MPO Technical Committee

MPO TECHNICAL COMMITTEE AGENDA August 10, 2016 10:00 a.m. Executive Conference Room Farmington City Hall 800 Municipal Drive Farmington, New Mexico  AGENDA FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING AUGUST 10, 2016 10:00 AM This meeting will be held in the Executive Conference Room at Farmington City Hall, 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, New Mexico. ITEM PAGE 1. Call meeting to order 2. Approve the minutes from the July 13, 2016 Technical Committee meeting. 12 3. Receive a report on the Safety Plan. 1 Presented by: Duane Wakan 4. Receive an update on the Administrative Adjustments made to the FFY2017- 3 2018 UPWP Presented by: Duane Wakan 5. Receive a TIP Project Update 4 Presented by: Duane Wakan 6. Receive an update to the 2016 Spring Traffic Count 5 Presented by: Duane Wakan 7. Reports from NMDOT a. District 5 (Paul Brasher) b. Planning Division (Robin Elkin) 8. Receive a report on the Red Apple Transit 7 Presented by: Duane Wakan 9. Review and consider recommending approval of the final draft Complete 10 Streets Design Guidelines Presented by: Duane Wakan 10. Information Items 11 a. TAP Review with NMDOT b. Grant Writing Workshop c. 30th Street Pedestrian Boulevard d. APA Affiliate Memberships e. Other Presented by: Duane Wakan 11. Business from Chairman, Members, and Staff 12. Business from the Floor 13. Adjournment 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: Safety Plan Prepared by: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Date: August 1, 2016 BACKGROUND  The MPO needs to develop a Safety Plan for use in evaluating needs and targeting safety related projects throughout the MPO area.  The Safety Plan will be a resource for the entities and NMDOT to use in improving the safety of the transportation system by identifying improvements to be made for all modes of travel and areas of greatest need.  A Safety plan is a tool whereby local projects can be prioritized with the appropriate safety countermeasure(s).  NMDOT recognized MPOs who have developed safety plans when considering Highway Safety Improvement Plans and funding opportunities.  All modes should be considered when developing a safety plan. MPO Funds will use a combination of PL and 5303 programs by formula to pay for the primary consulting services CURRENT WORK  Establish a steering committee to ascertain regional safety goals and objectives  Create a RFQ/P to attract the appropriate consultant  MPO Intern is currently creating the preliminary crash data maps for use in the public participation process  Integrate historic crash data with the MPOs travel demand model (Bob Shull)  Staff research consistently found the four E’s of safety to be prevalent in safety plans, Engineering, Education, Enforcement and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) – Data Driven plan – Goals and Objectives- Safety Counter Measures  MPO Staff will present the timeline for moving forward with development of the Safety Plan. ANTICIPATED WORK  Work with consultant to outline the planning particulars with clear deadlines.  Collect crash data from UNM and BEBR crash reporting unit.  Provide input to HSIP program at the State level: Data Driven (reactionary) vs Close calls (proactive) INFORMATION ITEM  This is an informational item requesting feedback from the Technical Committee members. 1  Safety Plan - Phases of Implementation Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Travel Demand Modeling Hire Facilitator Public Outreach Write Plan Present Final Plan for Committee Review 2  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item #4 Subject: FFY2017-2018 Unified Planning Work Program Prepared by: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Date: August 3, 2015 BACKGROUND  The Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) is the fiscal year work plan for the MPO.  The FFY2017-2018 UPWP will cover planning activities and work products to be completed from October 1, 2016 to September 30, 2018.  The final UPWP was adopted by the Policy Committee in a special meeting on June 23, 2016.  NMDOT requested some corrections be made to the FFY2017-2018 budget tables. CURRENT WORK  Staff over budgeted $5,022 in FY 2017 and $2,564 in FFY2018 totaling $7,585.  Staff was alerted to program FAST Act funds in the amount of $8,509 which includes local match into the FFY2017 budget.  The $8,509 in FAST Act funds will need to be expended by Dec 31, 2017.  Staff alerted NMDOT that those funds to be applied to complete the Safety Plan.  The net difference was + $924.00 to the overall budget over FFY17-18.  The Technical Committee expressed no concern with the proposed adjustment at the July 13, 2016 meeting ATTACHMENTS  The final draft of the 2017-2018 UPWP can be downloaded by clicking the following link: http://www.fmtn.org/DocumentCenter/View/8622 INFORMATION ITEM  It is recommended that the Technical Committee receive a report on the administrative adjustment to the FFY2017-2018 UPWP. 3  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item #5 Subject: Status of TIP Projects Prepared by: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Date: August 2, 2016 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. These monthly reviews help correct inconsistencies in the TIP, STIP, the MPO’s MTP, Agreement Request Forms (ARFs), etc.  The next scheduled TIP Amendment cycle begins in April 2016.  NMDOT has requested a change for F100112 which will require a TIP amendment.  NMDOT has issued a call for TAP/RTP projects. Click a link to the guidelines- http://dot.state.nm.us/content/dam/nmdot/planning/FFY18-19_TAP- RTP_Guide.pdf TRACKING INFORMATION (2016-2021 TIP)  Local Agreement Status (ARF)  ITS/Sys ENG Certification  ROW Certification  Public Involvement Certification  Design Completion 30 – 60 – 90%  Environmental Certification  Utilities Certification  Railroad Certification  Archeology Certification CURRENT WORK  Top Regional Priority Projects o East Arterial Route Phase II- Meeting results with NMDOT ROW and Environmental Division- New mapping- Land-Fill issue updates? o Pinon Hills Boulevard Bridge Phases I & II  Surface Transportation Program Funds (STP)- funds can be used to repair structurally deficient bridges.  