MPO Technical Committee

MPO TECHNICAL COMMITTEE AGENDA March 14, 2018 10:00 a.m. Council Chambers Bloomfield City Hall 915 North First Street Bloomfield, New Mexico  AGENDA FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING March 14, 2018 10:00 AM This regular meeting will be held in Council Chambers at Bloomfield City Hall, 915 North First Street, Bloomfield, New Mexico. ITEM PAGE 1. Call meeting to order 2. Approve the minutes from the February 14, 2018 Technical Committee 6-20 Meeting. 3. Presentation on Red Apple Transit Operational Analysis Study 1 Presented by: Andrew Montoya, Transit Manager, Red Apple Transit 4. TIP Project Updates from Technical Committee members 2 Presented by: Mary Holton 5. Reports from NMDOT a. Update from District 5 (Paul Brasher) b. Update from the Planning Bureau (Rosa Kozub) 6. Committee Member Discussion Item(s) 3 No items were presented for discussion. 7. Information Items 4 a. Update on the Technical Committee’s subcommittee’s work on reviewing the Project Prioritization Methodology (PPM) b. NMLTAP Training at Technical Committee on April 11, 2018 c. Upcoming Training: FHWA’s ADA Compliance Program at the FMPO Office on May 31, 2018 d. Report on the Update to the MPO’s Bike and Pedestrian Plan e. Report on the next scheduled TIP Amendment f. Report on the preliminary preparation of the FFY2019-2020 UPWP Presented by: Mary Holton 8. Business from Chairman, Members, and Staff 9. Public Comment on Any Issues Not on the Agenda 10. Adjournment The public body may only take action on an item if it is listed for action on the publicly noticed agenda. 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 Assistant 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 Assistant if a summary or other type of accessible format is needed.  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item #3 Subject: Presentation – Red Apple Transit Operational Analysis Study Date: March 14, 2018 PRESENTATION Mr. Andrew Montoya, Transit Manager will present on the Operational Analysis study for the Red Apple Transit hub relocation. This study is expected to begin soon. In 2017, the FMPO approved the allocation of up to $30,000 of its FTA 5303 funds for this project. Depending on timing, some FHWA PL funds may need to be utilized as well. The project was approved for funding under Section 4.4 of the MPO’s current UPWP. Mr. Montoya will manage the project and provide monthly reports to the Technical Committee. 1  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item #4 Subject: Status of TIP Projects Prepared by: Mary Holton, AICP, MPO Officer Date: March 14, 2018 BACKGROUND  The STIP Protocols, finalized in early 2014, require 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 next month.  FFY2018-Q3 TIP amendment requests will be due to Staff no later than May 4, 2018. The amendments will be considered by Technical Committee on May 9th and by Policy Committee on May 24th. TRACKING INFORMATION (2018-2023 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- o Pinon Hills Boulevard Bridge Phases I & II o Kirtland School Walk Path System  Surface Transportation Program Funds (STP) - funds can be used to repair structurally deficient bridges.  Integration of all FMPO TIP projects on to new eSTIP website.  Public eSTIP website can be viewed at https://estip.dot.state.nm.us/ INFORMATION ITEM  This is an information item only. Committee members will have an opportunity to provide feedback regarding TIP project status and details. 2  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item #6 Subject: Committee Member Discussion Items Date: March 14, 2018 DISCUSSION ITEMS No items were presented for discussion by Technical Committee members. 3  FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Agenda Item #7 Subject: Information Items Prepared by: Mary Holton, AICP, MPO Officer and Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner Date: March 14, 2018 INFORMATION ITEMS a. Update on the Technical Committee’s subcommittee’s work on reviewing the Project Prioritization Methodology (PPM). Direction was given to Staff during the February 14th Technical Committee meeting to organize a subcommittee to review the FMPO’s Project Prioritization Method. The subcommittee’s first meeting is currently planned for March 19, 2018. b. NMLTAP Training at Technical Committee meeting on April 11, 2018. During the Spring of 2017 the New Mexico Department of Transportation began a partnership with the University of New Mexico’s Civil Engineering Department to provide local governments and municipalities in New Mexico with technical assistance, trainings and information as part of the Federal Highway Administration’s Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP). Previously, LTAP services had been coordinated by NMDOT’s Planning Bureau. NMLTAP Program Manager Josh Johnson will be here next month to present on the services provided by the NMLTAP Program. Contact information for Josh - Phone: (505) 277-0767, E-mail: jsjohns@unm.edu c. Upcoming Training: FHWA’s ADA Compliance Program at FMPO Offices on the Second Floor at 100 W Broadway on May 31, 2018. This full-day course (8a-4p) sponsored by NMLTAP provides attendees with an understanding of the authorities, regulations, and coverage of the ADA Compliance Program; an overview of the FHWA's ADA compliance program; and clarifies ADA compliance standards. Registration will be $20 per person. d. Report on the Update on the MPO’s Bike and Pedestrian Plan. A verbal report is planned. e. Report on the next scheduled TIP Amendment. FFY2018-Q3 TIP amendment requests will be due to Staff no later than May 4, 2018. The amendments will be considered by Technical Committee on May 9th and by Policy Committee on May 24th. f. Report on the preliminary preparation of the FFY2019-2020 UPWP. A verbal report is planned. 