MPO Technical Committee

MPO TECHNICAL COMMITTEE & NMDOT SPECIAL JOINT MEETING AGENDA Farmington Metropolitan Planning Organization June 30, 2015 10:00 a.m. MPO Office 100 W Broadway, 2nd Floor Farmington, New Mexico  AGENDA FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION SPECIAL JOINT TECHNICAL COMMITTEE & NMDOT MEETING June 30, 2015 10:00 AM This meeting will be held at the MPO Office, 100 W Broadway, 2nd Floor, Farmington, New Mexico. ITEM PAGE 1. Call meeting to order 2. Approve the minutes from the May 14, 2015 Technical Committee meeting. 16 3. Consider recommending approval of the FTA Memorandum of Agreement 1 Presented by: Duane Wakan 4. Consider approval of the FFY2016-2021 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). 12 Presented by Fran Fillerup 5. Receive a TIP Project Update 14 Presented by: Duane Wakan 6. Information Items: a. MPO Quarterly Meeting b. Schedule of July TC Meeting 15 c. Other Presented by: Fran Fillerup 7. Joint Meeting Discussion Items and Additional Reports from NMDOT a. Project Updates by Entities (Aztec, Bloomfield, Farmington, San Juan County) and NMDOT b. NMDOT Organization Chart (Miguel Gabaldon & Others Departure) c. Communication & Project Management Concerns d. Status of NMDOT Representation on FMPO Policy & Technical Committees e. Additional Update from District 5 (David Quintana) Additional Update from the Planning Division (Brian Degani) f. Business From Chairman, Members, and Staff 8. Business from the Floor 9. Adjournment 10. ATTENTION PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES: If you are an individual with a disability who is in need of a reader, amplifier, qualified sign language interpreter, or any other form of auxiliary aid or service to attend or participate in the hearing or meeting, please contact the MPO Administrative Aide at the Downtown Center, 100 W Broadway, Farmington, New Mexico or at 505-599-1466 at least one week prior to the meeting or as soon as possible. Public documents, including the agenda and minutes, can be provided in various accessible formats. Please contact the MPO Administrative Aide if a summary or other type of accessible format is needed.  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item 3 Subject: FTA Memorandum of Agreement Prepared by: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Date: June 16, 2015 BACKGROUND or PREVIOUS WORK  The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) serves as the planning contract between the MPO and the Federal Transit Administrations 5303 program.  The document identifies the responsibilities for carrying out the metropolitan transportation planning process between the MPO, NMDOT, and the fiscal agent serving the metropolitan planning area.  With the MOA, NMDOT and the MPO also enter into a contractual agreement to establish the terms and conditions for performance and payment.  The lead agencies legal department has reviewed and signed the document.  This is the first MOA that has come from NMDOT Transit and Rail Division. CURRENT WORK  FTA has presented the MPO with a MOA that covers a three-year period from July 1, 2018 to September 30, 2018.  The Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) will need to identify specific 5303 planning task, scopes and funding estimates.  A 20% local funding match will continue to apply to all 5303 planning activities.  An annual audit of the 5303 Program will be required pursuant to 2 CFR 200 uniform administrative requirements, cost principles and audit requirements for Federal awards. ANTICIPATED WORK  Approval of the Memorandum of Agreement by the Policy Committee will be sought at their special June 30 meeting. ATTACHMENTS  A draft Memorandum of Agreement as proposed by NMDOT Transit & Rail Division. ACTION ITEM  Staff recommends approval of the Cooperative Agreement to the Policy Committee as proposed by NMDOT. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item 4 Subject: FY2016-2021 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Prepared by: Fran Fillerup, MPO Associate Planner Date: June 23, 2015 BACKGROUND  The TIP is a short-term program of projects expected to be completed in the next six years.  The TIP update process includes revising existing project information, adding new projects, and developing TIP priority lists.  A Call for Projects was issued on April 30, 2015 to start the TIP update process.  A Project Review Committee made up of a Policy Committee member, a Technical Committee member and MPO Staff reviewed the TIP projects on June 2. Scoring was completed using the MPO’s new projection prioritization method (PPM).  Attached are pages containing the overall ranking of projects included in the TIP Call for Projects, and supporting information showing average scores on the 10 goal-based criteria, inclusion in local ICIP documents, and information from the Review Committee’s Key Findings.  Projects already found in the 2014-2019 TIP were not required to be scored, though some entities chose to include them in the scoring.  Staff will present the current TIP projects and ranking based on the PPM on June 30.  A 30-day public comment period on the new TIP was opened on May 27, 2015. CURRENT WORK  Staff met with the entities, Red Apple, and NMDOT individually to discuss any updates to their project information.  The draft TIP has been developed based on these meetings.  The TIP Priority lists will be reviewed and modified with the Technical Committee on June 30.  The STIP is scheduled to be updated summer 2015. PROJECTS FROM PREVIOUS TIP (2014-2019)  Those projects in the 2014-2019 TIP with funding occurring in 2016-19 are carried forward, are listed here, and detail pages from the TIP database are attached. o East Arterial Route Phase 2 (F100091) o East Pinon Hills Boulevard Extension Phase I (F100100) o East Pinon Hills Boulevard Extension Phase II (F100101) o US 64 Phase IV (F100110) o US 64 Phase V (F100112) o US 64 Phase VI (F100113) o Bridge Preservation: US 550 #9178 & #9179 (F100114) o Bridge Preservation: US 550 8243 & 8244 & US-64 7526 (F100115) o NM 173 (F100170) 12  o CR 350/CR 390 Intersection (F100210) o Vereda del Rio San Juan River Trail Phase II (F100230) o Vereda del Rio San Juan River Trail Phase III (F100231) o Animas River Trail (F100240) o Animas River Trail (F100250) o Red Apple Transit Capital/Operating (TF00001) NEW PROJECTS TO ADD TO 2016-2021 TIP  The following projects have been identified to be added to the TIP and already have some level of local, state, and/or federal funding.  Detail regarding the funding is found on the attached pages from the TIP database are attached: o Kirtland Schools Walk Path - Approx. 