October 18, 2016 BPI
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
.24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
4I
42
43
44
45
46
MESILLA VALLEY METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
The following are minutes for the meeting of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
Advisory Committee of the Mesilla Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
which was held October 18, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. in Commission Chambers at Dona Ana
County Government Building, 845 Motel Blvd., Las Cruces, New Mexico.
MEMBERS PRESENT: George Pearson, Chair (City of Las Cruces Citizen Rep)
Ashleigh Curry (Mesilla Citizen Rep)
Jolene Herrera (NMDOT)
Mark Leisher (DAC Citizen Rep) (departed 6:29)
James Nunez (City of Las Cruces Rep)
Lisa Willman - proxy Gabriel Rochelle (Bicycle Com. Rep.)
Jorge Castillo - proxy Samuel Paz (Dona Ana County)
David Shearer (NMSU - Environ. Safety) (departed 5:30)
Lance Shepan (Mesilla Marshall's Department)
Andrew Bencomo (Ped. Community Rep)
MEMBERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT
Maggie Billings
Tom Murphy (MPO)
Andrew Wray (MPO)
Michael McAdams (MPO)
Dominic Loya (MPO)
OTHERS PRESENT: Becky Baum, Recording Secretary, RC Creations, LLC
1. CALL TO ORDER (5:00 p.m.)
Pearson: Okay, it looks like we're at 5:00 and we've got probably everybody that's
going to come here, so I'll call this meeting of the MPO Bicycle and
Pedestrian Facilities Advisory Committee to order. It's right at 5:00 1 think.
Let's just go through introductions. Will you start, David?
Shearer: David Shearer, New Mexico State University.
Herrera: Jolene Herrera, NMDOT.
Shepan: Lance Shepan, Mesilla Marshal's Office.
Curry: Ashleigh Curry, Town of Mesilla Citizens' Representative.
Willman: Lisa Willman serving as fill-in for, proxy, pardon me, proxy for Gabriel
Rochelle.
I
Nunez:
James Nunez, the City of Las Cruces.
2
3
Bencomo:
Andrew Bencomo, Community Pedestrian Representative.
4
5
Castillo:
Jorge Castillo, Dona Ana County, proxy for Samuel Paz.
6
7
Leisher:
Mark Leisher, Dona Ana Citizen Rep.
8
9
Pearson:
I'm George Pearson, City of Las Cruces Citizen Rep.
10
11
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
12
13
Pearson:
So next we have the an approval of the agenda. Are there any changes
14
15
16
Wray:
No.
17
18
Pearson:
To the agenda from staff?
19
20
Curry:
I did note a change, oh sorry, no, pardon me. No, I was looking at
21
minutes.
22
23
Pearson:
Okay. We're on the agenda. I'll hear a motion to approve the agenda as
24
presented.
25
26
Shearer:
I move.
27
28
Curry:
I second.
29
30
Pearson:
I have a motion and a second. All in favor, "aye."
31
32
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
33
34
Pearson:
Any opposed?
35
36
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
37
38
3.1
August 19, 2016
39
40
Pearson:
So next we come to the approval of minutes. We've got two minutes to
41
approve so first we'll talk about the August 16th minutes. Any discussion?
42
43
Curry:
Yes. I'd like to note on Members Present it said Blake Stogner in proxy for
44
Gabriel Rochelle but Gabriel was here and Blake wasn't so maybe that
45
was left over from a previous one.
46
Fil
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Pearson: Any other comments?
Castillo: I have a few comments. The, so it was August and September, it's page
28 line 32, the minutes say "font sales," that should be "font size." Line 37
there were several "it's" there, a "where" is missing, "where it enhances."
And the last one is line 40 where it says "floor of arroyos," that should be
"flow, F-L-O-W of arroyos." Thank you.
Pearson: Any other comments? So I'll hear a motion to approve as amended
Herrera: I move to approve the minutes as amended.
Bencomo: Second.
Pearson: With a motion and a second. All in favor, "aye."
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
Pearson: Any opposed? So that passes.
3.2 September 20, 2016 Special Meeting
Pearson: Next we have the minutes from September 20th. Any discussion?
Hearing none, I'll hear a motion to approve.
Bencomo: So moved.
Pearson: And a second?
Shepan: Lance Shepan.
Pearson: Having a motion and a second, all in favor, "aye."
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
Pearson: Any opposed? So that moves us past the approval of the minutes.
4. PUBLIC COMMENT
Pearson: Next we have public comment. Any members of the public wish to
comment at this point? Seeing none.
5. ACTION ITEMS
5.1 Amendments to the 2016-2021 Transportation Improvement Program
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Pearson: We'll move on to action items. We have a TIP amendment.
ANDREW WRAY GAVE HIS PRESENTATION.
Pearson: Okay so the RoadRUNNER that's not new funding, it's just money that's,
was there that's just being moved around?
Wray: Some of it is new.
Pearson: Okay,
Wray: Portions of it are new. But some of it is, has been in the TIP too so it's a
mix.
Pearson: And the US-70 project, that's just a pavement preservation, that's not
related to the various phase projects that, or the feasibility study for one of
the phases?
Herrera: Yeah, Mr. Chair. Actually this pavement preservation project is sort of in
the middle of that capacity study but the engineers decided that the
pavement is getting really bad and that we're not going to be able to wait
until the study is done and we get a project designed there so they wanted
to put this in there just to take care of that really poor pavement condition.
Pearson: Any further discussion from the Committee Members? Hearing none, I'll
hear a motion to approve as presented.
Bencomo: So moved.
Shearer: I second.
Pearson: There's a motion and a second. All in favor, "aye."
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
Pearson: Any opposed? That passes.
5.2 Missouri Avenue Study
Pearson: So now we're on to the Missouri Avenue study.
ANDREW WRAY GAVE HIS PRESENTATION.
Curry: Mr. Wray it says "Missouri Avenue Extension Alternative 2 and
Roadrunner Extension Alternative 2," is one of those maybe a three?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Wray: You are correct. Yes, the slide is in error. I will make a note and correct
that. Yes you are correct. Roadrunner Extension is alternative 3.
Curry: Thank you.
ANDREW WRAY CONTINUED WITH HIS PRESENTATION.
Pearson. Okay. Thank you. While I quickly move to the recommendation page
eight, so it says "Two alternative, two alternatives are recommended for
further analysis," and then from there it's kind of hard to figure out what
they actually are. I wonder if you could delineate a little bit further the non -
motorized and the other one and ...
Wray: You mean in the text of the document?
Pearson: Right.
Wray: Okay. We can certainly
Pearson: It just ...
Wray: Certainly do that.
Pearson: Cause I think that's where people will jump to, for the meat of "What does
this report do?" is that they're going to look at the recommendations and,
and I, paging through the rest of it, it looks like you now, you always refer
to the other alternatives as "Alternative 2," "Alternative 3," or whatever. So
maybe in that section you should also reference ...
Wray: Okay.
Pearson: The alternative number. The other question that I had that was discussed
but I don't really see it as part of, it wasn't part of your presentation, the
Alternative 6, the bike/ped, pedestrian alternative, there was also some
discussion at least of retaining the complete right-of-way that would be
needed for the full build -out.
Wray: Yes. That, that would be the idea is if, if a non -motorized facility is
constructed the right-of-way to potentially build out Missouri completely
would be retained so that that facility could be constructed at a later date if
needed.
Pearson: So I wonder if that needs to be explicitly stated as part of ...
Wray: We can certainly do that.
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Pearson: That's, any other Committee Members?
Herrera: Mr. Chair. I have a couple of comments. On page 53 when you get into
the travel demand model pictures, so there's, Figure 12 is Alternative 2
and then Figure 13 is Alternative 4, so Alternative Ts completely missing.
Which I know it's not being recommended but it still should be in here
somewhere. And then on page 55 they're numbered so Alternative 1 has
the little description and then, I'm sorry Alternative 2 has the description,
Alternative 3 is blank. And then just a quick question about the evaluation
matrix. I think that it was a lot of information but I think it was helpful to
just have a snapshot of kind of everything. Is there a, can you include that
in the appendix?
Wray: Mr. Chair, Ms. Herrera. It actually is included in the appendix.
Herrera: Okay.
Wray: We don't physically have the ability to print it at the City. It, it came on a, a
nonstandard size sheet of paper and we, we tried, believe me. We, we
could not print it at a legible size today.
Herrera: Okay.
Wray: So that was just technical impossibility.
Herrera: No, that's perfectly fine. I just think that it's ...
Wray: We, what ...
Herrera: Good information.
Wray: What I can do is this, maybe not this week because I realize that the draft
report needs a lot of work to kind of get it up to snuff but as soon as
possible I'll get a copy up onto the website that'll obviously include the
alternative matrix and I will let this Committee know when that's available
for download and review.
Herrera. Okay. Thank you. I just, I know that we've seen it before, well I've seen it
quite a bit and it's really helpful so it's good to know it's in there. And
that's all I had, Mr. Chair. Thanks.
Pearson: Other Members? Go ahead.
Castillo: Yes. When did you say the deadline for comments from this body would
be?
0
1
2
3
4
5
G
7
8
9
1Q
it
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
34
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
)8
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Wray: Technically we can accept comments up until the Policy Committee finally
approves it. From a realistic standpoint, probably the Monday of the
Policy Committee meeting in November which I don't have a, a calendar
handy to check the date but it's the second, the second Monday of
November. We probably need to cut off comments at that time.
Castillo: All right. Thank you.
Nunez: Mr. Chair. The, say this is Phase A. I was curious, it, Phase B is that
where they do a, a cost analysis?
Wray: Yes.
Nunez: All right. Thanks.
Pearson: So with that, if there are no more comments then our action is to approve,
recommend approval of this report to the Policy Committee. Hear a
motion to make that approval.
Shearer: I move that we make it, move forward with this.
Nunez: Second.
Pearson: Having a motion and a second, all in favor, "aye."
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
Pearson: Any opposed? So that item passes.
5.3 Transportation Alternative Program Application Recommendation
Pearson: Next is the transportation alternative program application
recommendations.
ANDREW WRAY GAVE HIS PRESENTATION.
Pearson: Maybe we should get all the applications and take a recess and then ...
Wray: Our, our hope, if, if the Committee wants to do it that way, that will be fine
but our hope was that we would be able to, to review each application
individually and provide an individual recommendation from this
Committee. But if, if you want to have them all distributed and then, then
have a single discussion that would be fine too.