Projects being specified in the 2040 MTP and added to the TIP require scoring committee review o One TC member, one PC member and MPO Staff INFORMATION ITEM  This is an information item only. Committee members will have an opportunity to provide feedback regarding TIP project status and details. 4  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item #6 Subject: 2016 Spring Traffic Counts Prepared by: Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner Date: August 3, 2016 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.  Staff split the administration of the annual traffic count calendar into spring and fall iterations which began 2013.  NMDOT Traffic Count Division has asked the FMPO to count an additional 15 locations which have been spread out over the spring and fall schedule. Several of the locations were in marked contrast to previous counts and Staff was asked to follow up and verify the validity of those counts and ensure the accuracy of the numbers. CURRENT WORK  The MPO scheduled 47 weekday volume counts (~21 Speed & Class) to take place on the week of April 25th.  The consultant team is contracted to conduct traffic counts in the Fall of 2016.  Aggregating data for trend analysis.  Interactive traffic count map now available on FMPO website. (www.fmtn.org/375/MPO-Traffic-Counts)  Staff checked with TRA to ensure there were no issues encountered during the actual counts. ANTICIPATED WORK  Fall 2016 counts are tentatively scheduled for early September.  Work flow development with consultants.  Perform traffic count data mapping and analysis. INFORMATION ITEM  An update on the 2016 Spring Weekday Traffic Counts to address those locations with significant changes. 5 SITE ON_ROAD FROM TO FUNCTIONAL Area Class 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Principal BL_155 US 550 Sullivan Rd US 64 Arterial Bloomfield Y 11,327 12,657 13,879 14,136 7,952 Count tubes were pulled up – this is a bad count. Will be removed from any published list. Either needs to be reset in Fall count or done independently. College FM_188 30th Hutton Blvd Minor Arterial Farmington Y 16,350 - - - 9,945 Contractor did not indicate anything other than that the direction split was very high. EB: 3,208 (32.3%), WB: 6,737 (67.7%). Nearby counts (FM_13 & 14) show higher counts similar consistent with FM_188’s 2012 count. 6  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item #8 Subject: Red Apple Transit Update Prepared by: Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner Date: August 3, 2016 BACKGROUND or PREVIOUS WORK  Staff will need to collect transit data on an ongoing basis to comply with MAP- 21 performance measurement requirements.  New ridership collection methods have been in place since March 2015 using tablets which can also collect basic demographic data.  Several route changes were implemented in August 2015 as a way to: (1) remove non-revenue miles; (2) add service to concentrated areas; (3) get workers into the COF by 8 am; (4) get students to San Juan College by 8 am; and, (5) provide a link with Navajo Transit.  2015 Ridership volumes decreased by 4.54 percent compared to 2014 volumes. Revenue during the same period went up by 9.69 percent. CURRENT WORK  Total ridership for 2016 (to date) has increased by 4.83% compared to the same time period in 2015.  Staff is currently in process of obtaining boarding and alightment data from Ride-Right. ANTICIPATED WORK  Staff will tabulate and map boarding and alightment data.  Staff will analyze gaps in the transit system, the walkable catchment areas of each transit stop as well as demographic mapping for the Title VI Plan.  End of the year analysis will be conducted and reported on following end of calendar year. INFORMATION ITEM  This is an information report requesting feedback from Technical Committee members. 7  Annual Total Ridership Comparison 15,000 14,000 13,000 12,000 11,000 Axis Title 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Route 2016 Jan - Jul 2015 Compare Change 2015 to 2016 Red 6,199 8,007 -22.58% Green 12,700 13,919 -8.76% Purple 9,829 9,874 -0.46% Yellow 11,210 9,671 15.91% Blue 22,645 21,432 5.66% Saturday Rte 2,100 1,127 86.34% 2016 Fmtn Routes 65,786 64,030 2.74% Tiger (Aztec) 3,854 2,119 81.88% Bobcat (Bloomfield) 3,137 2,975 5.45% Bronco (Kirtland) 4,000 4,034 -0.84% Total Ridership 76,688 73,158 4.83% 8  2016 Regional Ridership 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 - Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Tiger (Aztec) Bobcat (Bloomfield) Bronco (Kirtland) 2016 Farmington Ridership by Route 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Red Green Purple Yellow Blue 9  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item #9 Subject: Complete Streets Prepared by: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Date: August 2, 2016 PREVIOUS WORK  Complete Streets are a means of designing a roadway so that it accommodates all modes of travel, including driving, walking, biking, and transit.  Staff has worked with the Complete Streets Advisory Group (CSAG) on content, and design guidelines for the FMPO planning area.  The Advisory Group held its last meeting on September 3, 2015 and reviewed the draft Complete Streets Design Guidelines document.  Technical Committee Workshops were held on February 24, March 16, and April 26 to review and provide edits to the draft Design Guidelines document.  The Technical Committee reviewed the Intersection section on June 22, 2016 and their recommendations were included.  The Technical Committee reviewed the Intersection and Equity sections on July 23, 2016.Those recommendations have been included. CURRENT WORK  Provide final editorial updates per recommendations from the Technical Committee.  Seek recommended approval by the Technical Committee.  