3.4 miles of asphalt path and sidewalk, Total Project Cost of $1,000,000, fully funded through TAP and Local Match in 2016 and 2017. o East Pinon Hills Boulevard Extension Phase III - Approx. 2.1 of roadway, Total Project Cost of $8,000,000 locally funded for construction. o East Blanco - Approx. one-half mile, total project cost $2,000,000, currently partially funded with State Municipal Arterial funds and Local Government Road Funds totaling $769,364 and local match of $192,342. o Red Apple Transit Bus Shelter - Awarded TAP project $81,577 FUNDING and FISCAL CONSTRAINT  The TIP is required to be fiscally constrained. The projects listed have identified funding, or anticipated funding can be based on a reasonable expectation for available funds.  NMDOT District 5 anticipates that, for the years 2016 to 2019, no additional funds are available beyond the current funding already assigned to projects. In the years 2020 and 2021, there is approximately $10 million total which may be available. This is still unknown at this time. ANTICIPATED WORK  Finalize any project revisions with the entities.  Discuss and approve TIP priorities with the Technical and Policy Committees.  Seek adoption of the FY2016-2021 TIP. ATTACHMENTS  The draft FY2016-2021 TIP will be provided separately within 72 hours of the Technical Committee meeting.  Background information used during the TIP Call for Projects will also be provided for reference. ACTION ITEM  It is recommended that the Technical Committee approve the projects in the fiscally constrained FY2016-2021 TIP. 13  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item 5 Subject: Status of TIP Projects Prepared by: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Date: June 16, 2015 BACKGROUND  The STIP Protocols, finalized in early 2014, indicate that each MPO shall develop a process to monitor the progress and status of each project in the first two years of the TIP.  MPO Staff has been conducting a monthly review of all FMPO TIP projects with the Technical Committee. These reviews have helped correct inconsistencies in the TIP, STIP, the MPO’s MTP and Agreement Request Forms (ARFs).  The Plans, Specifications, & Estimates (PS&E) deadline is July 15, 2015. CURRENT WORK  2014-15 TAP Projects are on track for PS&E completion by July 2015.  20th Street Sidewalks Phase I (FMTN) completed PS&E in early February  20th Street Sidewalks Phase II (FMTN) to complete PS&E in July  Vereda del Rio River Trail Phase II & III (BLMFLD) to complete PS&E in June/July  South Side River Road River Trail (FMTN) to complete PS&E in June/July INFORMATION ITEM  This is an information item only and Committee members will have an opportunity to provide feedback regarding TIP project status and details. 14  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item 6 Subject: Information Items Prepared by: Fran Fillerup, MPO Associate Planner Date: June 23, 2015 INFORMATION ITEMS a. Proposed new date for July TC meeting. With the next scheduled Technical Committee on July 9, MPO proposes to move the July meeting to July 16. b. Review of MPO Quarterly. The Farmington MPO hosted the MPO Quarterly meeting on June 17 and 18 in Aztec and Farmington. c. Other. 15  MINUTES FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING May 14, 2015 Technical Members Present: Bil Homka, Alternate, City of Aztec Teresa Brevik, City of Bloomfield Cindy Lopez, City of Farmington David Sypher, City of Farmington Dave Keck, San Juan County Technical Members Absent: Bill Watson, City of Aztec Staff Present: Mary Holton, MPO Officer Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Fran Fillerup, MPO Associate Planner June Markle, MPO Administrative Aide Staff Absent: None Also Present: Brian Degani, NMDOT, Planning Liaison Larry Hathaway, San Juan County Andrew Montoya, Transit Manager, City of Farmington Sam Montoia, Alternate, City of Farmington Claude Morelli, NMDOT Rebecca Morgan, Complete Streets Advisory Group Member 1. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Sypher called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m. 2. APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE APRIL 9, 2015 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING Mr. Keck moved to approve the minutes from the April 9, 2015 Technical Committee meeting. Ms. Lopez seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. 3. AMENDMENT #11 TO THE FFY2014-2019 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Subject: FFY2014-2019 TIP Amendment #11 Prepared by: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Date: May 6, 2015 16  BACKGROUND  On April 26, 2015 the Farmington MPO advertised Amendment #11 to the FFY2014-2019 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).  The amendment involves two projects in the TIP as described in the attached notice.  The Technical Committee will consider the amendment and may make a recommendation at their meeting on May 14. AMENDED TIP PROJECTS  F100112 US 64 Phase V - NHPP funds are being decreased by $3,525,285 in FY2018.  F100200 San Juan Blvd/Scott Ave Intersection Safety Project- A local non- match of $59,900 for Project Engineering (PE) is being added in FY2015.  An update to F100200 adds an additional $70,000 in Local Non-Match Funds in FY2015 for construction. ACTION ITEM  Staff recommends the approval of Amendment #11 (including F100200 updates) to the FFY2014-2019 TIP DISCUSSION: Mr. Wakan explained the two projects that made up Amendment #11 to the FFY2014-2019 Transportation Improvement Program.  US 64 Phase V (F100112); Funding for Phase V was decreased by $3,525,285 in FY2018  San Juan Boulevard/Scott Avenue Intersection project (F100200); local non- match of $59,900 for project engineering is being added in FY2015; an additional $70,000 in local non-match funds are also added for construction. Mr. Sypher clarified that this project now has two separate contracts. The project design will be completed in FY2015 with construction planned for FY2016. Mr. Wakan stated that the $70,000 in construction funds would be moved to FY2016. Mr. Wakan said the MPO has experienced issues with project changes coming in after the 30-day public notice has been advertised resulting in having to call special committee meetings. He commented that other MPOs in the state do not formally notice the actual project details in the public notice to allow for last minute changes to be more easily be incorporated into the final amendment. The project details are, however, presented for discussion at the committee meetings prior to approvals. Mr. Wakan also reported that the other MPOs in the state advertise their TIP amendments for 15 days and use 30-day noticing when a new TIP is advertised. Mr. Wakan said these were changes Staff was considering implementing in order to avoid having to re-advertise and yet still meet federal noticing requirements and the MPO’s own Public Participation Plan. 17 Mr. Sypher opened the public hearing for TIP Amendment #11. There being no public comment, Mr. Sypher closed the public hearing. ACTION: Ms. Lopez moved to recommend approval of Amendment #11 to the FFY2014-2019 TIP. Ms. Brevik seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. 