Pearson: Well I was, that, since we haven't seen these at all I just think ...
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Wray: That ...
Pearson: Just do ...
Wray:
That would be fine.
Pearson:
The review period and then we can do each ...
Wray:
Go ahead and ...
Pearson:
Talk about each one separately.
Wray:
Okay. We'll do that. Dom will hand out the rest of them for you.
Pearson:
So we can temporarily adjourn.
Wray:
Call a recess I think is ...
Pearson: Call a recess. So I get to call a recess myself or do we need a vote?
Shepan: You can do it.
Bencomo: I think there is ...
Wray: I do not know the answer to that actually whether you can, whether you
can ...
Bencomo:
I think we need a vote.
Castillo:
You can call a recess.
Pearson:
Okay I'll call a recess.
Wray: Okay.
Pearson: Until we review some of these applications.
COMMITTEE RECESSES 12 MINUTES.
Wray: Am I to understand you're ready to go?
Pearson: Call back to order. David Shearer for the record did leave, so he had
another commitment.
Wray: Right. Thank you Mr. Chair. At this time we would like to introduce
discussion of the Las Cruces Public Schools traffic calming projects. The,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
there is a list of the, the projects in the application packet. The aim is to
improve traffic calming circumstances in the vicinity of a number of
schools. I apologize, I actually do not actually have a list of them here
myself but I'd like to turn the floor over at this time to Ms. Curry for her to
give a fuller presentation on the item.
Curry: Thank you Mr. Wray, Mr. Chair. The, as, as Mr. Wray said the idea about
the, behind this is traffic calming. We have 25 elementary schools and
eight middle schools in Las Cruces that we're particularly working around
here for traffic calming. There are several schools that are next to high-
speed roads that traffic is unaware that there is a school zone in
instances, the schools of Columbia, Tombaugh, Valley View, University
Hills, Sonoma, Jornada, Desert Hills, Fairacres, Cesar Chavez and
Sunrise which are next door to each other, Alameda, Conlee, and
Highland. And the idea behind this application is that some of the schools
would be put forward to receive a study to determine if permanent flashers
would be necessary and they are the radar feedback flashers, so not just
a yellow flashing "School Zone" sign but the ones that flash and say "Your
Speed Is 25 miles an hour" or whatever the, whatever the speed is that
somebody's going. So those would be, there would be a study done to
determine the necessity of those around those schools, and also for some,
several mobile dollies. So what that means is they're carts that are set up
and if there's a problem area then the cart could be moved from school to
school. That's just because we know it's really expensive to try to put
these flashers at every single school. So if we have mobile ones we work
with law enforcement and the Safe Routes to School and we would
determine where they would be most needed.
So Safe Routes to School has a monthly coalition that meets, that
includes people from law enforcement, from traffic and engineering,
volunteers, Department of Health, a number of people that would all give
input into, into this, this piece, so it's not, so it's not Las Cruces Public
Schools working in a silo here. Ninety-two thousand, oh sorry. Not
$92,000; it's $139,600 that's being requested for this. And I'd like to
actually just give a quick story. Last week we got a report from a parent
that there was a child who was hit on Missouri Avenue in front of Conlee
Elementary at the crosswalk, a midblock crossing. She was crossing the
road, didn't stop for the cars, the car stopped for her and somebody else
didn't see her and crossed, and it was just cars traveling at a high speed.
It's a very fast road. She was okay but it could've been a lot worse and so
those are the kinds of things that we're really trying to prevent. So if we're
encouraging our children to reduce traffic and walking back to school we
want to provide an environment that's safe for them. If there are any
questions about it I'd be happy to answer what I can.
01
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Shepan: Ms. Curry as, and I was trying to figure out what page this was but it's the
one with kind of a, a budget done up on it, on the Smart Traffic Speed
Trailers.
Curry: Okay.
Shepan: Just to confirm what I was thinking, I looked up Custom Signal Smart
Trailers. Their lowest -end model is the Model 650 and that's $5,000.
Curry: What does it say on that? I'm not, I'm, haven't come across the page yet.
Is the, is it this page here? Okay. Dollies, $12,000.
Shepan: And then $12,000 for the Speed Trailers.
Curry: Okay, and ...
Shepan: So if, if they were going with the $5,000 model with their budget that's
here, they're only going to get two of 'em. You've seen the one we have in
Mesilla. That is a higher -end one. To re, to buy a brand-new one that
was right around, actually it's a little bit more than what's budgeted here
for a brand-new one.
Curry: Okay.
Shepan: We just spend $2,000 to fix our trailer. So it, they might want to look at ...
Curry: Increasing that number.
Shepan: Increasing that number because the one that they show from Custom
Signal, the, the Model 650, you're not going to be, they're not going to
move that one around a whole bunch without, before they're going to start
having trouble with it and then there's going to be a cost to 'em to replace
it. My suggestion is, is to buy better ones up front so they don't have to try
to Band-Aid 'em later. Cause that's what happened to us.
Curry: Thank you for that recommendation. And would you be able to tell me
where did, where did you purchase yours from or what would you
recommend?
Shepan: We got ours from LCPD before I got on the Department and total we've
probably put $5,000 into that trailer to get it to where now it works and it's
fully solar -powered and I, now I can leave it out for weeks at a time. If you
can get with me later on in the week I can pull up some documents and
show you what I would like for Mesilla to get ...
Curry: Okay.
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Shepan: Eventually but I have some recommendations I can bring to you.
Curry: Super. Thank you so much. I'll connect with you.
Wray: Mr. Chair. Could I interject here and I apologize to the Committee. I failed
to mention, we're not just asking for an, a recommendation on these items.
We're also take, this is an opportunity for the BPAC to provide suggestions
as Mr. Shepan just did, this is an opportunity for the BPAC to provide
suggestions to the jurisdictions for ways in which their applications could
be approved. So while we are asking for a recommendation on these
items tonight to the Policy Committee we are also asking the, the BPAC to
evaluate the recommendation and see if there are ways, or evaluate the
application and see if there are ways that they could be improved and then
the, the it'll be up to the jurisdictions to determine whether or not they wish
to amend their applications in any way but staff is open to receiving those
amendments and we certainly encourage the jurisdictions to implement
suggestions up until November the 30th which is the deadline when MPO
staff has to submit. So I apologize Mr. Chair.
Shepan- Actually I have one more thing on that. With only getting one or two
trailers with so many schools, and I know this from experience because
when we put the trailer out in front of the elementary school then the
middle school's calling it, the neighbors on McDowell are calling for it. We
just get bombarded with requests for it all of a sudden, "Well why isn't it
over here? It's more important over here than there." So the more trailers
they have the better off, their phone calls would be less I guess you might
say.
Curry: Thank you. I think the idea behind it was just trying to keep the application
to a reasonable amount so that ...
Shepan: Right.
Curry: It gets approved because if you ask for too much it's, you know you might
get nothing and we thought at least start with something.
Shepan: Right.
Curry: The two mobile, but I, 1 hear your thoughts on that and I think that does
make sense especially when you only have two for a, 33 schools.
Bencomo: Mr. Chair. So a, a comment on that also, Lance. It, I think there might be
a difference too cause yours are used for enforcement and that's what,
they're not?
I
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
75
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Shepan: No, ours are not used for enforcement. They're, they're just notifying.
We, there's a speed limit sign on top of it which correlates to the street that
it's on and then it flashes your speed as you go by. That's all it does.
Bencomo: But ...
Shepan: It doesn't issue citations, we don't issue citations off of it. It's just a
warning device to let you know how fast you're going.
Bencomo: Okay. I was just curious if it might be a difference with a law enforcement
agency having it compared to the schools having it, the schools are more
for notification in different areas so ...
Shepan: Right.
Bencomo: Anyway, thanks.
Shepan: It, it would do the same thing as the flashing lights in front of Mesilla
Elementary School. That notifies vehicles of how fast they're going.
That's all.
Curry: Thank you. And I think just to add, we have noticed an enormous
difference in traffic speed in front of Mesilla Elementary with, since putting
in that solar feedback speed limit sign. They've really made a huge
difference to cars paying attention and slowing down.
Shepan: Depends on who you ask.
Curry: That's me witnessing it.
Herrera: Mr. Chair.
Pearson: Jolene.
Herrera: I have a whole list of comments.
Pearson: Of course.
Herrera: But it's only because I would like you guys to get funding and so I want to
make sure that your application is as good as it can be when it goes up
against all the other ones in the state. So some of them are a little picky
but on the TAP application itself, number 5c I guess is not filled out.
That's one of the things that the guide clearly says, is don't leave anything
blank so I'm sure you can find some way to write something up in there.
So make sure that everything is completely filled out. Also, there's a lot of
missing information as far as you don't have letters of support from the
12
I
City, the County for all of the roads that these signs are going to be
2
installed on. That's missing from here. You don't have a letter or a
3
resolution from Las Cruces Public Schools saying that they're going to pay
4
the local match.
5
6
Curry:
Ms. Herrera. I believe that all of that was submitted.
7
8
Wray:
It ...
9
10
Curry:
They may have just not have printed ...
11
12
Wray:
It ...
13
14
Curry:
This for the package.
15
16
Wray:
It should have been in there.
17
18
Herrera:
Okay. It's not in this package that you just handed me.
19
20
Wray:
Okay. I will ...
21
22
Curry:
Yes.
23
24
Wray:
See what I can do about getting, getting to the bottom of that. I'm not sure
25
what's happened there.
26
27
Herrera:
Okay, yeah.
28
29
Curry:
Yeah.
30
31
Wray:
But yes there, there are letters of support from LCPD ...
32
33
Curry:
Yeah.
34
35
Wray:
From the City Manager's Office of City of Las Cruces.
36
37
Curry:
Maybe you look at the back sides. Are you looking at backs ...
38
39
Herrera:
Yeah, I did. I went through everything pretty thoroughly and there's ...
40
41
Curry:
Did you? Okay.
42
43
Herrera:
Yeah.
44
45
Curry:
So ...
46
13
I
Herrera:
They're not in here.
2
3.
Curry:
We have from NMDOT, we do have a letter of support from the school
4
district, you, we have the Resolution Number 2008-25 for the Complete
5
Streets and the Resolution Number 09-301 again for Complete Streets,
6
one's Mesilla, one is the City; we have David Maestas ...