Seek approval by the Policy Committee on August 25, 2016. ANTICIPATED WORK  Publish the final document and distribute to entities.  Create a regional Complete Streets resolution for regional consideration and adoption. ATTACHMENTS  The final draft of the Complete Streets Design Guidelines was sent out on July 28th and it can also be downloaded on the following link: http://www.fmtn.org/DocumentCenter/View/8610. ACTION ITEM  Staff recommends that the Technical Committee complete a final review of the final draft Design Guidelines and considering recommending approval to the Policy Committee. 10  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item #10 Subject: Information Items Prepared by: Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner Date: August 2, 2016 INFORMATION ITEMS a. TAP Project Feasibility Review. MPO and entities staff met with District 5 engineering staff and NMDOT planning representatives in Santa Fe on August 8th to review and discuss TAP project feasibility forms. b. Grant Writing Workshop. Mr. Garcia attended a grant writing workshop in Albuquerque on July 20 and 21, 2016. c. Update on the 30th Street Pedestrian Boulevard. Staff assisted San Juan Safe Communities Initiative in submitting a Letter of Interest for the People for Bikes Community Grant Program. Update on application status will be received by September 2nd. More information on grant can be found at http://www.peopleforbikes.org/pages/grant-guidelines d. APA Affiliate Memberships. The applications for APA Affiliate Membership for each Policy Committee member have been received. Several Technical Committee members, who were not already APA members, were also registered for Affiliate Membership. e. Other. 11  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016 MINUTES FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING July 13, 2016 Technical Members Present: Jason Thomas, City of Bloomfield Steven Saavedra (Alt), City of Farmington David Sypher, City of Farmington Stephen Lopez (Alt), NMDOT District 5 Andrew Montoya, Red Apple Transit Fran Fillerup, San Juan County Technical Members Absent: Bill Watson, City of Aztec Cindy Lopez, City of Farmington Paul Brasher, NMDOT District 5 Staff Present: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner June Markle, MPO Administrative Aide Staff Absent: Mary Holton, MPO Officer Others Present: Robin Elkin, Planning Liaison, NMDOT Larry Hathaway, Policy Committee Alternate, San Juan County 1. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Fillerup called the meeting to order at 10:06 a.m. Mr. Fillerup asked everyone in attendance to introduce themselves. 2. APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE JUNE 22, 2016 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING Mr. Lopez moved to approve the minutes from the June 22, 2016 Technical Committee meeting. Mr. Sypher seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. 3. COMPLETE STREETS Subject: Complete Streets Prepared by: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Date: June 29, 2016 12  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016 BACKGROUND or PREVIOUS WORK  Complete Streets are a means of designing a roadway so that it accommodates all modes of travel, including driving, walking, biking, and transit.  Staff has worked with the Complete Streets Advisory Group (CSAG) on content, and design guidelines for the FMPO planning area.  The Advisory Group held its last meeting on September 3, 2015 and reviewed the draft Complete Streets Design Guidelines document.  Technical Committee Workshops were held on February 24, March 16, and April 26 to review and provide edits to the draft Design Guidelines document.  The Technical Committee reviewed the Intersection section on June 22, 2016 and their recommendations have been included. CURRENT WORK  The revised Intersection section of the Design Guidelines document has been updated.  Minor revisions to the section on equity now include references to environmental justice. INFORMATION ITEM  For Technical Committee review and comments. DISCUSSON: Mr. Wakan presented the final draft of the intersection chapter of the Complete Streets Design Guidelines for review by the Technical Committee. Following the review in June, Staff took those recommendations and made some minor changes and updated verbiage. The Technical Committee reviewed the revisions page by page: Page 1 – Multi-Modal Intersections  Reverse order of paragraphs three and four for better flow;  Consider adding something about functional classifications in 2nd paragraph after …”guidelines for each road type…”;  Also consider adding a reference to ITE. It was noted that this document is not intended to recommend design treatments since it is meant to be broad design guidelines. The overall document is intended to provide an overview of concepts from throughout the country and the West. The ideas presented could be used if appropriate for future improvements at specific intersections. The examples presented are to illustrate points and to depict concepts the region is looking to have. Page 2 – Pedestrians  Focus is too heavy on peds/bikes. Driving around the community where there are bike paths, few bikes are seen. With the recommended changes, the cost per individual bike/ped user will be extremely high. Want balance; 13  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016  When talking about corner radii, cannot omit the reason a large radius would be needed in order to facilitate truck/RV traffic. The reader needs to understand why larger radii are used:  Is this more important for the section on vehicles;  A page dedicated to each mode of travel, but radii addressed in the pedestrian section and not in the others;  Since radii discussed in the Pedestrian section only, need to explain why large radii are built and considered;  Add something in 3rd paragraph about accommodating large vehicle movements;  Was the illustration from the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide going to be