4. CONSIDERING RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE COMMITTEE BYLAWS AND OPERATING PROCEDURES Subject: Committee Bylaws and Operating Procedures Prepared by: Mary L Holton, AICP, MPO Officer Date: May 14, 2015 BACKGROUND  The Committee Bylaws and Operating Procedures provide the guidance for the Policy and Technical committees, and is due for renewal. The new Bylaws will govern from October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2018.  The Bylaws are formally updated in conjunction with the Joint Powers Agreement every three years.  Descriptions of the Chair and Vice-Chair for each committee, removal and replacement process, and voting procedures are contained within this document.  An initial report on the update to the Committee Bylaws and Operating Procedures was given to the Technical Committee on April 9, 2015, and to the Policy Committee on April 23, 2015. CURRENT WORK  The language in the Committee Bylaws is being reviewed for possible changes, including adding membership for a NMDOT representative to both the Technical & Policy Committees as directed by the Federal Highway Administration, and adding a Red Apple Transit representative to the Technical Committee as directed by the Federal Transit Administration. RECOMMENDATION  The proposal is submitted for the Technical Committee’s consideration of a recommendation to the Policy Committee. DISCUSSION: Ms. Holton reported that the draft Committee Bylaws and Operating Procedures document was reviewed with the Technical Committee on April 9. The document was then reviewed and discussed with the Policy Committee on April 23. The document is being submitted today for Technical Committee consideration of recommended approval. 18 Ms. Holton noted the changes beginning on Page 8 of the Agenda (those changes in red are old recommendations and those in green are the new suggestion brought forward by the Policy Committee: Page 8 - Membership The Policy Committee is made up of six (6) voting members; five who are appointed by the governing bodies of the participating local governments and one designated by NMDOT. Either an elected official (preferable) or an appointed government official of the governing body may serve as a member or designated alternate. The governing body of each participating member is responsible for appointing an elected official to the Policy Committee as follows: One (1) from San Juan County; One (1) from the City of Aztec; One (1) from City of Bloomfield; and Two (2) from the City of Farmington. Alternates may be designated by the participating member’s governing body or NMDOT for their voting member; the alternates must also be elected officials from the governing body, except for the NMDOT member. For members and alternates, the governing body and NMDOT shall submit a letter to the MPO Officer and to the MPO Planner designating the member and the alternate member. Ms. Holton reported that the Policy Committee wanted this section to state that it was preferable to have an elected official, but to allow an entity the option of appointing a government official instead. This appointed official would be at a department head level or above. Page 16 – Removal Procedure 1. Attendance is required at all Technical Committee meetings. If a Technical Committee member fails to attend seventy-five (75) percent of the Technical Committee meetings in a twelve-month calendar period or fails to attend fifty (50) percent of the Technical Committee meetings in person in a twelve-month calendar period, his or her membership may be terminated. Committee attendance is recorded and archived by the MPO Administrative Aide. Ms. Holton said there was discussion on setting a minimum threshold for in-person meeting attendance and the Policy Committee supported the Technical Committee’s need to ensure they saw representatives face-to-face as often as possible. The recommendation above was made by the Policy Committee for consideration by the Technical Committee. Ms. Holton stated that these two changes were the only additional ones since the last time the Technical Committee had reviewed the document. Mr. Sypher referred to Page 49 of the Agenda which were the minutes from the April meeting in which Staff was asked by the Technical Committee to draft some language on attendance and voting. Is the addition noted above meant to be this language? Ms. Holton replied that this is what Staff was proposing for the Technical Committee to review. Mr. Sypher also commented that at the April Technical Committee meeting, there was discussion on accepting voting by telephonic means and if there should be a limit to the number of times this should be used. He asked if this item had been discussed with the Policy Committee. Ms. Holton said that this had not been discussed 19 with the Policy Committee but that telephone attendance is already built into the document and is allowed. Ms. Holton clarified that a committee member is required to attend 75 percent of the Technical Committee meetings with the 50 percent attached to actual meeting attendance. ACTION: Mr. Keck moved to recommend approval of the Committee Bylaws and Operating Procedures. Ms. Lopez seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. 5. CONSIDER RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT (JPA) Subject: Renewal of and Revisions to the Joint Powers Agreement Prepared by: Mary L Holton, AICP, MPO Officer Date: May 14, 2015 BACKGROUND or PREVIOUS WORK  The cities of Aztec, Bloomfield, and Farmington, and San Juan County participate in the Metropolitan Planning Organization through the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA).  The current JPA is set to expire on September 30, 2015.  The JPA explains the responsibilities of the City of Farmington as the fiscal agent and the functions and organizational structure of the Policy and Technical Committees.  It describes the roles and work products required of the MPO.  The proposed revisions to the JPA were reviewed by the Technical Committee on April 9, 2015, and by the Policy Committee on April 23, 2015. CURRENT WORK  Major revisions to the proposed JPA include: Adding NMDOT representatives to both the Technical and Policy Committees (at the direction of FHWA and NMDOT) and adding a Red Apple Transit representative to the Technical Committee (at the direction of FTA).  Minor revisions are also proposed.  