7
8
Herrera:
Oh, there they are.
9
10
Curry:
Transportation Director.
11
12
Herrera:
Okay. They're like in the middle of the Safe Routes to School plan. Okay.
13
So that ...
14
15
Curry:
From the ...
16
17
Herrera:
Takes care of all of those.
18
19
Curry:
Associate Superintendent, the Police Department letter of support. So 1
20
think un, unless you see something additional missing I think we were
21
fairly thorough. And I don't believe we got a letter of support from Harold
22
Love but we got a signature from him which we were told sufficed.
23
24
Herrera:
The signature suffices for the Project Feasibility form saying it's a feasible
25
project but if you're looking to put a device on NMDOT right-of-way you're
26
going to need a letter of support from District 1 saying that that's okay.
27
28
Curry:
Would you write us a letter of support please?
20
30
Herrera:
That has to come from Harold.
31
32
Curry:
Okay.
33
34
Pearson
She tried.
35
36
Herrera:
Yeah. I would love to but I'm not the authority for District 1. Okay. So 1
37
think that pretty much takes care of everything except for on the PIF form,
38
there's a lot of forms, but the Project Identification Form there's also some
39
things missing on there; number 34, number 36, and number 39 are not
40
filled out so just if ...
41
42
Curry:
Thank you very much. I really appreciate that.
43
44
Herrera:
And everything else I think looks good.
45
46
Curry:
Good.
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Herrera: It's a good application.
Curry: Thank you very much.
Nunez: Mr. Chair.
Pearson: Yes.
Nunez: A couple items. The page 3 of 4, item 27 says "amount amount" but I,
maybe it's been mentioned already, Federal, Local, Tribal, or Other so if
we can have those values. I noticed the same thing about what you talked
about Ms. Herrera. The letters, I did see those but I did not see one from
the Project Development, in other words as I, help me understand, I was
trying to read a little bit in detail of what, what all you're asking for. You're
asking for a, it talks about road calming. You asking for any road changes
or anything from the City, so it'll be a design, or is it ...
Curry: No. It wouldn't be road changes. It would be, some of them would be
structures, signage that would be put in. So that would be the radar, the
permanent radar feedback signage and there are those pictures where
he's identified where, so the study would need to have been confirmed
that those would be needed and then determine exactly where they would
be placed according to MUTCD standards and ...
Nunez: So my question is, is the, are the City of Las Cruces engineers to design
that, or is David Maestas' group which they typically do not, or is it the Las
Cruces Public Schools engineers to get the ...
Curry: No, I believe that it's David Maestas who had said that you know in his
letter he said "The City Traffic Engineering Department supports your
efforts in applying and will assist our coordinated efforts to maintain Safe
Routes to School and keeping Safe Routes to School," oh that's the
coordinator one.
Nunez: Right, I think ...
Curry: Okay. Let me look, let me look into that.
Nunez: To, if you, if you can just make sure that it's ...
Curry: Yeah. Let me look into that.
Nunez: It's, it's addressed is my point.
Curry: Thank you.
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Nunez: So that if you need design ...
Curry: Yeah.
Nunez: Funds then it would be included or David Maestas' group is going to
provide a design for a contract ...
Curry: My ...
Nunez: To do that work.
Curry: And I, and I will need to look into that in more detail but my understanding
is that we would apply for funds to be able to pay for it because I know the
last time we did Safe Routes to School the City ended up having to do the
design and we've tried to commit to not doing that again, putting them in
that position. So on this we have specific support, I believe it would come
from, funding would come from an outside source to provide that. But let
me verify that before ...
Nunez: All right.
Curry: We do that definitively. Thank you.
Nunez: And then the last item, I'm, I did hear you mention the number of
elementary schools and then the other middle schools and then I counted
up the, the, the schools that you have listed here which is about 12 or so,
about half, or your list, or less than half. But the, I was thinking of, just as
you mentioned others going to be calling is actually providing maybe one
of these to a private school?
Curry: Sure. This ...
Nunez: For, for a little bit. You see my point?
Curry: Well yes. So I tell you what, Las, the Las Cruces Public Schools is putting
forth this application.
Nunez: Oh, I got you.
Curry: If a private school wanted to do it, that's fine.
Nunez: All right.
Curry: We do partner as much as we can in the spirit of communication and
partnership. We communicate with the public schools, with the private
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
schools if they need us but you know really priority would go to Las
Cruces Public Schools since this is a Las Cruces Public Schools
application.
Nunez: Makes sense. Okay. I'm, I'm new to this. Thanks.
Herrera: Mr. Chair.
Pearson: Yes.
Herrera: I just have one more, so I read the letters now that I found them. Thank
you. The only thing that I don't see in here is who's going to be paying the
power bills for the, are they all solar then with no sort of power backup?
Curry: Correct.
Herrera: Okay. And to make sure on your application that if you are planning, if the
schools are planning to get some engineering funding to put a plan set
together that that's made clear in the application somewhere. And actually
it's in those boxes that were pointed out. It has a specific part for
preliminary engineering and all that so.
Curry: Thank you. I'll confirm that.
Herrera: Okay. Thanks.
Pearson: Any other comments on this one?
Castillo: Mr. Chair. Just a few comments. The, I, 1 would pay special attention to
the naming of the project. I think it's, it's, in one of the forms it just
mentions traffic calming. In the other form it mentions a program. So just
be clearer about that. That, that would make it easier for the reader. And
several times you mention data. I don't know if you have any actual data
on like number of either traffic citations or actual number of complaints,
increase, decrease. If you do that would be helpful. Mr. Nunez mentioned
something about one of the budgets. I, I, 1 would, I would encourage you
to double-check both budget numbers. I, 1, 1 saw some inconsistencies in,
in the budget numbers so just check those. And then lastly I would kind of
reiterate what Ms. Herrera had mentioned on number 36 which is security
of motorized or non -motorized users. I mean the whole point to the
project is for the non -motorized users so I would definitely add something
in that item. Thank you.
Curry: Thank you very much. Could I just ask you, you said you saw some
budget number inconsistencies. Can you point to those specifically so I
can know exactly what ...
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
Castillo: Yeah. Without looking through the, the, the, the, the pile right now, so one
of the main ones where it asks for the, the overall breakdown, I think it's
like $139,000 and then if you look at the other two itemized items it's
$85,000 plus $34,000 so either something's missing, or it doesn't equal
$139, 000.
Curry: Thank you. I'll look into that. Appreciate that.
Pearson: Any other comments? So with those comments, so we should just take a
vote to ...
Wray: We, we ...
Pearson: Move this forward.
Wray: Do need a vote Mr. Chair.
Pearson: So I'll hear a motion to move this project forward.
Herrera: I move to move this project forward with the comments from the
Committee I guess reviewed.
Pearson: And a second?
Nunez: Second.
Pearson: We have a motion and a second. All in favor, "aye."
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
Pearson: Any opposed? Move onto the next one.
Wray: Thank you Mr. Chair. We'd like to direct the Committee's attention now to
the Safe Routes to School Coordinator position application. This is an, a
position of importance to the Las Cruces Public Schools SRTS Program.
This is, it's the Coordinator position is essentially the person who heads up
and sort of guides the implementation of SRTS throughout the LCPS
system. This is a position that's been in existence with the MPO for six or
seven years now. We've had a, a couple of people come and go through
the position. It was originally housed within Mesilla Valley MPO, at that
time Las Cruces MPO staff, has since shifted to be within the Las Cruces
Public Schools' own staff and I will now turn the floor over to Ms. Ashleigh
Curry who is the current incumbent of that position.
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
3$
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Curry: Thank you Mr. Wray and Mr. Chair. So as Mr. Wray said this is a
continuation of, of funding that we're requesting for the Safe Routes to
School Coordinator position. It's one of the few things that is verified in
the TAP applications as being available for funding specifically with every
school coordinator position. We're proposing, it's currently 20 hours a
week. We're proposing to move that to 25 hours a week. As Mr. Wray
said when the, when the program got started it's been under various,
various umbrellas of funding. We also had a Champion position, a Safe
Routes to School Champion that was housed through the Town of Mesilla
originally and the program was a pilot program and moved on to, we are
now involved in 100% of our elementary schools and lightly involved in all
of our middle schools as well: Education, encouragement, just getting
programs up and going and then of course coordinating engineering
needs between schools and the City engineer, the Town, and the County.
So it's an important position to keep things moving forward. We've been
going for ten years in, again some of it under the MPO, some of it under
the Town of Mesilla. But the Safe Routes to School has been going for
ten years and I believe has really got a good amount of success and we'd
like to just keep that moving forward. This is one of the few places that we
can get funding for this position so if it didn't come from TAP funds I'm not
sure that we'd be able to continue funding this elsewhere. This school
district supports the, supports the program very well. It, it works well to be
in the school district, that we have access to children and be able to go do
the education in the schools with the children and of course there's the
LCPS match. I, 1 should also just add we do have two half-time positions
that are currently funded just one year out for, through the Department of
Health that also fund two other Champions that assist with the
encouragement and education pieces.
Herrera: Mr. Chair. If I can just add that this is the only successful Safe Routes to
School program in the state. It's a good one.
Pearson: So do you have any picky? I saw one empty box.
Herrera: I do. On the Project Information, Identification Form, the PIF, sorry
number 19 and number 36 are blank. Especially number 36 1 think you
want to talk about, and I saw the letters and things were in here as well so
that's really the only thing. Just those two.
Curry: Thank you very much.
Pearson: Yeah. I think from my perspective if nothing else gets funded this is the
project that needs to be funded so I would heartily approve this
submission.
Curry: Thank you.
19
1
2 Pearson: Anybody else have comments? James.
3
4
Nunez:
Just the number 27 again, 3 of 4, breakout of the funds, I, 1 don't know if
5
they require amounts in the different columns; Federal, Tribal, Local, or
6
Other.
7
8
Curry:
Page 27, is that what you said?
9
10
Nunez:
Page 3 of 4, block 27 or question 27.
11
12
Herrera:
Mr. Chair. That's one of those weird ones, so this form is used for every
13
kind of project and it doesn't fit some of them so that's probably why it's
14
not filled out cause there's really no preliminary engineering/right-of-way
15
construction. So I think on this form, the way that it's filled out it's fine but
16
on the previous application definitely fill in those different lines.