4  The minutes from the February 14, 2018 Technical Committee meeting are on the following pages 5  DRAFT MINUTES FARMINGTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING February 14, 2018 Technical Members Present: Steven Saavedra, City of Aztec Jason Thomas, City of Bloomfield Virginia King, City of Farmington Taylor Clem (Alt.), City of Farmington Paul Brasher, District 5, NMDOT Andrew Montoya, Red Apple Transit Manager Fran Fillerup, San Juan County Technical Members Absent: Cindy Lopez, City of Farmington Staff Present: Mary Holton, MPO Officer Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner June Markle, MPO Administrative Assistant Staff Absent: None Others Present: Beth Mace, Resident, City of Aztec Dan Flack, Representative from Town of Kirtland Somie Chavez, FMPO Planning Liaison, NMDOT Larry Hathaway, San Juan County 1. CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair, Jason Thomas called the meeting to order at 10:03 a.m. 2. APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE JANUARY 10, 2018 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING Mr. Saavedra moved to approve the minutes from the January 10, 2018 Technical Committee meeting. Mr. Fillerup seconded the motion. The motion to approve the minutes passed unanimously. 3. FFY2018-2023 TIP AMENDMENT #2 Subject: FFY2018-2023 TIP Amendment #2 Prepared by: Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner Date: February 5, 2018 BACKGROUND  On February 7, 2018 the Farmington MPO advertised Amendment #2 to the FFY2018-2023 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). 6  The amendment involves three projects in the TIP as described in the attached notice.  The Technical Committee will consider recommending approval of the amendment to Policy Committee at their meeting on February 14th.  The proposed amendment was published on the MPO’s website and advertised with the Daily Times on 2/7/2018. AMENDED TIP PROJECTS  F100300 – East Blanco Bridge, City of Bloomfield  F100290 – CR 5500 Bridge Replacement, San Juan County  F100113 – US64 Widening Phase VI, NMDOT ANTICIPATED WORK  Hold a public hearing on TIP Amendment #2 on February 14, 2018.  Seek approval of the amendment at the February 22, 2018 Policy Committee meeting. ATTACHMENTS  The Public Notice to advertise Amendment #2.  Tables summarizing the proposed amendments. ACTION ITEM  Staff recommends the Technical Committee consider recommending approval of proposed Amendment #2 to the FFY2018-2023 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). APPLICABLE CITATIONS  § 450.328 TIP revisions and relationship to the STIP.  (a) An MPO(s) may revise the TIP at any time under procedures agreed to by the cooperating parties consistent with the procedures established in this part for its development and approval. In nonattainment or maintenance areas for transportation-related pollutants, if a TIP amendment involves non- exempt projects (per 40 CFR part 93), or is replaced with an updated TIP, the MPO(s) and the FHWA and the FTA must make a new conformity determination. In all areas, changes that affect fiscal constraint must take place by amendment of the TIP. The MPO(s) shall use public participation procedures consistent with § 450.316(a) in revising the TIP, except that these procedures are not required for administrative modifications.) After approval by the MPO(s) and the Governor, the State shall include the TIP without change, directly or by reference, in the STIP required under 23 U.S.C. 135. In nonattainment and maintenance areas, the FHWA and the FTA must make a conformity finding on the TIP before it is included in the STIP. A copy of the approved TIP shall be provided to the FHWA and the FTA.  (c) The State shall notify the MPO(s) and Federal land management agencies when it has included a TIP including projects under the jurisdiction of these agencies in the STIP. 7 DISCUSSION: Mr. Garcia reported that the required legal advertising for Amendment #2 to the FFY2018-2023 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) was opened on February 7, 2018. Amendment #2 covers the following three projects:  F100300 – East Blanco Bridge, City of Bloomfield  F100290 – CR 5500 Bridge Replacement, San Juan County  F100113 – US64 Widening Phase VI, NMDOT Mr. Garcia explained the changes being proposed for these projects (refer to Pages 4-7 of the Agenda): F100300 – East Blanco Bridge - Change Project Type to Bridge-Replacement; - Move $560,511 forward into the first four years of the TIP; - Local MAP Funds in 2018 of $72,749 and local match of $24,247; - Local MAP funds in 2019 of $347,643 and local match of $115,881; - Update funds in the information year of 20230 of the TIP to $1,943,113. F100290 – CR 5500 Bridge Replacement - Update the project with Bridge #8130; identifying the project with a formal bridge number; - Move funds forward into the first four years of the TIP; - Local bond funds in 2018 of $604,511; - Local bond funds in 2019 of $4,395,489; F100113 – US 64-Phase VI - Add 2018 STP Urban funds of $2,563,200 and local match to make the change a total of $3,000,000; Ms. Holton stated that public comments were solicited in the public notice and none were received. Mr. Thomas opened the public hearing on Amendment #2 to the FFY2018-2023 TIP. No comments were received from those present. Mr. Thomas closed the public hearing. ACTION: Mr. Fillerup moved to recommend approval of Amendment #2 to the FFY2018-2023 Transportation Improvement Program. Mr. Clem seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. 4. STATUS OF TIP PROJECTS Subject: Status of TIP Projects Prepared by: Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner Date: February 5, 2018 8  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 2017. TRACKING INFORMATION (2018-2023 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- o Pinon Hills Boulevard Bridge Phases I & II o Kirtland School Walk Path System  Surface Transportation Program Funds (STP) - funds can be used to repair structurally deficient bridges.  Integration of all FMPO TIP projects on to new eSTIP website.  Public eSTIP website can be viewed at https://estip.dot.state.nm.us/ 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. Garcia asked for TIP project updates from the Technical Committee members: US 64 – Phase VI Mr. Brasher reported that Phase VI (F100113) of the US 64 widening project will be combined with Phase V (F100112) and they would be launched as one project. Phase V is completed and a few right-of-way complications exist with F100113. Final drawings are expected to be completed in April with letting anticipated to take place in June 2018. Red Apple Transit Operational Analysis Mr. Montoya stated that re-bid proposals from the public transit operators closed on February 13. The evaluation committee will meet on February 21 to review the proposals submitted. 9 A presentation on the Red Apple Transit operational analysis study will be given by KFH Group to the Policy Committee at their meeting on February 22. 20th Street – Phase III (F100132) Ms. King reported that the cooperative agreement for the design phase was received from NMDOT on February 16. This project will go out to bid in the next week. On Phase I (F100130) of this project, the City of Farmington is waiting on the final reimbursement as well as the final change order to close out this Phase of the project. Because F100130 is still outstanding, Ms. King has held back submitting anything further for Phase II (F100131). Foothills – Phases I and II The 30/60% plan review was for Phase II just sent to NMDOT. The City of Farmington has not yet received the cooperative agreement for construction. The bid for construction for Phase I of Foothills will go out within the next two weeks. San Juan Boulevard & Scott Avenue Intersection (F10200) The City of Farmington is still trying to get the final reimbursement from NMDOT. Ms. King said there were some issues with the review process and the City is waiting on a letter from NMDOT explaining what they are needing in order to get this cleared up. East Main Street There is funding programmed through the Local Government Road Fund (LGRF) for the resurfacing of East Main Street. City staff will be meeting with the local contractor to find out when asphalt production will begin for the year. Plans are to begin this project in the summer. Pinon Hills Boulevard (F100100) Some project design funding remained after this project was inactivated. The North Region Design Center asked the City of Farmington to resubmit a reimbursement request for these remaining funds. East Blanco Bridge Mr. Thomas stated that with the assistance of Stephen Lopez with NMDOT, the City of Bloomfield was able to work through some issues on the comments made in the 60% review; questions raised on the environmental certifications are being sorted out with Brian Kribben of NMDOT, and; questions on the utility and right-of-way certifications are also being addressed by Stephen Lopez. Mr. Thomas reported that the City of Bloomfield has MAP funding for utility relocation and the project is hoped to be completed by June 2019. Kirtland Schools Walk Path Mr. Fillerup reported that the San Juan County Commission approved the cooperative agreement for the Kirtland Schools Walk Path and that has been sent back to NMDOT. Glade Run Recreation Area 10 This agreement is small and covers both design and construction so