The new JPA will go into effect from October 1, 2015 through September 30, 2018. RECOMMENDATION  The proposal is submitted for the Technical Committee’s consideration of a recommendation to the Policy Committee. DISCUSSION: Ms. Holton reported that the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) is a companion document to the Committee Bylaws and Operating Procedures document. The new JPA will go into effect on October 1, 2015 and run for three years. 20 As with the Bylaws document, the changes noted in red have been reviewed previously by the Technical Committee and anything noted in green has been added since. Page 22 – Section Four 1. The MPO Policy Committee shall consist of: a. One (1) member who shall be an elected or appointed official from Aztec. b. One (1) member who shall be an elected or appointed official from Bloomfield. c. Two (2) members who shall be elected or appointed officials from Farmington. d. One (1) member who shall be an elected or appointed official from San Juan County. e. One (1) member who shall be appointed by the New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT). Ms. Holton noted that this was the only new change since the Technical Committee in April. Staff is asking for action on the JPA by the Technical Committee. Ms. Holton reported that once the JPA has been approved, Staff will work with the individual entities over the summer for adoption of the document. ACTION: Ms. Lopez moved to recommend approval of the Joint Powers Agreement. Mr. Keck seconded the motion. Before the vote was taken Mr. Homka asked if this was the document that spelled out staffing of the MPO Officer. Ms. Holton explained that funding for the positions of MPO Planner, MPO Associate Planner, and Administrative Aide came from all the entities as well as the two federal grants. The City of Farmington is the fiscal agent for the MPO and has had that designation since the formation of the MPO. Mr. Homka asked if other MPOs had their cities as designated fiscal agents. It was noted that both Mesilla Valley and Santa Fe’s fiscal agents are the city governments. Mr. Wakan added that the MPO Officer for FMPO was also a city employee. The motion was passed: 4-1 6. RECEIVE A REPORT FROM NMDOT ON THE NEW MEXICO TRANSPORTATION PLAN (NMTP) Subject: 2040 New Mexico Transportation Plan (NMTP) – Presentation on Public Review Draft Presentation by: Claude Morelli, NMDOT Date: May 14, 2015 BACKGROUND  NMDOT has conducted a statewide planning effort and prepared the 2040 New Mexico Transportation Plan (NMTP).  The Plan provides a vision for how New Mexico’s transportation system can 21  support the well-being of our residents and visitors now and in the future.  The Plan has been developed with 1,260 public participants and 650 working group members in 20 working groups across the state. NMDOT has collaborated with 73 local and regional governments, 35 state and federal agencies, 115 civic and private organizations, and 23 tribal organizations. PRESENTATION  Staff from NMDOT will present the Draft NMTP, including: o An overview of the vision and goals; o Description of the strategies for implementation; o Details about the future federal and state funding picture; and o A statewide system of assigning facilities into Tiers to prioritize the work of NMDOT.  The 45-day public comment period is open until June 26. Comments may be provided during the meeting or may be submitted on the NMTP website, www.newmexicotransportationplan.com (see feedback box at the bottom of the page). DISCUSSION: Mr. Claude Morelli with NMDOT’s Asset Management & Planning Division presented an overview of the draft New Mexico Transportation Plan (NMTP). Following is a summary of Mr. Morelli’s presentation. The draft document can be viewed at www.newmexicotransportationplan.com and the 45-day public comment period is open until June 26. Plan Development Process - Plan developed to provide framework for decision-making; be more transparent, predictable, and accountable; - Federal and state laws require the plan be performance based, data driven, and strategic; state plan must be long range in nature, covers at least 20 years, reflects diverse input from all over the state, and must include bicycle and pedestrian; - State plan will guide decision making of MPOs and RTPOs; - Considered future revenue scenarios; no change in 1993 federal gas tax; tax is an amount per gallon sold and does not reflect the price of fuel; trying to stretch funding. - Plan alternatives considered: 1. trend approach (business as usual); 2. restructure management and focus on prioritizing system; 3. what could be done if additional sources of revenue became available - Stakeholders – bottom up and top down vetting process with nine statewide working groups (professionals from public and private sectors), non-profits, trucking companies, state and federal agencies; the regional working groups focused on rural transportation areas that were comprised of the same mix of stakeholders; citizens and visitors. - Coordinating committees from NMDOT, MPOs and RTPOs, inter-agency (state and federal land managers), and tribal. - Stakeholders identified several major points: make better use of available funds and use resources more efficiently, improve public transportation, preserve existing facilities before build new, improve data collection and how 22  it is turned into information, emphasize health and safety, provide better mobility for everyone, respect culture of state. Plan Contents Plan Summary Challenges and Opportunities Goals and Strategies Transparency and Accountability Safety Preservation Multimodal Access and Connectivity Cultures, Environment, and Quality of Life Measuring Our Performance Implementing the NMTP Appendices Mr. Morelli said the plan was based on goals and strategies and was not a project- based plan. The plan includes five goals which are the heart of the plan. Each goal has with it a set of strategies as well as a set of actions: Goal 1 – Operate with Transparency and Accountability This goal focuses on the need to hire the right people to do the right job. Need for individual skilled in data collection and analysis and in planning. Create partnerships for public trust and support with use of coordinating committees. Goal 2 – Improve Safety for All System Users This goal will be data driven. Will not only look at crash hot spots but where crashes could happen and do more of a risk based, analytical approach. Goal 3 – Preserve and Maintain Transportation Assets for the Long Term This goal will receive much emphasis over the coming years. NMDOT is also developing an asset management plan that will determine how the state prioritizes preservation, maintenance, rehabilitation and re-construction projects going forward. Using a life cycle cost analysis, the asset management plan will be look at not only the cost of building a new road, but also the costs to maintain it into the future. The road network system will be prioritized by tiers. Tier 1 is the interstate system; Tier 2 is the roads connecting major communities in the state, have the highest volumes, are the major truck routes; Tier 3 will encompass the rest of the roads in the National Highway System, and; Tier 4 will be all the other lane miles owned by NMDOT (about 2/5ths of the system with low volumes). The tier method will be used for other modes (transit, bike ways, and pedestrian). NMDOT will consider trading roadways with the forest service or, in areas where communities want to downsize an NMDOT roadway (a road diet) and NMDOT may allow an entity to take over some ownership if they take on the maintenance of the road section. 