17
18
Curry:
Thank you Ms. Herrera. I think somewhere in the instructions it does say
19
"where applicable" because this is the one thing that's a coordinator. The
20
majority of the TAP funding is for infrastructure pieces.
21
22
Wray:
Ms....
23
24
Curry:
But thank you for noticing.
25
26
Wray:
Mr. Chair, Ms. Herrera. Would it be helpful to at least put "N/A" in the
27
spots just to make sure that the Committee up in Santa Fe who'll be
28
evaluating this knows that the applicant is aware and has made a
29
conscious decision that this question does not apply to me?
30
31
Herrera:
Yes. That ...
32
33
Curry:
Yeah. Okay.
34
35
Herrera:
It can never hurt.
36
37
Pearson:
Right. That's one area where the TAP programs were designed for
38
construction projects for the most part but this is a program project so we
39
have to make sure that it does fit in. Any other comments? Do I hear a
40
motion to move this project forward?
41
42
Bencomo:
Mr. Chair.
43
44
Pearson:
Yes.
45
46
Bencomo:
Point of order. Does Ashleigh need to recuse herself from this vote?
20
I
'?
Wray:
Sure.
3
4
Pearson:
We can do a roll call vote and Ashleigh could abstain. So Andrew could
5
you take the roll call?
6
7
Wray:
There's no second.
S
9
Pearson:
Oh yes.
10
11
Wray:
Actually there's no motion.
12
13
Pearson:
There's no motion.
14
15
Herrera:
Mr. Chair. I move that we approve this application.
16
17
Bencomo:
Second.
18
19
Pearson:
Okay. With a motion and a second, Andrew roll call please.
20
21
Wray:
Ms. Herrera.
22
23
Herrera:
Yes.
24
25
Wray:
Mr. Shepan.
26
27
Shepan:
Yes.
28
29
Wray:
Ms. Curry.
30
31
Curry:
Abstain.
32
33
Wray:
Ms. Willman.
34
35
Willman:
Yes.
36
37
Wray:
Mr. Nunez.
38
39
Nunez:
Yes.
40
41
Wray:
Mr. Bencomo.
42
43
Bencomo:
Yes.
44
45
Wray:
Mr. Castillo.
46
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Castillo: Yes.
Wray: Mr. Chair.
Pearson: Yes.
Leisher: Yes.
Pearson: Oh, and Mark.
Wray: Oh, I'm, I am so sorry Mr. Leisher. I apologize. Mr. Leisher,
Leisher: Yes.
Wray: I'm sorry. You're so quiet over there.
Leisher: Yes.
MOTION PASSES.
Wray: All right. Thank you Mr. Chair. I would like to turn the attention of the
Committee now to the application from the Town of Mesilla regarding the
multi -use path along Calle del Norte. This application is a development of
the work that I'm sure this Committee remembers earlier this year of
designating the southern loop of the Las Cruces Multi -Use Path. Town of
Mesilla is proposing connecting more or less the spot where the La
Llorona Trail meets with Calle del Norte. Unfortunately there's some issue
as far as ownership actually making a physical connection, so effectively
starting from that intersecting point on Calle del Norte and then, then
pushing the trail out to the east. Sorry, I lost my sense of, my inner
compass there. We have Larry Shannon from the Town of Mesilla to
speak on behalf of that application tonight.
Shannon- Okay. There, the primary purpose of this application is to complete the
Intercity Bicycle and Pedestrian Loop by connecting La Llorona Trail with
the Mesilla, Mesilla Valley Multi -Use Connection Loop. So what we're
looking at doing is going from La Llorona down Calle del Norte, down to
the lateral. You have a map in your application that shows it going all the
way to 28. We prefer not to do that. The funding is actually for the lateral
then we would take the lateral down to either Union or to University. But
right now the benefit primarily would be connect the, to complete that loop
for the trail and the benefit to Mesilla in doing that would be that because
Mesilla is primarily a, a, a, a tourist town we have quite a bit of pedestrian,
quite a bit of bicycling, quite a bit of vehicular traffic. This would help to
separate the bicycle traffic down Calle del Norte from the, the, what motor
traffic would make it a safer pedestrian and bicycle route along Calle del
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
to
11
12
13
14
t5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
3.0
31
3
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
-13
44
45
46
Norte. So safety would be a primary result of the, of this application. Plus
the fact that because Mesilla is such a small town because it does rely
heavily on the tourist industry and because bicycling is a major part of that
this would be a definite benefit to the Town of Mesilla economically
because it will help to promote bicycle and pedestrian traffic from La
Llorona. By completing a loop you'll be able to get down to University
from La Llorona. So it would benefit us because of the fact that we would
bring in more pedestrian and more bicycle traffic and more economic
growth to the city.
Pearson: So is that ...
Shannon: But this, at ...
Pearson: Economic aspect, is that part of the application included in part of the
narrative of the application?
Shannon: I'm sorry?
Pearson; Is, okay.
Shannon: Yes.
Pearson: Yes.
Bencomo: I've got a bunch of notes on this one.
Pearson: Okay.
Bencomo; So just some, some suggestions on wording in, in the application. The,
the, under the "Economic Vitality/Retail Growth" the Rio Grande Trail is in
the works right now. It's going to happen I believe. The State is pushing
that and it's, it's moving along, there's meetings happening so, and then
the City of Las Cruces just passed a resolution to designate,
recommending designation of the La Llorona Trail to be part of the Rio
Grande Trail. So now that connectivity is even more important
economically, vitality -wise, tourist, tourism -wise. So if some wording
talking about the Rio Grande Trail, the possibility of that in the future, the
City of Las Cruces passing that resolution. Those are I think some very
powerful arguments for, for putting that piece in.
Pearson. Well it's gone past that. The, the La Llorona Trail has been accepted as
part of the Rio Grande Trail.
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Bencomo They did that at the last meeting of the
Pearson: Yes. They had a meeting ...
Bencomo: Rio Grande Trail ..
Pearson: Special meeting in October and actually the Governor's going to be here
on Thursday to indoctrinate it into the system.
Bencomo: Okay. Good. So yeah, so that's a, that's a big piece I think. "Safety and
Security," I'm sorry, still writing notes, okay. "Safety and Security" is
section three. There's, there's not any mention in the text itself, you
mentioned it discussion -wise but in the text, the large numbers of bikers
and runners. I use that, we, my group uses that road a lot. We run out to
the river and back. There's tons of bikers up and down that road all the
time. They use it as a, as a major route whether to go to Snow Road or all
the way out to South Fairacres Road, they use that route quite a bit. I
think Lance can attest to this, there are multiple races that head down
pieces of Calle del Norte, come out of the plaza and onto Calle del Norte.
He's shaking his head, he doesn't like that but it's a good route.
Shepan: They're better now that we run them backwards.
Bencomo: Oh, okay.
Shepan: Runners are, they behave better now.
Bencomo: Yeah. So, so there's, there's a lot of races that are held. Mesilla's a, is a,
is a huge place for races that go on there so that, that's another piece of
not only "Safety and Security" but also "Economic Vitality." It also kind of
fits into there cause it brings people into the community for that. Number
four, "Accessibility and Mobility through Integration and Connectivity," just
some wording changes maybe. It says, I mean it's your document but
says, "This project will complete the Intercity Bicycle Loop" but it really
won't. There are some pieces missing, they're not in Mesilla but there's
some pieces miss, so I would suggest wording perhaps says "This project
is a key component of the completion of the Intercity Loop" rather than "It
completes it" cause there's some other pieces that need to be done.
And then maybe listing the connectivity, the connectivity if once the,
that loop is, is completed it's a key component of it, will connect Las
Cruces, NMSU, Dona Ana County, and Mesilla. All the entities in the area
will, if you list them all that's going to, that, that will eventually connect
them. Also something that I, 1 would like to see not only in this application
but generally speaking from the, from the BPAC as we move forward, we,
we're talking about multi -use trails and I think we need to, to change, is it,
hate the, the term because everybody says it now, "flip the script" but
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
anyway, use different words. These multi -use trails are not just recreation
because when you say "recreation" they're way down at the bottom of the
list. And these multi -use trails are not just for recreation. They, I did a, a
kind of a self -drawn map using the bus route system and if we put some of
these trails in that we're talking about there's tons of connectivity with
parks, with schools, with bus stops that go right through the area, they're
alternative transportation routes. They're not just recreation trails. They're
used for recreation, they, to get people out. So we needed to start I think
you could, be a more powerful argument to say they are alternative
transportation routes for mass transit, parks, businesses, not just for
recreation.
And then under 5b, again "How will it improve the quality of life?"
Once again if you connect to mass transit people can have more quality of
life, routes to businesses perhaps, and then another thing that is, is kind of
an intangible but when you have these trails out there for people to go out
and do those things and people get out and they connect, they meet, you
start building a sense of community, that is an enhancement to your
quality of life by building community, by meeting your neighbors, by doing
those type of things. That's the kind of wording I think that needs to be
used in these application projects also.
And then I have a final comment but, I mean a question for Ms.
Herrera may, perhaps. Letters of support, are those only accepted from
entities or perhaps could something like Southern New Mexico Trail
Alliance, Las Cruces Roadrunners running group, could they provide
those, community groups?
Herrera: Certainly. I think the clarification is if there's a facility being proposed on
somebody else's right-of-way that is a required letter of support but there's
definitely others that could support projects.
Bencomo: Okay.
Herrera: And yeah, that's definitely, it helps the application because it gives it more
of a regional feel ...
Bencomo: Right.
Herrera: To the people in Santa Fe.
Bencomo� Awesome. Great. Yeah, because there are, there are at least four groups
I know of that I, I'm 99.9% sure would give you a letter of support.
They're, they're community groups. They're not governmental entities.
So, and that's all my comments. Thank you.
Curry: Mr. Chair. I might add to that that I think Safe Routes to School, the Las
Cruces Public Schools would write a letter of support for that because
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
ultimately it, it provides that alternative transportation for our students
when the, when the complete loop is, is completed. So this is a piece of
that too.
Pearson: Any other comments?
Herrera: Mr. Chair. Sorry. Now I have my whole list. First of all the Project
Identification Form is completely missing from the application. That needs
to be filled out. Maybe, Andrew if you can just maybe resend the form.