removed? Previous comments indicated this picture was technical and difficult to interpret; o Consider a better explanation in 3rd paragraph of the illustration; o Illustration serves a purpose; o Keep graphics but offer clarification. Page 3 – Cyclists  Quote used in the 2nd paragraph is misleading: some believe the quote means a reduction in accidents refers to “bike” accidents only and not to “all” accidents;  Need to be accurate in what the actual accident reduction would be: will not get a 10% reduction in all accidents;  The study cited did not say the accident reduction was for “bike accidents” only: do not want to misquote author;  Consider removing the quote;  Consider adding, “In one study, they found that…”;  Reduction percentage will vary across various cities: consider revising to say “…reduce accidents by up to…”;  Ask for clarification of the reference before it is used: see if this was more than one study, more than a single intersection, more than a single city;  To gain consensus on this section, the statement will be removed. It was explained that the illustrations shown on this page are examples only and not necessarily recommendations for any local intersection. Although the illustrations are more urban in nature, they demonstrate a general way for these amenities to be applied. The actual concepts will be left up to the designers and changes implemented will be addressed on a case-by-case basis to keep them context sensitive. Page 4 - Vehicles  Concern with the word “undermine” in the 3rd sentence of the 2nd paragraph;  If radii are too generous and designed for the larger vehicles, a “fast” right hand turn can be created: this is what the intersection design is trying to mitigate;  Change “undermine” to “cause for concern” or “negatively impact”. This change is simple and the members agreed with the word change to “negatively impact”. 14  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016 Conclusion  Include ITE reference;  Add heading for Works Cited and make a separate section for Resources (include those already listed). Equity Section Mr. Wakan explained that this re-written Equity section is more explicit in highlighting some of the Federal requirements on environmental justice. The purpose of the added language is to clarify how environmental justice applies when seeking federal or state project funding.  Recommendation to paraphrase quote by National Rural Health Association’s CEO in 3rd paragraph;  In last sentence in 4th paragraph: “Recent regulations not require…”, add the word “Federal” after “Recent…regulations now…”;  Entities with staff of 50 or more are required to produce Title VI and ADA plans in order to be eligible for state or federal funding. Tribal entities are the only ones exempt from this requirement;  Importance of including economic considerations when speaking to inequity: 2nd sentence of 1st paragraph insert “economic class” somewhere in that sentence;  2nd sentence, 2nd paragraph after “older adults”, add “economically disadvantaged”;  3rd paragraph speaks to inequity in transportation and what can be done in a rural setting (i.e.: sidewalks, bike lanes, rural transit);  However, then the 3rd paragraph begins talking about rural residents being less healthy…what is the connection with inequity in transportation? Do we need the 2nd part of this paragraph?;  Consider deleting the 2nd part of the paragraph and discuss the ideas for a rural area – “provide amenities in a rural setting where appropriate” (wider shoulder, detached multi-use trail, rural transit) and work with community/land owners to make these happen. Good examples of rural amenities seen at RTPO meeting at Laguna Pueblo;  5th paragraph, last sentence: delete the phrase “Because a community if only as strong as its weakest link…” Just end paragraph with “Weaving equity into place making…”. Mr. Sypher asked when the final draft of the Design Guidelines might be ready for the Technical Committee to review before making their final recommendation. Mr. Wakan said the final draft will be issued in August. Mr. Sypher asked that the final draft be issued at least two weeks prior to the Technical Committee meeting of August 10. Mr. Wakan said that Staff should have no problem getting the draft out to the Technical Committee members two weeks prior to their next meeting. Mr. Wakan asked that if there are any grammar, punctuation, or syntax edits to the document, to please send those to Staff now. Any further edits to content will be discussed when the Technical Committee reviews the entire draft document in August. Mr. Fillerup stated that it is hoped to get a recommendation from the Technical Committee in August. 15  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016 Mr. Sypher said that when the full document comes together for review, there could likely be more edits or adjustments desired by the Technical Committee members. Mr. Fillerup noted that the document could still go to the Policy Committee with recommended changes. He recommended that the document be reviewed as a whole, realizing that not every page can say everything that the members would like to be said. Mr. Fillerup reminded the group that these are guidelines only and it is not meant to write specific codes for any ordinance. ACTION: The chapters were reviewed. 4. TAP/RTP PROJECTS Subject: TAP/RTP Projects Prepared by: Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner Date: July 6, 2016 BACKGROUND  The MPO issued the call for projects for TAP and RTP funding in FFY2018 and 2019 on May 12, 2016.  All Project Feasibility Forms (PFF) must be received by the MPO by 5:00 p.m. on July 14, 2016.  A PFF meeting will be scheduled following the July 14 deadline and will include the sponsoring agency, MPO staff, and NMDOT representatives.  If the project is deemed feasible at this meeting, the sponsoring agency will be invited to prepare the final application packet that will be due to the MPO in November 2016 (deadline to be announced later).  