23 Goal 4 – Provide Multimodal Access and Connectivity for Community Prosperity This goal will first look at operations and demand management of a roadway. Can the roadway be operated more efficiently, can the signals be timed better, or can auxiliary lanes be used before constructing something new. The focus will be on the key corridors with the most people. Coordinate with communities on better land use decisions. Also being considered are the changing demographics of the state. By the year 2040, the state will have the 3rd or 4th highest percentage of people over 60. Additionally, the millennial population exhibits a much different traffic pattern. Goal 5 – Respect New Mexico’s Cultures, Environment, History & Quality of Life This goal will focus on context sensitive solutions by working with the community. NMDOT is committed to working with local communities to support transportation- related projects when funding is available and to respect local plans. Environmentally friendly practices will be implemented wherever possible. NMDOT will work proactively with planning partners to promote tourism and recreation. Mr. Morelli said the NMTP was released for public comment yesterday. The 45-day public comment period will end on June 26. Additional presentations in the area will be made at the Transportation Commission meeting on May 21 and again at the MPO Policy Committee on May 28. Mr. Sypher made a general comment to the presentation regarding the need to be responsive and efficient in delivering the product and asked if the plan addressed staffing needs? Mr. Morelli commented that a section of the plan does address the need for retooling and they are aware of the lack of certain skill sets within NMDOT. Mr. Sypher said that there remain issues with receiving project information in a timely manner which causes project delays. He believes the problems are due to understaffing and retention issues in the Engineering Division. The Technical Committee members also discussed other issues:  Last minute NMDOT requirements that create short turnaround times for planning staff;  A better understanding of how local entities function, their time frames and processes for presentations and obtaining signatures;  Inadequate staffing at District 5 and NMDOT;  District 5 focus is on Santa Fe;  Disconnect between District 5 and FMPO; have a local NMDOT representative  Improve communications so entity planning staff knows where document is in NMDOT’s process and what additional information may be needed;  Slow response times from NMDOT have caused cancellation of projects and hurt a community’s economic development efforts. 24 Mr. Morelli responded that NMDOT is working to bring together a map of all their processes to identify bottlenecks and better understand what is happening at a particular stage. He is hopeful that this may help some of the issues mentioned. Mr. Degani added that the Planning Division is contemplating the use of a date stamp that will help track where a document is in the process and who should be next in line to receive and review the document. Everyone thought this would help the overall process and help identify bottlenecks. Mr. Fillerup stated that the public comment period on the NMTP is now open and recommended that these comments be provided on line at www.newmexicotransportationplan.com. Mr. Fillerup presented the tier map for the local roadways that will impact funding priorities. The tiers help identify the level of maintenance the roadway requires as well as some design and access concerns in the future. Tier 2 routes: US 550 to Aztec, US 64 to Shiprock, and NM 491. Most of the rest of the road network in this area is Tier 3 or 4. 7. REVIEW DRAFT CHAPTER OF THE 2040 MTP UPDATE Subject: 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Prepared by: Fran Fillerup, MPO Associate Planner Date: May 5, 2015 BACKGROUND OR PREVIOUS WORK  Staff is drafting updates to the chapters of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP), and adding new plan elements as needed. CURRENT WORK  Chapter 13 – Financial Plan – Federal legislation requires that the MTP is based on reasonably expected funding during the 2040 planning horizon. This chapter contains projections for funding based in the near term (5 years) on the TIP and local, state, and federal budgets. Beyond 5 years, best estimates have been made about future project costs, and the funding levels which may be available.  Federal legislation is also guiding funding by federal and state sources to maintenance of the transportation system. Performance measures, reviewed previously, will track the condition of the system and prioritize maintenance before funding for capacity expansion. 25  CHAPTER 13 FOR INFORMATION  Input will be sought on a draft of Chapter 13 of the 2040 MTP. DISCUSSION: Mr. Fillerup said that the focus of the NMTP towards access management and maintenance as opposed to expansion is the same focus for the MPO’s 2040 MTP Update. Mr. Fillerup presented the draft of Chapter 13 – Financial Plan – of the 2040 MTP. Chapter 13 – Financial Plan Population projections for the state and MPO area are showing growth. The MPO area is projected to grow from 97,000 to 138,000 within 25 years. The projects that were identified even five years ago had anticipated that growth, however funding for the projects both at the local and state levels is not planned for. Mr. Fillerup explained the chart shown on the next page, FMPO MTP 2040 Total Estimated Project Costs and Funding. - The anticipated project funding through the year 2040 is expected to be about $204,363,000; - This amount covers funding for Tiers 1 and 2 of roadway and bicycle/ped projects; - Funding levels are remaining the same, but purchasing power is shrinking with time; - Several expensive proposed future projects: widening of NM 516 and maintenance work along US 550. Mr. Sypher asked when the final draft 2040 MTP Update would be available for individual review and then review by both committees. Mr. Fillerup replied that within the month of May, the financial plan draft chapter will be finished which is the last of the chapters. He added that Staff wanted to present a fully completed draft for review and that draft should be available in June. The Technical Committee could also do a review in June. The Policy Committee is not scheduled to meet in June or July, so a special meeting will likely need to be called for them to review the 2040 MTP Update as well as the FFY2016-2021 TIP. The Technical Committee will plan to do their final review of the 2040 MTP Update at their July 9 meeting. ACTON: The report was received. 