Wray: It's, Town of Mesilla had that attached. I'm not sure, maybe something
has gotten jumbled in the printing ...
Herrera: Okay.
Wray: Would potentially be my guess. I, the, Harold signed the document. I, 1
know he did. I've seen it.
Baum: You're not on the microphone.
Herrera: Sorry. The Project Feasibility Form is there, the one signed by Harold, but
the actual Project Identification Form that has ...
Wray: Oh, oh.
Herrera. All of the detailed information, that's missing. So I don't know if the Town
filled that out and maybe it's just not here. Either way it needs to be
included.
Shannon: I'll find out.
Wray: No, that's ...
Herrera: Okay so I guess moving on, I did notice that Calle del Norte, well it is a
State road and there's no letter of support from District 1 so that's
something that's going to be needed and you can contact Mr. Harold Love
for that. Also the funding I'm a little bit worried about, on the Project
Feasibility Form, well from the cost estimate and everything that it, it looks
like you want to split the $616,365 equally between both years but that's
not really how the funding works for this program. Really it's, the first year
so Fiscal Year 2018 would be to complete your preliminary engineering
and then the following fiscal year would be the construction funding. So
when you fill out the Project Identification Form make sure that you're
pretty clear on how much you need for preliminary engineering, and
there's already a cost estimate in here that looks good so just taking those
numbers and filling in the right boxes with this is, that's all that really needs
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
to happen there. And then also there's no mention of the MPO's trail map
and plan on this application but this is part of it, and it's another planning
document that can give you more points on your application so definitely
mention that and include that somehow in your application. And then the
map, this map is okay but it might be good to add another map that's a
little more zoomed -out that shows kind of the connectivity and actually if
you want to just include the MPO's trail map and kind of mark that up too,
that might be helpful just cause it shows how this piece connects to the
other trails.
Shannon: So I apologize about the map. I did the map and it was ten-minute map
there so, "We need a map." And, but yeah that definitely does need to be
modified for the real application.
Herrera: Yeah. I mean I think this is good for showing a close-up but just
something that shows a little bit more connectivity regionally would be
good.
Shannon: Okay.
Herrera: And that's all that I have, Mr. Chair. Thanks.
Curry: Mr. Chair, Mr. Shannon. I wanted to ask you, have you been in touch with
the other entity, the International Boundary Waters that would actually do
the connection between the end of Calle del, Calle del Norte and the La
Llorona beginning trail, or the trailhead?
Shannon: Well I'm standing in tonight but to be honest with you I don't believe so,
but I'll find out.
Curry: Cause I think that that would also be a letter, a good letter of support or a
letter just showing there's that connectivity because if somebody did
realize that there's another small segment that involves a different entity,
it's probably good that that other entity; a) knows that you're planning on
this and; b) if we could get a letter of support from them that would be
even stronger.
Shannon: Okay.
Pearson: Yeah the La Llorona Trail is in the IBWC area so somebody from the City
presumably knows the correct contact if you can't find it yourself.
Shannon: Okay.
27
I
Pearson:
Any other comments? So as far as voting on this one there was
2
suggested that perhaps the Town of Mesilla Representative shouldn't vote
3
since it's a town project.
4
5
UNKNOWN:
(inaudible).
6
7
Pearson:
Okay, so ...
8
9
Shannon:
I'm Sorry.
10
11
Pearson:
Lance is agreeing to that and so I'll hear a motion to move this one
12
forward.
13
14
Curry:
Mr. Chair. As the Citizen Rep do I get a vote for the Town of Mesilla?
15
16
Pearson:
I think so, yeah.
17
18
Curry:
Okay.
19
20
Wray:
No motion.
21
22
Herrera:
Mr. Chair. I move to approve this application, I guess with the comments.
23
24
Willman:
I'll second that.
25
26
Pearson:
Okay. We have a motion and a second. Will you do a roll call?
27
28
Wray:
Yes sir. Mr. Leisher.
29
30
Leisher:
Yes.
31
32
Wray:
Mr. Castillo.
33
34
Castillo:
Yes.
35
36
Wray:
Mr. Bencomo.
37
38
Bencomo:
Yes.
39
40
Wray:
Mr. Nunez.
41
42
Nunez:
Yes.
43
44
Wray:
Ms. Willman.
45
46
Willman:
Yes.
w
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Wray: Ms. Curry.
Curry: Yes.
Wray: Ms. Herrera. Oh excuse me, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to skip you. Mr., Mr.
Shepan.
Shepan: I'm not voting on this.
Pearson: Just say ...
Wray: Just say abstain.
Shepan: Abstain.
Wray: In, in the mic please so it can be on the record.
Shepan: Abstain.
Wray: Thank you. Ms. Herrera.
Herrera: Yes.
Wray: Mr. Chair.
Pearson; Yes.
MOTION PASSES.
Wray: Thank you Mr. Chair. We'd like to turn the attention of the Committee now
to the last application that MPO staff received as part of this. It was from
the City of Las Cruces. The application is for green infrastructure
improvements concentrated in the Downtown area of the City of Las
Cruces. There's also infrastructure traffic calming improvements at a, as a
part of that. We have Mr. Armando Morales here from the City of Las
Cruces staff to speak to the Committee regarding this application.
Leisher: Mr. Chair. A brief aside, I need to leave in about three minutes, so_
Morales: Good afternoon everyone. As you know the City of Las Cruces has been
invested in the Downtown Revitalization for some time now as you can
see with the, the opening of the plaza and with the two-way conversion of
Church and Water going on early next year. And we, we feel that, staff
feels that green infrastructure will serve a number of the goals listed in our
City documents, one of which is the, the MPO's Transit Plan. And some of
I
these goals are to increase pedestrian, bicycle, and economic activity in
2
the Downtown area and it will also create a sense of place. With
3
economic activity, as you know bicycles and pedestrians according to the
4
League of American Bicyclists, they spend more money, or they spend
5
money more frequently than motorized travelers and, and that's one of
6
the, the, that's one of the things that we're trying to target for the
7
Downtown area is to increase those aspects in, in order to increase
8
economic activity, economic development/activity. And I'll stand for any
9
questions you guys have.
10
11
Pearson:
Could you describe the project a little bit more? Cause it's, it's a ...
12
13
Morales:
So ...
14
15
Pearson:
Million -dollar project, right?
16
17
Morales:
Yes. So what the City has done, or sorry, what the City has done is
18
they've targeted areas on Church and Water that they believe are good
19
candidates to be placed for green infrastructure. And that green
20
infrastructure that was determined there were determined by the City of
21
Mesa's Green Infrastructure Toolkit in which it addresses all of the, the,
22
the best areas and the type of activity that is in that area.
23
24
Pearson:
So the two-way conversion of Church and Water is going to happen
25
already.
26
27
Morales:
Correct.
28
29
Pearson:
And this would not be part of that but, so that project would leave space
30
where this project would come in and do these kinds of improvements. Is
31
that what we're looking at?
32
33
Morales:
Correct. It is an extension if you will of that project. It is not a part of that
34
project but it can be looked as an, as an extension. Because of the, the
35
two-way conversion this, this will have much more benefit because in that
36
two-way conversion they are going to create an overlay in the Church and
37
Water area and the cross streets, Bowman, Griggs, Las Cruces, and
38
Hadley they are going to do a complete reconstruction and in that
39
reconstruction they're going to have, include green infrastructure. So
40
there will already be green infrastructure in those cross streets but the
41
two-way conversion project will not include green infrastructure on Church
42
and Water. And that is what we are applying for, to extend green
43
infrastructure to these streets to continue green infrastructure in the whole
44
Downtown area.
45
46
Bencomo:
Mr. Chair.
30
1
2
i
4
5
G
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
75
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Pearson: Yes.
Bencomo: So for my education cause I read it briefly or quickly and, and I saw, what
do you mean, when you say "green infrastructure," I have an idea what
that is, but what do you mean by that? What is the green infrastructure, I
saw trees in there, is that, I mean those are literally green infrastructure
but what, what is it?
Morales: Green infrastructure is essentially strategic placement of things like trees,
(inaudible) and drainage to liven up the neighborhood as well as help, help
the, the terrain flow better as far as things like, like drainage and, and help
with traffic calming and, and ...
Bencomo: Okay. Okay. And, and those, yeah those general things I, 1 understand
those but do you know specifically what, I, 1 saw trees like I said and then
you say "traffic calming." What are they going to do as far as traffic
calming? Is it going to be reduced road widths, is it going to be, what is it
going to be?
Morales: In some areas yes. What we'll do is we'll add curb extensions and that'll
narrow some of the, the driving lanes but what happens also when you
add more I guess visual, visual aids to, to roadways traffic tends to slow
down because there's, there's more things to pay attention to. So with the
increase of essentially things to look at you'll drive at a much slower pace.
Bencomo: Okay. Thank you.
Herrera: Mr. Chair_
Pearson: Jolene.
Herrera: If I could follow that up with the, some of the same comments that we
talked about previously at the Project Feasibility meeting, the scope is still
pretty unclear and I guess to get to the comments just made, you need to
list specific elements. If you're planning on doing curb extensions that
needs to be mentioned specifically. Any kind of schematics or pictures
that you can provide would be better because when you say "green
infrastructure" most people have no idea what you're talking about, just
like we all kind of didn't know. So I think it's good to put the words in here
but any kind of visuals that you can provide. If there's other cities that
have this implemented already that you can take pictures from, all of that
kind of stuff helps. Also the funding is a little bit unclear, so it doesn't look
like you're applying for any kind of engineering funds, so would the City be
doing the plans then?
31
I
Morales:
Correct.
2
3
Herrera:
Okay. And then for construction management, the City has inspectors
4
that have certifications to ...
5
6
Morales:
Ah yes, yes sir.
7
8
Herrera:
Do that? Okay. So I would be clear about that in the application. Make
9
sure that you say that. There's also mention of a map in here showing
10
the, the limits and I'm not sure if it's this one, it's a little unclear if it is this
11
map so if you can just, I don't have a specific comment. Just make it more
12
clear I guess.
13
14
Morales:
Okay.
15
16
Herrera
Just think about it from the perspective that the people that are going to be
17
on this Committee may have never been to Las Cruces, maybe they've
18
never been Downtown so they probably don't know what it looks like. And
19
if you can help them see that in their minds you're more likely to get a
20
better score. That's all the comments I had Mr. Chair.