All applications must be submitted to NMDOT before November 30, 2016.  The FMPOs Website provides links to other related information, such as the updated TAP/RTP application, a sample resolution of sponsorship, the Project Feasibility Form (PFF), and the Project Identification Form (PIF).  Considerations for projects: o FAST Act, the Federal transportation legislation enacted in December 2015, further TAP and RTP programs. o Projects may include pedestrian and bicycle facilities; safe routes to school projects; infrastructure improvements that provide non-drivers better access to transit; environmental mitigation; and, other improvements to the transportation system. o The minimum amount an agency can apply for is $75,000. o The maximum amount an agency can apply for is $2 Million. o TAP projects must be consistent with the New Mexico Transportation Plan and the MPO’s 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP), as well as with other locally adopted plans. o Both TAP and RTP are cost reimbursement programs which require a 14.56% local match. 16  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016 CURRENT WORK  PFFs must be submitted to the MPO by July 14, 2016 at 5:00 p.m.  PFF meeting will be scheduled following the July 14 deadline. INFORMATION ITEM  This item is presented for information purposes only. DISCUSSION: Mr. Garcia reported that July 14, 2016 is the deadline for TAP/RTP Project Feasibility Forms (PFF) to be submitted to the MPO. Staff has received four or five to date, but work is still ongoing. Following the July 14th deadline, Staff will work with all the NMDOT representatives to set a meeting for the PFF meeting. Project(s) deemed feasible at this meeting will then prepare a final application packet that will be due to the MPO in October or November prior to the November 30th NMDOT submittal deadline. Mr. Wakan said that the entities are welcome to attend in person the PFF meetings with NMDOT. If unable to attend in person, an entity representative will need to be available by conference phone to answer any project questions that might arise during the review of their project(s). Mr. Fillerup asked if FMPO could request that those meetings happen preferably during August to allow more time to address any questions and provide a more complete and accurate application. Mr. Wakan stated that Staff will coordinate with District 5 and Robin Elkin to schedule a date for this meeting as quickly as possible. Mr. Sypher asked if there would be a local selection committee to review and prioritize the projects. Mr. Fillerup said the scoring committee is used for new projects being added to the TIP and not for the TAP process. Every TAP PFF submitted will be forwarded on to the meeting with NMDOT. Funding of the projects(s) will come from this statewide committee and the MPO cannot offer any recommendation or ranking. Mr. Sypher asked about the TIP selection committee and how they were selected/appointed and the length of their term. Mr. Fillerup noted that the committee members last time were volunteers. ACTION: The report was received. 5. 2016 SPRING TRAFFIC COUNTS Subject: 2016 Spring Traffic Counts Prepared by: Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner Date: July 13, 2016 17  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016 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.  Staff split the administration of the annual traffic count calendar into spring and fall iterations which began 2013.  NMDOT Traffic Count Division has asked the FMPO to count an additional 15 locations which have been spread out over the spring and fall schedule. CURRENT WORK  The MPO scheduled 47 weekday volume counts (~21 Speed & Class) to take place on the week of April 25th.  The consultant team is contracted to conduct traffic counts in the Fall of 2016.  Aggregating data for trend analysis.  Interactive traffic count map now available on FMPO website. (www.fmtn.org/375/MPO-Traffic-Counts) INFORMATION ITEM  Staff will present a report on the 2016 Spring Weekday Traffic Counts. DISCUSSION: Mr. Garcia summarized the recent spring traffic counts (see details on Pages 4-6 of the Agenda). There were 47 counts taken, 21 of which were speed and class. The 2014-2016 data, however, has not yet been verified by NMDOT’s traffic count division. Mr. Garcia also showed the interactive map of the traffic count locations published on the MPO website. Mr. Sypher said he noticed a few that stood out with marked contrast to previous counts and asked if the MPO planned to follow up and verify the validity of those counts and ensure the accuracy of the numbers. Mr. Garcia said he would check with TRA to ensure there were no issues encountered on their end. Mr. Fillerup asked if Staff would follow up on those locations with sharp, drastic changes and report back at the next Technical Committee meeting. Mr. Sypher said he had noticed two locations with significant change and offered, if desired, the City of Farmington could provide new counts to help verify the accuracy of the previous counts. ACTION: The report was received. 6. CRASH ANALYSIS Subject: Crash Analysis Prepared by: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Date: July 7, 2016 18  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016 BACKGROUND OR PREVIOUS WORK  The MPO needs to develop a Safety Plan for use in evaluating needs and targeting safety related projects throughout the MPO area.  Staff was able to get access to 2013 and 2014 crash data sets provided from the University of New Mexico Crash and Safety Division via the State of New Mexico DOT.  Staff now has aggregated five years of crash data (2010-2014) which will be much richer and useful when applying for Highway Safety Improvement Program funds.  More recent crash data sets lack apple to apple details and require geo-coding work in order to be consistent with data sets provided by NMDOT. CURRENT WORK  Update a series of crash data maps for the MPO planning area as well as for each entity within the MPO from 2010-2014.  