26 27 8. REPORTS FROM NMDOT Planning Division – Brian Degani Mr. Degani reported that Ms. Yolanda Duran is temporarily filling in at NMDOT’s Traffic Data Recording Supervisor. For the time being, contact Mr. Degani with any questions. The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is not accepting any applications at this time. FFY2015 had received budget cuts and FFY2016 is now over-programmed and projects are being moved out to the outer time frames. Mr. Degani said there are 76 HISP projects currently pending Mr. Degani reported that there are currently 20 road safety audits (RSA) scheduled or in process. He explained that projects can result following the completion of an RSA which allows NMDOT to assess a corridor and its future needs. Mr. Sypher asked about a pending RSA for the intersection of English and Main in Farmington. Mr. Degani said he would confirm that this location was on the list of scheduled RSAs. Award letters for the Transportation Alternatives Program and the Recreation Trails Program projects have gone out. Local projects that received awards were the bus route accessibility project for the City of Farmington and the walk path system in Kirtland for San Juan County. There will be further discussion of funding, ranking, and the selection process at the next MPO Quarterly on June 17 and 18 at the FMPO office. Mr. Wakan reminded all that there was a mandatory webinar this afternoon for the project managers of these two TAP projects. USDOT Secretary Fox announced that the next round of funding for the TIGER grants has been posted on their website. Mr. Degani reminded all that the June 11 Technical Committee meeting will also be a joint meeting with NMDOT and District 5 representatives. District 5 – David Quintana Mr. Quintana was unable to attend the meeting. There were no new project updates for the MPO. 9. CONSIDER RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE 2015 SPRING WEEKDAY TRAFFIC COUNT LIST Subject: 2015 Spring Traffic Count Program Prepared by: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Date: May 7, 2015 BACKGROUND  The MPO maintains traffic counts for over 220 locations throughout the MPO area.  Locations are counted according to a three-year cycle and change periodically. 28   Staff split the administration of the annual traffic count calendar into spring and fall iterations in 2013. CURRENT WORK  The MPO scheduled 42 weekday volume counts (~16 Speed & Class) to take place on the week of June 2nd & 3rd.  The consultant team is in the second-half of their one-year contract with the MPO. ACTION ITEM  Staff recommends approval of the 2015 Spring Weekday Traffic Count list. DISCUSSION: Mr. Wakan reported that the traffic counts are taken semi-annually – one in the spring and another in the fall and the locations are counted according to a three-year cycle. Mr. Wakan referred to Page 39 of the Agenda which showed the proposed list of traffic count locations for the spring count. The Technical Committee is being asked to review the list for any known construction or maintenance concerns that could affect the count and to make Staff aware of any concerns. Mr. Wakan said there were no counts scheduled this spring for county locations. All of those will be conducted this fall. There were no new count locations other than the MPO wanting to split some links on Dustin Avenue. The GIS database being used by NMDOT makes splitting links difficult. Mr. Wakan said speed and class counts will be taken on 16 locations on the list. By splitting speed and class counts, a broader look at the network can be obtained. ACTION: Mr. Keck moved to recommend approval of the 2015 Spring Weekday Traffic Count List. Ms. Lopez seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. 10. CONSIDER RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE COMPLETE STREETS DESIGN GUIDELINES Subject: Complete Streets Prepared by: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Date: May 6, 2015 BACKGROUND or PREVIOUS WORK  Complete Streets is a means of designing a roadway so that it accommodates all modes of travel, including driving, walking, biking, and transit. 29   Staff has worked with the Complete Streets Advisory Group (CSAG) to design guidelines for the FMPO planning area.  The Advisory Group held its latest meeting on April 1. CURRENT WORK  MPO Staff created preliminary cross-section street dimensions with input from a sub-committee made up of local public works staff and engineers.  Minimum standards were created for travel lanes, bike lanes, sidewalks, buffer zones, as well as other elements of the street.  Minimum standards apply differently depending on the land-use context area and street typology.  The Advisory Group requested modifications to those dimensions.  Staff and Advisory Group members are drafting chapters for the design guidelines document.  The minimum dimensions are presented for consideration and recommended approval. ACTION ITEM  Staff recommends approval of the draft Design Guideline minimum standards. DISCUSSION: Mr. Sypher said this Agenda Item was only addressing the street section design guidelines being presented by Staff. The Technical Committee reviewed each of the cross-section design guidelines beginning on Page 42 of the Agenda and recommended changes: Downtown/Urban Area A lane in the downtown area is an “alley”. Add this clarification to the minimum standards for ease of reference? Angled parking zone: 30 to 60 degree depending on the measurement of the base angle. Should this be noted in the minimum standards? There was a question on whether the City of Farmington’s UDC allowed for a 16’ parking zone as noted. Ms. Lopez said the 16’ parking zone was acceptable. The travel lanes are shown as 10’ wide and this is fine if it is realized that RVs and large trucks will need to be re-routed off the route. Should the rerouting of trucks and other large size vehicles be noted in the minimum standards? Industrial No comments on this section. Neighborhood For a street (60 feet) would there be room or would it be desired to have both sidewalks and a multi-use path as a minimum standard or note the sidewalk zone as “conditional” as designated under the “avenue” road typology? 