San Juan County may solicit a contractor able to do both pieces of the project. The Commission approved the cooperative agreement and this has been sent on to NMDOT. Bridge on CR 5500 Mr. Fillerup stated that the design portion of this project has just begun. The bridge will be closed down to one lane of travel due to lack of compliance with the load rating and speed limit. The consultant has raised concern not only over the deterioration of the bridge, but also the condition of the guardrails should an accident occur. This reduction in travel lanes is expected to take place the week of February 26 and continue until the bridge can be reconstructed. Aztec East Arterial Mr. Saavedra reported that City of Aztec Commissioners have met with various state legislators to impress on them the importance of the Aztec East Arterial and in receiving the severance tax funds in order to complete this project. The state legislator is aware of the importance of these funds being awarded and assured the City that the funds would be appropriated. If the funds are appropriated, the projection will go out to bid this summer. 5. REPORTS FROM NMDOT District 5 – Paul Brasher Mr. Brasher stated that along with the update on Phase VI of the US 64 widening (F100113), District 5 has been working with David Sypher on agreements for signalization and maintenance particularly at the intersections along Phase VI of US 64. A meeting is planned for early March to begin to develop these maintenance agreements and to, hopefully, simplify and clarify responsibilities. Planning Bureau – Somie Chavez Ms. Chavez reported that Gabrielle Chavez has been hired as the new TAP Coordinator. A joint MPO/RTPO meeting is scheduled for March 28-29, 2018 in Albuquerque. The agenda for this meeting is being prepared by Rosa Kozub. Ms. Chavez is also reviewing the items on FMPO’s Corrective Action Plan (CAP) and looking at items that can be closed out. As soon as the review is complete she will provide the final findings with Ms. Holton. 6. UPDATE ON 2017 TRAFFIC COUNTS Subject: Update on 2017 Traffic Counts Prepared by: Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner Date: February 14, 2018 BACKGROUND 11   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.  FMPO Staff closely coordinates with NMDOT Asset Management in regard to all traffic count activities. It was recommended by NMDOT that we consolidate our usual Spring/Fall counts into one count for 2017.  Interactive traffic count map now available on FMPO website. (www.fmtn.org/375/MPO-Traffic-Counts) CURRENT WORK  The MPO conducted 70 weekday counts (42 Speed & Class, 28 volume) over the week of August 22nd.  The consultant team is contracted to conduct traffic counts through the Fall of 2016.  Aggregating data for trend analysis.  Integrate results with interactive map on FMPO website.  Best practices for FMPO coordination with local entities: o Streets point of contact for construction, mowing, painting, and sweeping. ANTICIPATED WORK  Work flow development with consultants.  Traffic count data mapping and analysis.  NMDOT data update.  FMPO Traffic Count Database System update  NMDOT is expected to issue an RFP for traffic data collection efforts within the MPO from this point forward. More details are expected in April. INFORMATION ITEM  Staff will present a report on the 2017 Fall Weekday Traffic Counts. APPLICABLE CITATIONS  23 CFR 500.204 - TMS components for highway traffic data, and that the Traffic Count Program is a required MPO Work Product per Table 3 (page 55) and page 68-69 of the NMDOT PPM. DISCUSSION: Mr. Garcia reported that in August 2017, the traffic count consultant completed 70 weekday counts (42 speed and class and 28 volume counts). Additionally, Mr. Garcia just finished the update of the online interactive map on the MPO website which shows the various count locations and their volume history. Mr. Garcia referenced Page 11 of the Agenda which showed a summary of all 70 count locations. The column labeled “Avg Spd” denotes those locations where speed and class data is available. Mr. Saavedra asked if any significant changes were seen from the previous count. Mr. Garcia said there were no significant trends noted. 12 Ms. Holton and Mr. Garcia explained the lag time in getting the count data certified by NMDOT. Mr. Garcia stated that the 2017 count data from the consultant was successfully integrated, seasonally adjusted, and certified by NMDOT. There are still some issues with the 2014-2016 data that NMDOT is working on. Delivery and integration of the raw count data from the consultants to NMDOT is the reason NMDOT is considering taking over the traffic counts for the FMPO, and the Mesilla Valley and Santa Fe MPOs. This would enable them to receive the counts in the format required for their system. Ms. Holton stated that the 2014-2016 data is posted on the MPO’s website along with a disclaimer that the data has not yet been certified by NMDOT. Mr. Garcia explained that there are interactive maps that show each count location and its history through 2017 on the website. Mr. Fillerup