21
22
Pearson:
So it's actually the TIDD doing the application that the City represents, or
23
how, is the fiscal agent? How does that work?
24
25
Morales:
Yes. The fiscal agent is, is the TIDD.
26
27
Pearson:
Okay. So it's actually a City application but the funding's coming from the
28
TIDD, is that how you ...
29
30
Morales:
Yes sir, yes sir. Sorry. Yes Mr., Mr. Chair.
31
32
Pearson:
Anybody, go ahead.
33
34
Castillo:
I, 1 would agree with both what Mr. Bencomo and Ms. Herrera had
35
mentioned and include in there a, a more compelling I guess narrative on
36
how the non -motorized audience is going to benefit from that. You
37
mentioned something about traffic calming and that does help motorists
38
but a little more on like the length of the, the walking distance, you know
39
how many, I think there are some studies that, that talk about maybe a
40
projected, you know pedestrian counts or just off-street activity, bicyclists
41
or, or whatever you have just, just to make a, a more compelling narrative
42
that, that you are addressing some of the, the, the true objective of, of the
43
TAP program. That's all.
44
45
Herrera:
Mr. Chair. I guess I just have one more comment. I started reading the
46
letter here. If you're still able to update this letter I would address it to
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Daniel Watts and call this a Transportation Alternatives project, not a
Recreational Trails project just because that's a different type of funding
and this project's not eligible for that type of funding. And then also it's
just a little unclear with what you just explained about how the TIDD is the
project sponsor. So is, is that part of the City, because the letter says that
it is.
Morales- What, what the TIDD is, is it's, it's a Tax Increment District and it, it
receives its own funding which serves on a, another board which happens
to be the City Council as well. But yes they, I'm sorry can you repeat your
original ...
Herrera: Yeah. I'm just a little bit worried about it just because it's pretty clear in the
guide that the sponsor of a project really needs to be a local government.
So I think if it can work to have the TIDD somehow have a MOA or
something with the City so that the City's the actual sponsor of the project.
I might just be confused about how a TIDD works but I don't want your
application to be thrown out just because they're confused about who the
project sponsor's going to be.
Wray: Mr. Chair, Ms. Herrera. Would it be appropriate me, for me to ask at this
moment, do you believe the TIDD is an eligible applicant?
Herrera: Is it a, the, is it a government agency then, is it ...
Bencomo: Mr., Mr. Chair. The, the TIDD is the, the City is the, going to be the project
coordinator. The TIDD is simply a, a, a mechanism for them to direct tax
collection to a specific area of the City. That's all it is. That's, so it's not
the TIDD that would be applying, I believe. It's the City and they would
use TIDD funding, which Tax Increment Development District is just the
Downtown only. That's how they collect the funds that have to stay in that
area and be used. But it's through the City.
Herrera: Okay.
Bencomo: So, but I think the, whoever the project engineers will be doing that and,
and yeah you might want to, your, to, back to your question about the
engineering piece, you might want to clarify that and they probably know
but the City, if they were going to do all the engineering, it doesn't seem
like they would, like they would ask for a, why would they not pay for the
engineering out of this, so that probably needs to be clarified if they're
going to do that to be sure. Cause typically the City will apply and
engineering will be Phase 1 of that or Phase A, whatever they call it and
then the second part will be construction. So that, if it's not in here it
needs to be clarified also, as Ms. Herrera stated.
33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Herrera: Thanks for the clarification. That makes it a lot more clear. This letter is
very confusing then because it says that the TIDD is going to be the
sponsoring agency of the project. So that wording is ...
Pearson. Yeah, it needs to be ...
Herrera: This letter needs ...
Pearson: That the City is the sponsoring agent.
Herrera: To be reworked.
Pearson: But the money comes from the TIDD.
Herrera: Right. And that's perfectly fine.
Pearson: That's okay.
Herrera: Yeah. That's okay, it's just the way that this is written is not I think how it
works in reality. So just, if you can work on this letter some to make it
clear.
Morales: Yeah.
Herrera: Now I'm done. Thank you Mr. Chair.
Willman: Mr., Mr. Chairman. I would say this picture, the only graphic that's
included, it's just the, kinda the racetrack around where your description
includes primarily Picacho from Main to Campo and on Campo from
Spruce to Lohman. That's not even in the picture. And then of course
Lohman from Campo to Alameda is outside. I mean I, might not make
that much difference. It's just what you're talking about working on isn't
depicted in that picture.
Morales: Okay. I can, I can clear that, that image up then.
Pearson Okay. Any further discussion? So I'll hear a motion to move this project
forward with the comments.
Bencomo: Mr. Chair. I move that we move this project forward to a vote with the
comments added.
Shepan Second.
Wray: Did we need to have a recusal discussion regarding this item?
34
Pearson: I think probably in the same idea the Town of Mesilla recused themselves
2
from their application, so maybe the staff from the City should recuse
3
themselves?
4
5
Wray:
And I apologize, I did not get the motion and the second, who made them?
6
7
Bencomo:
I made the motion.
8
9
Pearson:
And Lance.
10
11
Shepan:
Lance Shepan, second.
12
13
Nunez:
Since I can't vote can I, 1 will add in a comment. To make it stronger 1
14
suppose is, I was kind of like you, Andrew, Mr. Bencomo. Green
15
infrastructure, the, if you, if you read this map, this, this gave me the most
16
information actually, if you look at the items and the bullets there and 1
17
hope you can somehow highlight it, but the, the, talks about the, I, I, the
18
little bit that I know about this project is I think that they just really didn't
19
have the funds to add trees and green and some of the other items so
20
now with this they'll be able to in the Downtown area. Otherwise they're
21
just going to have asphalt and they're not going to have other things, and
22
you guys mentioned the benefits if they had the trees and that should calm
23
it, blah blah blah. And so, but, but to get, so anyway that, I, I, 1 would just,
24
1 think with some wording and some, maybe even in color or something
25
you could make this a little bit, define it up front like Ms. Herrera said and,
26
and then, cause it, even rereading the description, the second sentence
27
threw me off. I'll be honest with you. It talked about some benefits or
28
something. But anyway that, that's my suggestion, just to make it, reread
29
it, rewrite it a little bit to make it stronger. All right. I'm out. I'm done.
30
31
Pearson:
Okay. So we have our motion and a second.
32
33
Wray:
Mr. Castillo.
34
35
Castillo:
Yes.
36
37
Wray:
Mr. Bencomo.
38
39
Bencomo:
Yes.
40
41
Wray:
Mr. Nunez.
42
43
Nunez:
Recruit, recused.
44
45
Wray:
Ms. Willman.
46
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
lI
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Willman: Yes.
Wray: Ms. Curry.
Curry: Yes.
Wray: Mr. Shepan.
Shepan: Yes.
Wray: Ms. Herrera.
Herrera: Yes.
Wray: Mr. Chair.
Pearson: Yes,
MOTION PASSES.
Pearson: And well before we go on, maybe to form, for the first proposal we didn't
have a roll call vote so maybe we should for the record do the roll call on
that one.
Wray: Is that permissible I guess?
Pearson: Because it's probably appropriate we have, no?
Baum You already had the vote.
Pearson: No?
Baum. You've already voted, you all said yes, so you're okay with that.
Pearson Okay.
Wray: Before we move on though I had been directed to, to make a statement to
the Committee and to the applying jurisdictions. Earlier I said that we
would need the applications by November 30th, that, that is the deadline
that MPO staff has to NMDOT. However, due to trying to account for
potential problems that we may have uploading the applications to the ftp
site, it, it would behoove the jurisdictions to have their, their final
completed applications to us by November 23rd. We'll, I'm sure we'll still
take them after that, after that but you have to understand that it, that if
you do push us to the wall like that we may not be able to get it up to
NMDOT in time.
36
1
2
Pearson:
So is ...
3
4
Wray:
And NMDOT will not take anything past five o'clock on November 30th no
5
matter how much we beg and plead. So applying jurisdictions please do
6
keep that in mind that we really need 'em by November 23rd.
7
8
Pearson:
So is that the Wednesday before the holiday?
9
10
Wray:
I have no idea.
11
12
Curry:
Correct. It is. Correct.
13
14
Pearson:
Okay.
15
16
Wray:
Thank you Mr., oh, I'm sorry. I guess ...
17
18
Pearson:
Okay.
19
20
Wray:
Have we officially moved on?
21
22
5.4
Bicycle/Pedestrian Project Recommendations
23
24
Pearson:
On to our next item.
25
26
Wray:
Thank you Mr. Chair. If you'll bear with me for just a moment while I bring
27
up the next, the next item. At this time I'd like to introduce Mr. Michael
28
McAdams who is going to speak to the Committee regarding the bicycle
29
infrastructure projects.
30
31
McAdams:
Mr. Chairman and Members. It seemed like we met another time this
32
week too. About, about two weeks ago we got together and we, on, on
33
the 20th of September we got out the maps, we looked at them. We
34
decided what would be a good project for implementation and the staff
35
went back and collected the recommendations on the map and the
36
comments and we came about with the list you have if you have your
37
packet of, of about you know several projects we think that will be possible
38
for implementation. There is an upcoming deadline of November 1st
39
where we can submit these projects to the ICIP for the City of Las Cruces
40
and what we've done, and we developed a set of recommendations which
41
we think would be good to put forward to the City. Now later, the County
42
projects and other, for Town we'd like to leave for later as their deadline is
43
January 1st. We'd like to work with the County and with, with the BPAC
44
on settling that. So today we'd just like to look at the one, the
45
recommended list, ICIP and prioritize them. And we may want to go
46
through these individually. It's, Mr. Chairman it's up to you how you want
37
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
to proceed with this or we can do it collectively you know. I guess the
discussion's now. I guess I'd like to leave it up to discussion at this time.
Pearson: Okay. One project that, maybe it's on here that I don't recognize, but one
that I've been talking about a lot is connecting from Motel Boulevard to the
outfall channel.
McAdams: Okay.
Pearson: The Picacho Middle School has a weekly bicycle program that would use
that.
McAdams: Right.
Pearson: And right now I think it's just, I don't think there's a formal connection
there. I think that there's some private developer land there so identifying
how that would work ...
McAdams: I guess we could look at, I mean we, we'd like to choose from the list we
presented I think because I'm not sure those, those aren't the, the present
list right now. We could add it but we'd like to go with those first and then
proceed with others perhaps.