30  Complete Streets Cross-Section Design Guidelines Downtown/Urban Area (Minimum Standards) Parallel Angled Sidewalk Buffer Transition Bike Travel Center Detached Multi Total ROW Curb(s) Gutter(s) Parking Parking Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Lane/Median Use Trail (DMUT) Zone(s) Zone(s) Lane 24 Feet N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12' N/A N/A Street 60 Feet 5' 5’ 6” 1.5’ 8.5' N/A N/A 6' 11' N/A N/A Avenue 70 Feet 5’ 3’ 6” 1.5’ N/A N/A N/A 6' 11' 14’ N/A Downtown Commercial 80 Feet 10’ N/A 6” 1.5’ 8’ 16’ 2’ 6’ 10’ TBD * N/A Boulevard 100 Feet 10' Cond * 5' 6" 6" N/A N/A N/A 6' 12' 14' 10' * Parkway 120 Feet 10' Cond * 5' 6" 6" N/A N/A N/A 6' 12' 14' 10'* *N/A if DMUT Condition is met * Center median width varies depending on other minimum standards * N/A if Sidewalk Condition Met Industrial (Minimum Standards) Parallel Angled Detached Multi Sidewalk Buffer Transition Bike Travel Center Total ROW Curb(s) Gutter(s) Parking Parking Use Trail Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Lane/Median Zone(s) Zone(s) (DMUT) Lane Street Avenue 70 Feet 10’Cond. 5' 6" 1.5' N/A N/A N/A N/A 12' 14' 10' * Boulevard 100 Feet 10’Cond. 5' 6" 1.5' N/A N/A N/A N/A 12' 14' 10' * Parkway 120 Feet 10’Cond.l 5' 6" 1.5' N/A N/A N/A N/A 12' 14' 10' * 31  Neighborhood (Minimum Standards) Parallel Angled Detached Multi Sidewalk Buffer Transition Bike Travel Center Total ROW Curb(s) Gutter(s) Parking Parking Use Trail Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Lane/Median Zone(s) Zone(s) (DMUT) Lane 24 Feet N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 24' N/A N/A Street 60 Feet 5' 5' 6" 1.5' 8.5' N/A N/A 6' 11' N/A 10’* Avenue 70 Feet 5' Cond. 5' 6" 1.5' N/A N/A N/A 6' 12' 14' 10'* Boulevard Parkway *N/A if DMUT Condition is met * Center median width varies depending on other minimum standards * N/A if Sidewalk Condition Met Commercial (Minimum Standards) Parallel Angled Detached Sidewalk Buffer Transition Bike Travel Center Total ROW Curb(s) Gutter(s) Parking Parking Multi Use Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Lane/Median Zone(s) Zone(s) Trail (DMUT) Lane 24 Feet N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 24' N/A Street 60 Feet 5' 5' 6" 1.5' 8.5' x 2 N/A N/A 6' x 2 11' x 2 N/A N/A Avenue 70 Feet 5’ 5' 6" 1.5' N/A N/A N/A N/A 12' 14' 10' Boulevard 2 Lns 100 Feet 5' 5' 6" 1.5' N/A N/A N/A 6' 11' 16' Boulevard 4 Lns 100 Feet N/A 10' 6" 1.5' N/A N/A N/A 6’ 11' 16' 10' Parkway 4 Lns 120 Feet N/A 10' 6" 1.5' N/A N/A N/A 6' 11' 16' 10’ Parkway 6 Lns 120 Feet N/A 10' 6" 1.5' N/A N/A N/A N/A 11' 16' 10' 32  Rural (Minimum Standards) Parallel Angled Detached Multi Total Sidewalk Buffer Transition Bike Travel Center Curb(s) Gutter(s) Parking Parking Use Trail ROW Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Zone(s) Lane/Median Zone(s) Zone(s) (DMUT) Lane 24 Feet N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12' N/A N/A Street 60 Feet 5' Cond. 5' N/A N/A 8.5' N/A 2' 6' 11' N/A 10'* Avenue 100 Boulevard Feet 5' Cond. 5' 6" 6" N/A N/A N/A 6' 11' 14' 10'* 120 Parkway Feet N/A 5' 6" 6" N/A N/A N/A 6' 11' 14' 10' *N/A if DMUT Condition is met * Center median width varies depending on other minimum standards * N/A if Sidewalk Condition Met 33 Commercial Under “avenue”, there is concern about all the zones fitting within the 70’ total ROW. Note the 10’ multi use path as “conditional” as in the Neighborhood standard? Rural The “boulevard” and “parkway” are shown with 11’ travel lanes. This is acceptable, but with anticipated higher speeds of 45-50 mph on a boulevard and parkway, a 12’ travel lane might work better. Mr. Keck agreed that a 12’ lane would work better in the Rural land use area. Additionally, this would likely be in a more industrial area, so have it match with the 12’ ROW shown in the Industrial land use area. Mr. Wakan said the MPOs Complete Streets minimum standards that are shown go above and beyond some of the ASHTO requirements and standards. ACTION: Mr. Homka moved to recommend approval of the draft Design Guideline minimum standards subject to the changes discussed. Ms. Brevik seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. Mr. Wakan introduced Rev. Rebecca Morgan who was in attendance at the meeting and who is also a member of the Complete Streets Advisory Group. 11. RECEIVE A TIP PROJECT UPDATE Subject: Status of TIP Projects Prepared by: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Date: May 7, 2015 BACKGROUND  The STIP Protocols, finalized in early 2014, indicate that each MPO shall develop a process to monitor the progress and status of each project in the first two years of the TIP.  MPO Staff has been conducting a monthly review of all FMPO TIP projects with the Technical Committee. These reviews have helped correct inconsistencies in the TIP, STIP, the MPO’s MTP and Agreement Request Forms (ARFs).  The Plans, Specifications, & Estimates (PS&E) deadline is July 15, 2015. CURRENT WORK  2014-15 TAP Projects are on track for PS&E completion by July 2015.  20th Street Sidewalks Phase I (FMTN) completed PS&E in early February  20th Street Sidewalks Phase II (FMTN) to complete PS&E in July  Vereda del Rio River Trail Phase II & III (BLMFLD) to complete PS&E in June/July  South Side River Road River Trail (FMTN) to complete PS&E in June/July 34  INFORMATION ITEM  This is an information item only and Committee members will have an opportunity to provide feedback regarding TIP project status and details. DISCUSSION: Mr. Wakan asked the Technical Committee for updates on their TAP projects for FFY2014 and FFY2015. He reminded the members of the July 15 deadline for all PSEs. Vereda del Rio River Trail Phase II & III (BLMFLD) Ms. Brevik reported that the ARFs for construction are ready; 60% of the plans should be ready on May 18 and submittal should be by the first week of June. All the certifications for Phase II have been received and waiting on the designs for Phase III to finish up the environmental. South Side River Road River Trail (FMTN) Mr. Sypher said that he had no information on this project and that Mr. Cory Styron, PRCA Director, would need to provide the update. 