Summary of 2/24/14 Board Meeting

There were 21 people in attendance at this meeting of the District 1 Board of Directors to hear about proposed bike plan and to get an update on Boys Totem Town.

Draft City-wide Bike Plan – Reuben Collins (SP Public Works)

The City’s Comprehensive Plan (2010) specifies that a bike plan should be developed with the intent to increase the bike share (the percentage of people using bikes for transportation), and with specification about spacing of bike facilities (that is distance between designated bike routes.

Purpose of the plan is to designate streets for future development of bikeways; and to recommend the bikeway type (off street, bike lanes, shared lanes, etc.); City has had an issue when Public Works  brings forward a project where streets are being rebuilt and they have had to deal in each case with the question of whether bikeways should be included. An approved plan allows them to think systemically and strategically about where these facilities should be located. (The draft plan was worked on from 2011 to 2013 during which time they held open houses to get input. Now the draft is released and the public has until the end of April to submit commits about it.)

Who rides bikes? – 1-2% are fearless riders, 5-10% are enthused and confident, 60% are interested but have concerns; 30% say no way no how will they get on a bike. This plan is not designed to compel riders but to encourage those who are interested but have concerns.  These are the large number of people who would ride if they felt safer etc. – the plan helps that 60% to figure out that they CAN ride if they choose.

There are 4 facilities types – off street paths, on-street separated lanes, bicycle boulevards, enhanced shared lanes (these represent engineering differences); city staff has proposed streets that should have a bicycle facility (and the types) across the city looking at a variety of route considerations (including cost, equity, user experience, key destinations, potential for development, ROW width, traffic volumes and speeds and truck traffic, etc …). The plan recommends substantial expansion of bikeways across the city (144 miles now, add 214 miles).

The plan doesn’t address cost, funding, construction timeline, policies or prioritization – but final plan should address each of these to the extent possible – including prioritization. Comments from the public are accepted through April 30, with a final draft expected in June, and adoption by City Council by the end of 2014. Comments are taken at public meetings such as this one, verbalize comments here, through written comments to Reuben at Reuben.Collins@ci.stpaul.mn.us, and on Open StPaul

Questions from audience –The Eastside hasn’t been served very well previously so eastside should be prioritized just to catch up – there is limited access currently to Pigs Eye limited with a current proposal to come in along Childs Road and cross highway 61 at Henry Park, but should also add river crossings; Also plans for pathway from Battle Creek Park and Fish Hatchery to Fish Creek along the ridge: How does this relate to Great River Passage Plan? –ANSWER -  this plan has a unique relationship with Parks Planning – parks has been in the room the entire time – this plan is not intended to influence Parks planning which focuses on recreational biking within parks; this plan asks questions about how people get to or from parks not how they circulate in a park.

Questions about McKnight Road – should there be an off street path all the way?; currently parking is allowed in the shoulders but little parking happens – do we restrict on-street parking or expand for off street or leave it as is? Unpleasant biking because of traffic speed so separated path makes sense – But this is a County road. The County is in process of developing its own bike(and ped plan) and will take this plan into account. Maplewood and county have both relied on Saint Paul to recommend bikeways on streets; Community wants to emphasize safety and comfort; under the freeway along McKnight is a problem – a tunnel there should be considered.

Margaret St is shown as a bicycle boulevard – It was recently narrowed in a certain section - does that set it up as a problem for bikeways – ANSWER no, narrow streets can be a preference for bikeways since narrowing slows traffic down and slower traffic makes for safer bike facility.

Connecting to other parts of the community is a major problem – like McKnight and freeway, key problem locations are Hiway 61 and Burns, and the freeway crossings including the so-called bike/ped bridge – bridges are a problem here. ANSWER – The District will be proposing a relocation of the bike/ped bridge.

When making comments – don’t think about how unsafe you think a route is now, but look at where people want to go and ask how routes can be made safe.

Boys Totem Town Update - Steve Poynter, BTT Director

Wanted to speak about the potential to rebuild of BTT. A major report was done in past 2 years with recommendations about how to improve the continuum of care for juveniles involved with the criminal justice system. Some of the recommendations included rebuilding Totem Town at current site, or combining with Juvenile Detention Center at that site or another, or developing a partnership with Hennepin County. As of this time, no official decision has been made, and no decision will be made without community input. 

The research being done now involves exploring the joint Ramsey/Hennepin County model; Hennepin County has programs for girls and for juvenile sex offenders at Glen Lake far to the west of downtown Mpls. The results of this research will be reported back to County Board within 2 months. They are also currently looking at the continuum of services for dealing with Juvenile corrections (stay in home, to jail…). The recommendation is for a 38 bed Totem Town – trying to keep youth out of the facility and better integrated with the community. (Now Totem Town only uses 36 bed – 3 dorms of 12 beds each; Kohler Hall is day treatment facility whereas it used to be a secure facility – with 14 boys in that program currently.) 

Totem Town has discontinued taking kids 14 years or younger (realizing that confining such youngsters does more harm than good). Some of these youngest offenders are in day treatment and some are at home, some going elsewhere.

The other issue that came up previously was runaways – previously in 2013 had been about 6 per month, now staff does a runaway risk assessment, and they have normalized the feelings of wanting to run away. Currently there has not been a runaway since October 19 2013 -  a great improvement. An additional factor may be that the younger kids were more likely to run away. Totem Town has been working closely with SPPD on the run away issue (and others…). 

Additional topics at the meeting included providing funding for volunteer and youth recognition, monthly financials and updates on efforts around inclusivity.