thanked Staff for the speed and class information they were able to provide to him for the County Commission’s discussion on the traffic and speeds of traffic traveling along CR 5500 and across the bridge. Mr. Fillerup asked if Staff reviewed the locations to determine if they wanted to continue to count specific locations. He noted Count #52 on Page 11 of the Agenda taken on South Court and it low count. He thought this information was valuable for input into the travel demand model but that other streets in the area are used more frequently and could provide similar information. Ms. Holton commented that, prior to the actual counts being taken, the location list is presented to the Technical Committee for their input. Many locations, however, are set by NMDOT. Mr. Garcia added that except for river crossings which are counted annually, the counts are usually rotated on a three-year basis which include locations pre-determined by NMDOT. Mr. Fillerup wondered if continued counts were needed at locations with extremely low traffic volumes (i.e.: Counts #52 and #69). Mr. Garcia said that Count #69 along CR 3535 had been requested by NMDOT. Mr. Garcia stated that the traffic count collection procedure will be changing soon and Staff will get direction on locations and scheduling from the Technical and Policy Committees. Mr. Brasher asked why some locations did not have speed and class counts. Mr. Garcia explained that the MPO budget restricted where and how many locations had speed and class counts taken. Speed and class count locations are completed on about one- third of all the MPO count locations. Where those counts are taken is based on requests from the local entities and Staff’s identification of highways, downtown areas and commercial corridors. Data is also available to show the directional split at each location counted. Crash data is available from 2010-2014 through NMDOT and the University of New Mexico. No additional crash data is currently available. 7. PROJECT PRIORITIZATION BEST PRACTICES Subject: Project Prioritization Best Practices 13  Prepared by: Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner Date: February 14, 2018 BACKGROUND  In Spring of 2017, a Call for Projects was issued to begin the implementation and adoption of the FFY 2018-2023 Transportation Improvement Program.  In May 2017, a Project Scoring Committee of 2 Technical Committee members, 1 Policy Committee member convened with Staff to review and score project submittals.  Some concern has since been stated about the current Project Prioritization Process (PPM) that is currently in place in the 2040 MTP (Chapter 4). CURRENT WORK  In the anticipation of upcoming and new projects being voted into the MTP or TIP, members of the Technical Committee have given direction to staff to review best practices of other MPOs on how they prioritize and rank their projects.  Staff reviewed the project prioritization methods of both the Santa Fe MPO and Mesilla Valley MPO due to their similar size and relationship with NDMOT.  Compare processes from Santa Fe and Mesilla Valley MPOs to our own to identify similarities and differences.  Highlight key observations. ATTACHMENTS  Chapter 4 of 2040 MTP – Project Prioritization Process  Handout of presentation to be given the day of the meeting. INFORMATION ITEM  This is an information item only. Further direction from Technical Committee is currently being sought. DISCUSSION: Mr. Garcia presented a PowerPoint on project prioritization best practices comparing FMPO’s Project Prioritization Method (PPM) from Chapter 4 of the 2040 MTP to processes used by Santa Fe and Mesilla Valley (Las Cruces) MPOs. Below is a summary of the presentation: Chapter 4 of the 2040 MTP identify and list national and regional goals. However, due to the limited levels of funding for all transportation modes the process of prioritizing projects must be comprehensive and strive to identify projects that will most effectively move those goals forward. The scoring matrix is used to rank projects against the established goals. During the development of the 2040 MTP, projects on the current TIP or that were being considered to be placed on the TIP were scored and ranked. Projects in the tables 14 from Chapters 5 (Roadway Plan) and 9 (Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan) were not scored and ranked. Consequently, the only “ranked” projects in the 2040 MTP are projects from a previous TIP. Several projects on the new FFY2018-2023 TIP have not been ranked. Section 4.5 of the 2040 MTP states: “…To date, the PPM has only been employed to rank projects included in the development of the new 2016-2021 TIP. Projects previously included in the 2014-2019 TIP were not all ranked. The MPO will work with local entities and NMDOT to complete the scoring and ranking projects within the MPO”. Mr. Garcia noted that this statement implies some direction from the MTP that scoring and ranking of projects will need to take place going forward. With the adoption of the 2040 MTP, there is currently no formal location outside of the MTP that shows