Using GIS mapping techniques staff is creating hot spot maps for vehicular and pedestrian hazard areas.  Staff is working on before/after studies on US 64 using access management controls as designed and constructed in the City of Bloomfield as a case study for the Access Management Plan (AMP).  Integrate historic crash data with the MPOs travel demand model (Bob Shull). INFORMATION ITEM  This is an informational item requesting feedback from the Technical Committee members. DISCUSSION: Mr. Wakan said the MPO has acquired some data from the state for the entire county. The MPO has data from 2009 to 2012 in the database and the state just recently provided the 2013 and 2014 data. Mr. Wakan stated that having the five years of data will aid entities seeking HSIP funds. It will also be valuable to have this information to integrate into the new safety plan that MPO plans to develop. Mr. Wakan gave a presentation on preparing to develop the Safety Plan and using the now available crash data information. He presented some information from the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) on the economic costs to a crash, who pays the most, and who is responsible for remediation. MPO staff will be studying:  Crash rates per linear mile;  Thermal hot spot mapping with weighted values (KABCO: K = Fatality, A = Incapacitating injury, B = Immediate medical attention injury, C = Minor injury with follow-up, O = Property damage only) for each person involved in the crash. This provides a more human element to the crashes; o Ped/Cycle 19  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016 o Fatalities o Corridor analysis  Crash Trends (alcohol, animal related, etc.);  Safe Route to School (crashes adjacent to elementary schools across the MPO during the school day). Mr. Wakan presented the crash incidents for the Aztec corridor for the downtown area as well as the West Aztec Boulevard. The data showed the number of incidents, who/what were involved in the crash, and the number of incidents per linear mile. For Bloomfield, with the completion of the access management controls, Staff is able to look at the changes in hot spot mapping before and after access management. In Farmington, Staff reviewed the 20th Street corridor. The PowerPoint showed the frequency of accidents and where they were occurring. Data also showed that the crash rate per linear mile is higher on West Main Street than on East Main Street indicating that there are more hazards in the downtown area. The 20th Street corridor is most dangerous for bicyclists while the downtown area is most dangerous for pedestrians. Mr. Wakan stated that Staff is working to complete this information for San Juan County, Kirtland, and the Crouch Mesa area until the entire MPO area is mapped. Additionally, the maps will be refinery and more narrative added going forward. This will be important content for the access management plan and the safety plan for the future and help to identify needed countermeasures. Mr. Lopez asked if there were correlations between the high volume traffic intersections and the higher incident of accidents. Mr. Wakan said that this has not been studied yet. Staff has been looking at peak hour traffic volumes and could look at a peak hour and then look to see when the crashes have occurred. Mr. Lopez thought that this information could suggest improvements that could be made at intersections that could mitigate crashes. Mr. Wakan stated that this crash data will be uploaded to the travel demand model to identify hot spots and project future crash sites. Mr. Fillerup asked if the raw data that went into the analyses could be made available. Mr. Wakan said Staff would work on providing the data used to produce these summaries. Mr. Wakan said that data more recent than 2014 is difficult to acquire because the databases maintained by the local entities do not all have the same level of information available and each collects their information differently. Staff believes discussions with E911 are needed to ensure consistency in collecting data. Mr. Lopez said Albuquerque or Santa Fe may have different accident formatting that could be used as an example. Mr. Wakan thought that if the region could use the format given by the state, this would ensure all the reporting and uploading was being done consistently and timely. Mr. Saavedra asked what the definition of “truck” was in the data presented. Mr. Wakan said the state’s definition was not known, but noted that FHWA has 13 vehicle classifications and there are six or seven different options for a truck. Mr. Lopez said the separation is commercial trucks versus private vehicles. 20  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016 Mr. Lopez asked about including crash history data into the traffic count information (Page 7 of the agenda). He noted that District 5 counts on being able to access and incorporate local crash data into their statewide information. He thought this information would be especially pertinent for US 64. Mr. Wakan said Staff would review this request. ACTION: The report was received. 7. STATUS OF TIP PROJECTS Subject: Status of TIP Projects Prepared by: Duane Wakan, MPO Planner Date: July 6, 2016 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. These monthly reviews help correct inconsistencies in the TIP, STIP, the MPO’s MTP, Agreement Request Forms (ARFs), etc.  The next scheduled TIP Amendment cycle begins in April 2016.  NMDOT has requested a change for F100112 which will require a TIP amendment.  NMDOT has issued a call for TAP/RTP projects. Click a link to the guidelines- http://dot.state.nm.us/content/dam/nmdot/planning/FFY18-19_TAP- RTP_Guide.pdf TRACKING INFORMATION (2016-2021 TIP)  Local Agreement Status (ARF)  ITS/Sys ENG Certification  ROW Certification  Public Involvement Certification  Design Completion 30 – 60 – 90%  Environmental Certification  Utilities Certification  Railroad Certification  Archeology Certification CURRENT WORK  Top Regional Priority Projects o East Arterial Route Phase II- Meeting results with NMDOT ROW and Environmental Division- New mapping- Land-Fill issue updates? o Pinon Hills Boulevard Bridge Phases I & II  Surface Transportation Program Funds (STP) - funds can be used to repair structurally deficient bridges.  