Bencomo: Mr. Chair.
Pearson: Yes,
Bencomo: I have a question for, so this was the, the, the meeting you're talking about
was the work session we had, correct?
McAdams: Yes. It was.
Bencomo: Okay.
McAdams: Yes.
Bencomo: So we had the work session, we had it, public there, we had us there, we
gave input and this is what we came up with on ...
McAdams: Yes.
Bencomo: The project
McAdams: Correct.
Bencomo: Recommendations
38
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1.2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
24
21
22
23
24
25
25
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
4.0
McAdams: Correct.
Bencomo: So a couple of questions ...
McAdams: Okay.
Bencomo: And I'll ask them and then we can go ...
McAdams: Okay. Okay, sure.
Bencomo: The color coding on here, just curious what that is and then on ...
McAdams: Oh you mean on the .pdf? Yes, let me show you the code.
Bencomo: Yeah.
McAdams: The coding, color coding on the .pdf you have in front of you, the red of
course is the projects that we see. I, maybe you want to zoom out
because it's like it's too close. And the green are for the, the project, we
have existing bike facilities so, and the numbers are the numbers that are
corresponding with the projects you know. Not sure if I can zoom, yeah.
Bencomo: Okay. So the red are the projects.
McAdams: Right.
Bencomo: The other ones are, are existing bike lanes, the green and the ...
McAdams: Yes.
Bencomo: Maroon is the ...
McAdams: That's, that's correct.
Bencomo: Multi -use trails.
McAdams: Right.
Bencomo: Okay. And the two red, or the one, two, three, looks like four maybe red
projects?
McAdams: Yeah, there's, we can go through those individually if you like.
Bencomo: I, what ...
39
f
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1.3
14
15
lb
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
4.6
McAdams: Okay.
Bencomo: Are the
McAdams The, if you look at the, you can go by, I like the numbers better so let's go
with the first which is C, CLC001, let me, which is Espina and this is,
would be bike lanes from the university to Lohman and we discussed
about that, it doesn't, it doesn't presently have bike lanes on it.
The second would be, let me get my list out, excuse me, CL, CL02,
I mean let me just go and look real ...
Bencomo: Looks like a typo, looks like a one, two.
McAdams: Well actually 00, CLC01 is Espina. They're not in order because we
picked, they were picked out from the whole list and the second one
probably would be discussed is, would be Spruce, be the 00, CLC07, that
would be a road diet. And that's mainly because of the accidents on that
area. There's a fair amount of accidents involving some pedestrians well
that was also identified as a possible project.
The next one would be Roadrunner which would be, go from, from
Lohman, excuse me from Bataan Memorial to Lohman. That'll be
additional bike lane, bike lanes from, from road, from Roadrunner.
Nunez: Excuse me. Is that number three?
McAdams: That's, CLCO, yes it's 03. That's correct. Okay. Right here, okay. Yeah
right.
Curry: Mr. McAdams, just to clarify are we expected to prioritize these tonight or
what's the expectation here?
McAdams: Yes. We, we'd like to have a prioritization, which you think is one, two,
three, I think there's seven projects would you like, would you one, you
know in order.
Curry: There's seven projects but there're 18 listed on the page that you give us.
McAdams: We, we, these are the ones that we think the, the most appropriate.
Curry: Okay so one to seven you've listed out as being ...
McAdams: Right.
Curry: The most appropriate.
McAdams: Yes ma'am.
â–º,K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
Curry: And then eight to 18 within the City are, are lower ranked so you've
already ranked them somewhat yourselves.
McAdams: Well we, we, we, yes we ranked them, yeah, what we thought were the, or
the, of the list what would be the most appropriate.
Murphy: Mr....
Curry: So you're asking us to rank one through seven ...
McAdams: Yes.
Curry: And ...
McAdams: Yeah.
Curry: Sort of ignore eight to 18 for now.
Murphy: Mr....
McAdams: We don't think those are as feasible as the other ones.
Curry: Okay,
Murphy: Mr. Chair, Ms., Ms. Curry. If, if I may. What staff did with the, the
workouts from the sheets from the, from the work session, we took ones
that we could readily identify, kind of immediate projects that, that were,
looked like they were very close to being able to be submitted for
construction. We are, we are, we did speak with the City Public Works
Department and we're looking at a November 1st deadline for submittal to
get into their CIP process so what we'd, we used, we used our judgment
to on a, on the projects that you all had fleshed out at the work session
and said, "Okay we think these could move forward more immediate
based on this very tight, tight deadline," and so what we're coming back to
you this evening is what we want to, is ask, "Out of these seven that, that
we're going to submit into the CIP, in, in, list which ones you know, which,
you know put some sort of order on them," be it so that the City can apply
them into different years as, you know as funding becomes available so.
And then, and then of course the rest of the, rest of the work that, that you
had done in the work session we intend to flesh out further but since we
had a upcoming CIP cycle looking right at us we wanted to proceed with
these seven immediately.
41
1
2
3
4
5
G
7
8
9
to
11
12
13
14
15
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Curry: Thank you. That really helps clarify. But to further clarify, we're not
looking at CLC1 through 7, we're looking at anything that has a note of
"CIP" next to it in the right-hand column.
McAdams: Yes.
Curry: Cause that goes through 12.
Murphy: That's correct. And, and anything that you know really is reflected on red.
Curry: Thank you.
Nunez: Mr. Chair. A question.
Pearson: Yes.
Nunez: The, the, so you're looking at just design or, so here's, here's a specific
question.
McAdams: Okay.
Nunez: On CLC7 for example, you talked about a road diet on Spruce, right?
McAdams: Right.
Nunez: Well you're asking to design or a study to see if that's feasible or you're
actually asking, you're, for us to prioritize it to try to get that work done,
designed and completed? I'm not understanding the full scope of this.
Murphy: Mr. Chair, Mr. Nunez. It would depend upon what was, what was
submitted or what came out of that work session. Some of them certainly
are not ready for construction and then are deserving of more study and I
think that, that would get kind of fleshed out during the CIP project. It you
know may need some preliminary engineering, may need some studies,
something like you know, you know Spruce for example we you know
presume that the engineers working on that would you know start doing
speed studies, crash histories, things of that nature as whether to prove it.
But then at the end of it there'd be a potential funding source to, to do the
actual construction if all the studies you know work out.
Nunez: All right, thanks. And to that end Mr. Chair, do you, do you just want us all
to write down these and number and you're going to tally them up in a
table or, cause for I guess my two cents, just looking at this at a glance I
would pursue the bottom ones on the map and then go to the longer,
bigger one, number three, which is behind the dam there, and then on
Spruce maybe last. But that's just ...
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Pearson: Number three is Roadrunner so ...
Nunez: My first pass you know.
Pearson: Yeah, it's ...
Nunez: So anyway go ahead, sorry sir. I'm done.
Pearson: Because questions about other, there are a couple of other road diet
projects that have been talked about, Idaho and Alameda, but they're not
on this list and they, the other question, like the CLC08, that project is
going to happen as far as I know. I just was hearing from the Traffic
Engineer today that that's something like four months out. That's funded
by State Capital Improvement Funds, or State set -aside funds.
McAdams: I'm, I haven't heard that Mr. Chairman. I haven't heard that that was
funded for the pedestrian crossing at University.
Curry: It, we spoke to Sue Young today.
Pearson: With HAWK signals.
McAdams: Okay.
Curry: Yeah.
McAdams: That's, that's news to me.
Murphy: Mr., Mr. Chair, Ms. Curry. The, did you speak with them about HAWK
signals by the Chick-fil-A facility?
Pearson: Yes. Also.
Curry: Both.
Murphy: Oh, both, both of those locations, okay.
Pearson: Yeah, the Chick-fil-A location ...
Murphy: All right, was ...
Pearson: Was being installed by developers and what he had said is he's not going
to sign off on a certificate of occupancy for that building until issues are
resolved so that those get installed. They're fighting about how much
money to spend on that.
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
39
.3y
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Murphy: Okay. And then to a previous statement I, and I, 1 do remember us
speaking about road diets on Alameda and Idaho previously. I, but I kind
of don't remember it coming through on the, on the sheet that we had
made off of your, go ahead Andrew.
Wray: Mr. Chair. I don't recall that particular road diet being discussed at the
September 20th meeting so that's the reason why it did not appear on this
list. Now I may have missed something but I, 1 don't remember hearing
that.
Pearson: Yeah,
Wray: So if, if MPO staff didn't hear it or it didn't get written down then it didn't get
generated on this, on this list.
Murphy: Yeah I think those are, I, I, I, those are straightforward enough concepts,
we've done them here in the past so I think if the Committee would like to
floor -amend this list and add, add those two specific road diets, MPO staff
could, could get those applications, CIP applications in to the City by the
November 1st. But I would also kind of hesitate to expand beyond, any
beyond that at this moment in time.
Pearson: And could you explain the CLC09 project a little bit because ...
McAdams: Yeah.
Pearson: That sound, the location describes the completed ...
McAdams: That would, I think ...
Pearson: NMDOT process, project.
McAdams: I'm not sure if they can, discussing, Mr. Chair. I'm not sure if they're
looking at green lanes there be, so to designate there better because right
now there's kind of confusion about how to get through that area. Same
thing with University, it would be, give better I guess visibility for bikes but I
don't think that that's being considered Mr. Chair. Yes.
Bencomo: Mr. Chair.
McAdams: Yeah.
Bencomo: If I remember correctly because that was specifically brought up and that
is the ...
LI'
1
2
3
4
5
b
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
4,
43
44
45
46
McAdams: Right.
Bencomo: Area where they just redid that and they put the bike lanes and it's a real
nice area but one of the things that was brought up by a member of the
public was at those bike lane crossings where people go onto, through
intersections and things like that the green striping or some way to identify
that because cars turning there creates an extra danger as bikes are
trying to pass on the bike lanes, and so they were talking about some kind
of identification, striping, painting, whatever at those intersections. And
that, I, 1 think that's why that's on there I believe. Cause that is that same
area where they just redid it on Avenida de Mesilla and it's brand-new so I
think that's what it was if I remember right.
Pearson: Well the City couldn't do that project anyways though then, right?
Herrera: (inaudible).
Pearson: So I think we can, we can scratch CLC9 from the list to consider.