a prioritized list of projects that have been ranked with the PPM process. Chapters 5 and 9 of the 2040 MTP identify Tier 1, 2, and 3 roadway projects and bike/ped plan projects. Tier 1 projects are meant to be built within five years, Tier 2 project in 5-15 years, and Tier 3 projects are the far horizon of 15+ years. Below are the highlights from the Santa Fe and Mesilla Valley project prioritization methods: Santa Fe MPO - Similar to the FMPO, they identify goals that are important locally, regionally, and nationally; - Use a visual approach when comparing projects to each other; - SFMPO staff then provide a precursor review and recommendation to their Technical Committee who then provides additional feedback and modifications; o FMPO receives all applications and then forms sub-committee of one staff member, and Policy and Technical Committee members who review the projects. - A list of short, medium, and long-term projects are then identified. All have been ranked and reviewed; - Their MTP does not list projects elsewhere in the MTP; o They broadly discuss corridors and overarching goals and needs. 15 Mesilla Valley MPO - Similar to FMPO, they identify goals that are important locally, regionally, and nationally; - PPM process references “system priority plan maps” (that relate to FMPO’s tables) that provide guidance on identifying, developing, and implementing projects, as well as a system for evaluating projects for inclusion in the TIP; o Project gets more points if it is identified on multiple priority plans. - List projects in their MTP’s financial plan grouped in five-year, 5-15 year and 15+ year planning horizons; o Includes cost and highlights if projects are on existing facility or new capital project (stresses importance of system preservation and maintenance). - Short-term projects already funded or soon to be funded in the 2016-21 TIP or of urgent need placed in the five-year planning horizon. Similarities in Prioritization Methods 1. Use goals derived from local, regional, and national sources to frame the scoring process; 2. Recognize the lack of programming authority due to being small MPOs and acknowledge the current shortage of State and Federal resources; 3. Each PPM points to preceding chapters that reference maps and plans detailing future facility networks. Differences 16 Observations  Putting each project mentioned in Chapters 5 and 9 of the MTP through the PPM process would be an equitable way to set regional priorities;  These updated lists can be used to replace the current tables in Section 4.5 of the MTP;  Technical and Policy Committee recommendation will be needed to determine if this action needs to be taken before the 2045 MTP update begins;  If a project is already on the TIP its priority should not be of concern compared to those that are in the MTP;  Since the TIP is a fiscally constrained document, a project’s placement on the TIP indicates it is already being given priority. The discussion and comments from the Technical Committee members are summarized below: - The Mesilla Valley MPO creates “plans” for the different modes (pedestrian, public transportation, bicycle, etc.) but how are the projects within those plans prioritized? Do they stipulate if one should be built sooner than another? The projects are not scored or prioritized. Priority is based on if it is on multiple priority plans. If a project is in a plan, it is put in the MTP and then into the financial plan. The only way it is put in the five-year financial horizon plan if it is on the 2016-2021 TIP or if the project addressed an urgent need. Preservation and maintenance is stressed in determining priority. - How is an “urgent” project determined? This could provide a tool to help the FMPO choose from all the projects within the region to help determine which should rise to the top. FHWA has asked the MPO to communicate to them which ones are the most regionally significant, but funding is particular to the lead agency. Additionally, prioritization does not translate into funding. Mr. Garcia said he would need to contact Mesilla Valley again to answer the question of what is “urgent”. The MTP can communicate cost, scope, and priorities to NMDOT so that when funding does become available, this information is clearly set out. Mr. Garcia said that over the past year with the development and implementation of the 2018-2023 TIP, the inconsistencies on how new projects are added to the TIP have 17 been identified. An out of cycle project does not face the PPM scoring and ranking process that projects within the call for projects are required to go through. Only a small number of projects in Chapter 4 of the MTP have been ranked and prioritized so what projects can be presented to NMDOT if there is no set ranking process. Projects already on the TIP were prioritized in the TIP. Mr. Garcia noted that if a project is on the TIP, it has been given priority because it has been given programming. Projects listed in Chapters 4 and 9 were not put through the PPM process. The ultimate goal of projects shown in the MTP is to eventually be