20th Street Sidewalks Phase I & II (FMTN) Mr. Sypher said these projects were on track. The agreement for Phase I was just accepted. PSE for Phase II should be ready soon. A 20th Street paving project is waiting on one certification on the replacement of some traffic loops at an intersection. This should be submitted to NMDOT in the next couple of days. Mr. Wakan said he would follow up on these projects with the Technical Committee at the June 11 meeting. Mr. Sypher said that the Right of Way Division of NMDOT had just requested some additional information on the Pinon Hills Blvd. project to be ready for the PSE. Planning staff is getting this information pulled together. Unfortunately, the environmental comments have been tied to the results of the right-of-way response which will likely delay the project and does not allow staff to address all the questions and concerns concurrently. ACTION: The report was received. 12. INFORMATION ITEMS Subject: Information Items Prepared by: Fran Fillerup, MPO Associate Planner Date: May 6, 2015 35  INFORMATION ITEMS a. TIP Call for Projects. Staff sent out the Call for Projects for the FFY 2016- 2021 Transportation Improvement Program on April 30. New projects to be added to the TIP are due to Staff by May 22. b. MPO Quarterly Farmington. The FMPO will be hosting the MPO Quarterly on June 17-18th. MPO Staff will develop agendas and lead a walking tour in Aztec on the 17th and facilitate the meeting with NMDOT and the other MPOs on the 18th. c. Other. DISCUSSION: Mr. Fillerup introduced and welcomed Mr. Andrew Montoya who is the new Red Apple Transit Manager. The MPO Quarterly is planned for June 17 & 18, 2015 and will be hosted by FMPO. Technical Committee members are invited to participate. The TIP call for projects was issued several weeks ago. Mr. Fillerup said to please let Staff know of any questions or if any projects are anticipated to be added. Mr. Keck asked about the need to use the new scoring methodology to identify and detail a project for the TIP that has already been funded. Mr. Fillerup said that the question has come up on whether funded projects should be scored and ranked relative to other new projects. Mr. Keck said he also has an old bridge that needs to be repaired and how does he make that fit into the scoring criteria and questions to be ranked. There is no money available for this project and he simply wants to get it into the TIP in case funding would become available. Mr. Keck was concerned with the amount of time and effort now being required just to have a project listed in the TIP. Mr. Sypher offered that Mr. Keck was not trying to be competitive with this project but simply wanted it to be added to the TIP. Does the prioritization methodology need to be fully completed when a high ranking is not being sought? Mr. Keck said this would be a project in the early stages of development and was only an idea. Ms. Brevik said most of the projects would follow an entity’s ICIP and maybe that information could be combined with the information being requested on the PPM. The Technical Committee also discussed project scoring, that the scoring was done to rank projects, and that the ranking would be done by a committee and then discussion with the Technical Committee. Mr. Fillerup explained that the value of scoring new or other existing projects is to see where they relate to each other and how they meet MPO priorities which all help with the discussion portion of the PPM later on in the process. Ms. Lopez said projects that are on the ICIP receive extra points so doing that work results in project points. Mr. Sypher reiterated taking an approach to allow projects to be added to the TIP without the PPM with the understanding that without the PPM, the project will rank 36 behind others that have completed the PPM. In other words, if an entity just wants to add a Phase II project to the TIP but does not care if it is ranked, and knows that it will not be ranked without the PPM, can this be done. The TIP wish list projects are really where the PPM would be most important since those will help drive the financial plans for the MTP. It was also discussed that since the PPM is new for the 2040 MTP, could completion of the PPM wait until the 2040 MTP has been adopted. This new PPM process will be a learning and transitional period. Mr. Fillerup recommended that an entity make an attempt at completing the PPM for any new project. It is obvious that trying to rank everything with no context is a much bigger effort, but this would need to be done at some point to provide the basis for comparison of projects in the region. The value of completing the PPM on new projects is to align the MPO goals with state goals and help with its competitiveness. Mr. Morelli commented that Congress explicated stated that every project that gets into the STIP must meet the seven national planning goals with performance measures and NMDOT must demonstrate how the projects are consistent and meet the measures. To get projects into the STIP, they must meet these requirements. Mr. Morelli added that another reason the goals and measures were implemented was to clearly show the public why and how a project was selected. Providing transparency allows the public to understand why a project was selected as the number one project over another project. Mr. Sypher said so that it was not a matter of having an unranked project on the STIP, but that in order for it to be included on the STIP, the justification must be on record. The MTP will be adopted shortly and the MPO is working through a transition period and toward full compliance within a year. Mr. Morelli said he thought it was understood that there would be a transition period for the entire process. Mr. Wakan said Staff would work with each of the entity’s staff and offer suggestions and help them compile the necessary information for the PPM especially for the wish list project list. 13. BUSINESS FROM THE CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS AND STAFF Ms. Lopez reported that Blue Zones will be back in Farmington on 5/15-18/15 to help draft actual designs on reconfiguring downtown Main Street from Auburn to Wall to make it more pedestrian friendly, sustainable, and economically viable street. She invited all members of the Technical Committee to participate. Ms. Lopez said that NMDOT had been invited but no one was available to attend. Although Main Street is not a state roadway, changes on Main will affect Broadway and other streets in the area. Ms. Brevik reported that the landscaping permit for medians in Bloomfield was received and the project is expected to being on May 18. She thanked NMDOT staff for their assistance. 37 There was no additional business from the Chairman, Members and Staff. 14. BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR There was no business from the Floor. 15. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Sypher adjourned the meeting at 12:15 p.m. __________________________ ________________________________ David Sypher, Chair June Markle, MPO Administrative Aide 38