Projects being specified in the 2040 MTP and added to the TIP require scoring committee review o One TC member, one PC member and MPO Staff 21  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016 INFORMATION ITEM  This is an information item only. Committee members will have an opportunity to provide feedback regarding TIP project status and details. DISCUSSION: Mr. Wakan reported that there have been some recent TIP modifications: Red Apple Transit requested some funds for design and construction of transit stops be moved; San Juan County also requested the movement of some funds. Mr. Wakan asked if there were updates from the Technical Committee members. Pinon Hills Boulevard Mr. Sypher reported that the City of Farmington has been given an extension until August 31 on Phase I of the Pinon Hills Boulevard project. A pre-PS&E is being scheduled for July 29, but Mr. Lopez said he needed to confirm the availability of Mr. Paul Brasher on this date. Mr. Sypher and Mr. Armendariz need to discuss funding, but they are working to resolve the remaining. The environmental comments have been received and the City of Farmington is checking on all the certifications. Mr. Sypher said the City of Farmington met with the right-of-way division last Friday and there seems to have been a major miscommunication. The City has made a dozen inquiries since July 29, 2015 regarding the status. NMDOT thought the city was asking about an earlier submittal instead of the most recent submittal appraisals. The main reviewer has been on vacation until today and will now confirm which appraisals he actually reviewed. It is believed he reviewed the “secondary” appraisals that dealt with side issues and were not used for the actual purchase. The actual purchase appraisals were not submitted until November and NMDOT thought these were the same appraisals as the original submittal. Mr. Sypher said the City hopes this has been the issue and, if so, hopes to be able to meet the August 31 deadline. If this is not the issue, a retro appraisal process would need to take place that would make meeting the August 31 very difficult if not impossible. Mr. Sypher said the City of Farmington will need a TIP amendment this fall for the Foothills and 20th Street sidewalk projects to ensure they are eligible projects. Mr. Wakan asked that the City of Farmington download the TIP change request form from the MPO website and then submit to the MPO. CR 350/390 Mr. Fillerup said the PS&E meeting was held for the intersection of CR 350/390 project. Conversations are continuing on some bid documents. Pinon Hills Boulevard (Phase III) for San Juan County is still going through right-of-way remapping and environmental re-evaluation. The County met yesterday with the title examiner and coordinated the sharing of the title work and reviews. The environmental re-evaluation is being conducted with BLM as the coordinating agency. Cheney/Walters/Echols is working on the remapping of some of the right-of-way mapping that did not get reflected on the maps submitted and approved. 22  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016 US 64 Mr. Lopez said that F100112 – Phase V of US 64 is going out to bid and F100113 if being planned for construction in 2019. Timing of this project’s construction will be based on completion of F100112 with a separation of at least one year to ensure all the construction related issues have been completed. Mr. Fillerup asked if, in a future meeting, District 5 could answer some questions about pursuing funding through the new STP with the recent modifications and how to apply for federal funding. Mr. Fillerup said he was used to having a TAP or RTP call for project where the timing and process involved is known. The L/TPA handbook says to write a letter to the district, adding it to the TIP and providing backup project details. The handbook does not clarify if or when any funding might be awarded. Mr. Fillerup asked if this was explained somewhere similar to how TAP and RTP projects are handled. Mr. Lopez said it followed the same process as a PFF. Mr. Fillerup if there was a time frame or did he just prepare a PFF and apply. He said he had posed this question to Danial Watts and also Shawn Sandoval and has not heard back from either of them. Mr. Wakan and Mr. Lopez commented that the STP program is the most flexible and the most in demand. Mr. Lopez said projects needed to have good supporting documentation (condition of facility/inspection reports/details) to determine the priority of STP projects. Mr. Fillerup asked if there was then a known date on when an entity could expect a funding decision to be made. Mr. Lopez said this would need to be coordinated with Rebecca Maes and NMDOT management as far as prioritization of STP projects. Is there a known data on when a decision would be made? NMDOT finds out in September what their federal funding levels will be for each federal funding classification from FHWA in which is when their fiscal year begins. Mr. Fillerup asked if a project is funded when it is added to the STIP. Mr. Lopez said this was correct. Mr. Fillerup clarified that when funding was applied for the application would say STP funding was being requested. Mr. Elkin added that the process was going in the direction of the PFF process for most projects. Along with completing the PFF and holding a meeting with NMDOT staff, the project must be in the local MTP, fiscally constrained, and then it will be part of the statewide prioritization ranking process. Mr. Wakan stated that projects being requested to be added to the TIP will have to be scored and ranked. Staff would like to get most of the projects seeking inclusion in the TIP compiled before holding the meeting to rank and score the projects. Currently, the MPO has only received the application for the Downtown Main Street project. Mr. Wakan asked for the entities and NMDOT to submit their requests prior to the August process. There is a quarterly e-mail call for projects sent out by the MPO. Mr. Sypher asked if clarification could be provided on the term of the selection committee, how they are appointed and when their next review is scheduled. This information will be provided. There are new project applications being submitted to the MPO now and they will be added to the TIP as part of the next amendment cycle. Once all have been received, Staff will coordinate a meeting to prioritize the projects. 