funded and be added included in the TIP. Mr. Fillerup agreed with Mr. Garcia’s recommendation that projects already in the TIP need not be scored with the PPM process, but that any future projects be scored and ranked through the PPM. He added that the way the projects were previously scored the committee tried to match the organization of goals and make it quantifiable. The process, however, was still having people assigned numbers and values to the projects based on their impact to safety, economic development, etc. Mr. Fillerup wondered if using a method more like Mesilla Valley would be better. Projects would be reviewed based on the most needed and which ones addressed the most urgent safety needs. Rather than lumping all the values together and using crash data and the travel demand model, project priority could be more truly quantified and provide for more performance-based planning. Mr. Fillerup thought it was important to identify and narrow down a list of projects that can be actually quantified and not just have numbers assigned by the value judgements of a scoring committee. His suggestion is to base decisions on actual crash data and do a thorough analysis. Ms. Holton recommended forming a sub-committee of Technical Committee members who would study these suggestions and bring a consolidated recommendation back to the Technical Committee in the next several months for their consideration on how to move forward with the PPM process. Mr. Fillerup, Mr. Saavedra, and Mr. Brasher (or other NMDOT representative) all said they would be interested in participating in this sub-committee. Mr. Garcia will organize a meeting of the interested parties to kickoff this discussion. 8. COMMITTEE MEMBER DISCUSSION ITEMS Subject: Committee Member Discussion Items Date: February 14, 2018 DISCUSSION ITEMS No items were presented for discussion. 18 9. INFORMATION ITEMS Subject: Information Items Prepared by: Mary Holton, AICP, MPO Officer and Derrick Garcia, MPO Associate Planner Date: February 22, 2018 INFORMATION ITEMS g. Desire of Policy Committee to receive minutes (or sections thereof) from Technical Committee meetings. The Policy Committee said they would appreciate receiving copies of the Technical Committee meeting minutes in their agenda packet. h. Invitation to attend presentation. Technical Committee members are invited to attend a presentation at the Policy Committee meeting on February 22, 2018. Mr. Warren Unsicker, CEO, Four Corners Economic Development, Inc., will speak on the “state of Region’s Economy”. i. T/LPA Handbook Update. From the NMDOT Govt to Govt Update for the week of 1/29/18, Rosa Kozub stated that the T/LPA Handbook update is underway. NMDOT plans a release date of this summer with training sessions to follow. j. Presentation: Project Conception to Completion. Mr. Josh Johnson, Program Manager for the New Mexico LTAP Center, will give a presentation on project conception to completion to the Technical Committee meeting on April 11, 2018. DISCUSSION: Ms. Holton stated that at the January Technical Committee, the members had asked Staff to see if the Policy Committee wanted to review their meeting minutes. At their meeting on January 25th, the Policy Committee said they would appreciate receiving copies of the Technical Committee meeting minutes. A draft copy of the Technical Committee meeting minutes will be provided to the Policy Committee outside of their agenda but prior to their next meeting. The Technical Committee members are invited to attend a presentation at the Policy Committee meeting on February 22nd by Mr. Warren Unsicker, CEO, Four Corners Economic Development, Inc. who will be speaking on the state of the region’s economy. Ms. Holton stated it is hoped that this will become an annual presentation. The Govt to Govt Update from Rosa Kozub for the week of 1/29/18 was sent to all Committee members. It announced that the update to the T/LPA Handbook was underway and was expected to be released this summer. Also, in response to Mr. Thomas’ recent inquiry, Staff has arranged for Mr. Josh Johnson with the New Mexico LTAP Center to give a brief training to the Technical Committee during their monthly meeting on April 11. 19 10. BUSINESS FROM THE CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS AND STAFF Mr. Saavedra stated that he will share an e-mail he received from the New Mexico Environment Department announcing a workshop on minimizing road and infrastructure impacts. The workshop is scheduled for April 10-12, 2018 and will be held at San Juan College. There was no additional business from the Chairman, Members and Staff. 11. PUBLIC COMMENT ON ANY ISSUES NOT ON THE AGENDA There was no public comment on any issues not on the agenda. 12. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Saavedra moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Brasher seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously and Mr. Thomas adjourned the meeting at 11:08 a.m. ___________________________ ___________________________ Jason Thomas, Vice Chair June Markle, Administrative Assistant 20