C-55 because they know our system, can deal with getting materials from our property, and we donât have to go to bid or get quotes as often. â¢ It is usually easier to work with a municipality, as opposed to private developers, but until the cities agree we can work through them, we need to draw up MOUs with private developers who do not want to assume any risk and only make a one-time payment for required amenity improvements. Some municipalities are charging for more than what we originally put in agreements with them; for example, the city now requires signed and sealed drawings for amenity improvement ($5,000 per bus stop) making amenity partnerships much more difficult. Another difficulty is deciding whose responsibility it is to improve areas near a bus stop: who (the transit agency or city) needs to fix the slope of a stop to be ADA compliant, who is responsible for design and construction of ramps or other necessary work? The transit agency cannot afford the design (sometimes engineer signed and sealed drawings required) and construction (concrete) of surrounding area, but could add a shelter, bench, or landing pad. â¢ Having a single person whose full-time job is bus stop improvements would be best. Currently, we have a planner who has numerous responsibilities, and bus stop improvement projects get pushed down on the list very often. Having transit maintenance staff put in and maintain shelters and bus stops was what we used to do and now maintenance only works on buses, so we have to use contractors, which is more expensive, and relies on grant funding to fund. Having a single contractor is ideal,