23  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016 ACTION: The TIP projects were reviewed. 8. NMDOT REPORTS District 5 – Stephen Lopez NM 170 – the preliminary design will help to identify how to program the phases for this project. Planning years are anticipated to be 2022 and 2023. Planning Division – Robin Elkin Mr. Robin said the Planning Division has been working on the MPOs’ UPWPs, quarterly invoicing, and completion of the QARs. FMPO did a good job with their UPWP. Mr. Elkin suggested reversing the order of the agenda items to have the presentations better connect with the other (i.e.: Safety Plan and Complete Streets) and interpreting say, Complete Streets, through the filter of the Safety Plan. 9. INFORMATION ITEMS Subject: Information Items Prepared by: Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner Date: July 5, 2016 INFORMATION ITEMS a. Shiprock Youth Conference. Staff participated in the Shiprock Youth Conference on June 29, 2016 and had adults and children design Complete Streets concepts. b. FFY2017-2018 UPWP. The budget tables for 2017 and 2018 have been adjusted slightly to reflect distribution formulas agreed upon by NMDOT and the MPOs. c. Other DISCUSSION: a. Staff attended the Shiprock Youth Conference on June 29 and had interactive sessions where complete streets concepts were presented to adults and students. Mr. Garcia showed some of the designs that were completed by the participants during the conference and commented that with the limited information they had, they were able to produce some great examples and doable concepts. b. Mr. Wakan explained NMDOT requested some corrections be made to the FFY2017- 2018 budget tables. The difference requires only minor tweaking to the budget and will not affect the MPO work activities. The Technical Committee discussed how best to review the proposed adjustments: 24  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016  Present what categories the money would come out of so know what activities might be impacted;  Eight different activity areas; all funding could come out of one category;  Adjustment is a downward adjustment ($3,000 over the two-year period) so local match contributions will be slightly less than anticipated. If the adjustment had been upward, a full UPWP budget amendment would have been required;  Can Staff present on this budget revision in August. Only minor adjustment, but it would be good to review;  This small dollar amount adjustment can be made to the budget with an administrative amendment;  Provide simple spreadsheet to explain the line items) affected and by how much; ensure that an activity is totally eliminated from the UPWP because of lack of funds;  Present at the August Technical Committee meeting to keep committee informed;  Mr. Elkin recommended that it be kept informal and done quickly; do not wait until August to review since it was already submitted past the deadline;  Easiest way would be to take $3,000 from the Safety Plan and then when receive the $7,000 award from the FAST Act, put that all toward the Safety Plan;  No Committee concern with this proposal;  Document this recommendation in the meeting minutes. c. Grant writing seminar. Mr. Garcia said Staff was proposing to host a grant writing seminar for any interested entity staffs. This workshop would assist the entities in ensuring all required elements (technical, demographic, social, long-range planning aspects) are included on grant applications. Staff also recommends the possibility of organizing grant writing steering committees within each entity. Mr. Fillerup recommended the workshop be presented by someone familiar with transportation projects. Mr. Lopez added that each grant has different criteria that would also need to be understood by the presenter. Mr. Wakan said the workshop would consider the basic principles/elements required when applying for TAP/Brownsville/TIGER and also provide options for applying for non-traditional grants. The MPO can provide backup information and data to assist with the grant request, but Staff cannot provide the actual grant writing. Staff will research who/what is available, cost, and availability. Staff will ensure they have the needed transportation background. 10. BUSINESS FROM THE CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS AND STAFF Mr. Sypher said he had done some follow-up research on the access management plan and found that the City of Farmington had adopted the plan. It was then put on hold for a short time until provisions for a variance were made. Subsequently, it was brought back and adopted by the City Council and it is an active part of the city’s process. Mr. Wakan reported that the other entities had also adopted the plan. It was 25  TC Final Draft Minutes July 13, 2016 recommended that the access management plan be added to the September or October agenda to begin addressing what needs to be done with, or to, the document. Mr. Lopez recommended using the State’s access management plan as a reference for these discussions. There was no additional business from the Chairman, Members and Staff. 11. BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR There was no business from the Floor. 12. ADJOURNMENT Adjourned at 12:28 pm ___________________________ ___________________________ Fran Fillerup, Chair June Markle, MPO Administrative Aide 26