Willman: Mr. Chairman. I, 1 would like to take off CLC01, just take it off the list. I
mean I ride down Espina every day and the facility is pretty nice. But I
think what would be a very bold move is to move on CLC07. Now that
would impact me personally, helping me to get across town on my bicycle.
Pearson: Right. One of the comments, we don't, we have fairly decent north -south
but we don't have good east -west. So I would agree with that. Actually
that was going to go to a road diet but there was a property owner along
that corridor that objected and there wasn't the political will to fight that.
So it's really, it really needs a road diet. We've got a, it's a middle school
there.
Curry: Sierra.
Willman. Yeah. Sierra.
Pearson: So that would be high on my list also, yes.
Herrera. Mr. Chair.
Pearson: Yes.
Herrera: Can I just ask a general question? So what I've seen in the past on the
ICIPs or CIPs, whatever they're called is that you don't have to be super -
specific on the project, that you can be kind of more general. So I'm
wondering if we can put something in there or recommend to MPO staff to
put something like "study road diets on various roads" so that we can at
9L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
least do the beginning steps of that, see where they're appropriate. We
can pick the, the roads, the two that you mentioned Mr. Chair, also on
Spruce, the one that's listed here, and then if there's any others to at least
get the planning part of that kind of done, and then maybe on the next
cycle after there's some good data to apply for the construction part. I
don't know, I'm kind of just throwing that out there. I don't know if that's
possible to do at this point in time or ...
Bencomo: Mr. Chair.
Pearson: Yes.
Bencomo: I, I, 1 would have to agree with that. I, 1 think that's, it's typically how the
City operates as far as ICIP. They're going to have, just like the, the
applications we just looked at. First year is going to be the, the study, the
design, whatever, they're going to pay for that and then the next year is
going to be that and that's, ICIPs are typically broken up like that. It's not
going to be construction and, and study and design all together, and then
it's a multi -year project. So I, 1 would have to agree with that. Maybe if, if
you can do it broadly enough just to, to say, "Okay we're going to study
these three streets," or whatever instead being, being down to one, maybe
one, we need funds to, to, to do design, study and design on these three.
I guess it would be study first cause then if the study didn't come out well
they wouldn't design it. So study and then design on these major areas
and then ...
Pearson: So maybe our recommendation should be to do the road study, road diet
studies, list some of these streets that we've identified already and others
as appropriate.
Curry: Mr. Chair. My thought on it is that if for example like they did on Solano
the road diet, they're willing just to actually do it, I would take it while it's
being offered to do it, and that's what I'm understanding from what Mr.
Murphy said, that these ones look like the most feasible, not a lot you
know, right off the bat. Just jump in and do it. So if a study is required on
it then that's one thing but if, if we're wasting a year by studying something
we, would they, the City, you know they would just adopt "Let's go ahead
and do a road diet on Spruce." I would say let's not waste time studying it
if they could just jump in and actually do it right away.
Pearson: Right. Cause I think the point would be to move these projects forward. I
think a road diet on Alameda is pretty obvious. We've got bicycle facilities
to the north and then all of a sudden we've got a, a section, the connecting
east -west is down on Las Cruces Avenue so you've got a big chunk from
Picacho to Las Cruces that is a four-way road where a road diet would
In
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
make it much safer. So if we can advance that through this process,
advance that project by a year or two that would make overall a better city.
Murphy: Mr. Chair, Ms. Curry. I, I, 1 think Ms. Curry's points are right on. Mr.
McAdams recently attended a workshop, I'm not sure if Jolene was there.
Herrera: I was there.
McAdams: (Inaudible)
Murphy: The State's developing further guidance on when to implement where,
where road diets are appropriate and they're, I, 1 don't know if they've got
a document published yet but it's going to be moving that direction and in
my mind that constitutes a good portion of what we'd be studying. I think
for the main, you know everything else that goes into the studies, things
that can be accumulated fairly quickly, crash history, road, road volume,
speeds on there and you know rather than, rather than do it one year and
then, or study it one year and construct it the next year in every single
case, I vote what we want to do is kind of you know based on, based on
your knowledge and Members of this Committee's knowledges of the, of
the local street system come up with those, those candidates which we
view as, as potential and get them on a list so when the, you know if and
when money comes available those, those improvements can be
implemented.
Herrera: Mr. Chair. I definitely appreciate those comments. I guess the only, I
don't know how the City upper management, City Council, I don't know
what, are they just willing to implement things like that without any kind of
data? I mean that's kind of where, so if you're talking about NMDOT,
we're not just gonna implement a road diet without knowing all of the data
and so I, 1 guess that's a hard call. So I'm looking at it from DOT
perspective, like you do the study and then, but if they're willing to just
jump on board and we say, "Do a road diet," and then they're going to do
it. I mean yeah, let's do that. I just don't know.
Murphy: If, if I may, if I may respond. It, I don't think we're going to advocate it in,
in the absence of, of all the data. I think the, those data points are things
that the MPO collects on a continual basis and at the time, you know
absolutely the, the City's Traffic Engineer looks at our data before they do
anything, they'll go out again, they'll, they'll collect their own data to look at
it, you know look at it further. So I don't think any of these things are ever
going to happen without really being studied thoroughly. I think it's more
of a matter of we need, we need some group to say, "This is, this is the
priority areas. We need you to look at these you know to, to do 'em."
And, and I believe that you know I, 1 think we can be confident that if, if
there's a reason not to do it, if it doesn't make sense from a, a capacity or
47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43.
44
45
46
safety standpoint, the professional engineers are absolutely going to say,
"No way. We're not going to do it."
Pearson: Right. Cause another, Boutz might be a place for a road diet by Las
Cruces High School and I actually asked about that and it was like, "No."
And I believe mostly probably because of the, the peak capacity during
beginning and end of school. But that's an area that we actually vitally
need bicycle facilities. It's like a, a bicycle desert there. We have a good,
a destination that should be used by bicyclists but no way to get there.
Nunez: If I could Mr. Chair. I agree with Mr. Murphy and I was going to interject
some of that information. The, Spruce is, can be looked at for a road diet
and then, and being four down to three lanes, right, typically is what, what
you do on a road diet. But the one on Boutz you mentioned five lanes
down to three lanes. That's another one of the reasons why it's maybe not
as practical but I, 1 was actually planning on getting into that a little bit
tonight whenever I had my report for the City. But back to this map, at the
very top: Recommended Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects for the City of
Las Cruces. If I remember right in our discussion we even talked about
how we might try to get some low -hanging fruit. So even my first
comment was the bottom part of this map, the shorter roads. So
whenever I saw Roadrunner, I thought that was pretty big in what you're
asking for a bike path along there. So and in addition to what your first
comment was, is some tie-in at Motel or something, I can't recall. But
anyway the point I was trying to make is that I thought that's what we were
trying to do is get the low -hanging fruit if we could and then next year and
etc. etc. But I, 1 think to wrap all this around I don't, I, are we getting to a
conclusion on what we're suggesting or buying in for you? I think I, do you
want us all to write down our priorities here or I think we there, are you just
going to go in this, the top seven here, and you've even expanded to your
road diet discussion to two or three projects, which is fine if you want to
look at those. But my last comment on road diets is, and you even asked
me Mr. McAdams I think the other day, there was a, a, think you were in
some study or some training ...
McAdams: Right.
Nunez: And you said the road diet failed, so I don't have a lot of information on
what specific example you have but sometimes they do with the data that
we get, so whenever we get that, it, Spruce may fail also. We don't know
that until we get into it, right. So anyway I'm, really my question or my, my
drive is, is yeah if you'd like us to priorities, prioritize these I suppose we
could.
McAdams: Mr. Chair, Mr. Nunez. I think you're right that sometimes road diets do fail
and that's because perhaps insufficient data and study. I, and also maybe
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
not enough public input as well. That was one of the things they stressed
at the workshop. And I think that we would like to get this on the table so
that the City, City could really consider that it's not just study but these are
some we would like to do. I think to press it, because I think to a certain
degree I agree with Mr. Murphy and also Ms. Herrera too that we need
data and we do have the data for it. But I think that as Ms., Ms. Curry was
saying that we'd like to have these, not just study but let's go ahead and
say, "These were, these are priorities, we should look at them and so we
can get something done." Road diets are fairly easy to accomplish. They,
they can back fire sometime but really they have, they're low capital. They
usually just consist of lane restriping, often they're done as part of
maintenance as well. But there's a good amount of benefits for road diets
in that they particularly reduce rear -ends, sideswipes, etc. and also people
crossing all four lanes. There is significant collisions on, on Spruce as we
know and many of them could be reduced by this, and also there's been
about three, three pedestrian and, and bicycle accidents. I actually, it's
going to be a, not actually, crash (inaudible) sign. So I think there's,
there's a good, a, a good, a good reason to look at Spruce as probably a,
a potential candidate for road diet. But I mean as far as a, the, Mr. Chair,
the, this Committee of course is willing to do anything that you feel in your
right to do. These are just suggestions. But I think the really the
imperative we'd like to get, like Mr. Nunez said something on the table,
low-lying fruit, so we can start to move ahead you know. And stuff like the
crossings, the pedestrian crossings at, at Walton are low-lying fruits.
We've already talked with, with several people in Transportation about
that. That would be connected with the, the bus, there's a, two bus routes
that come to that area and that that's, the divot it's, it was originally across
from Wal-Mart, the bus stop, now it's being transferred divot, divot and
course people are going across Walton to get to, to Wal-Mart. And that
would be kind of a low-lying fruit. So it, Mr. Chair it just depends on how
the Committee would like to pursue this. Thank you.
Bencomo: Mr. Chair.
Pearson: Yes.
Bencomo: So at the, at the risk of dragging this meeting on because I see tiredness
in people's faces but, and at the risk of making enemies of MPO staff and
other people ...
McAdams: You know me.
Bencomo: I'm going to, I'm going to be myself. You mentioned low -hanging fruit
multiple times.
McAdams: Right.
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Bencomo: And yeah I guess it could be termed that. I almost feel like it's the path of
least resistance not low -hanging fruit. I read the title here, it says
"Recommended Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects." Somebody needs to
show me where there's a pedestrian project on there. Those are all bike
lanes. They're in -road facilities. There's no pedestrian ...
Pearson: Well...
Bencomo: Projects on here.
Pearson: I'll argue that a road diet is a pedestrian project cause that improves safety
for pedestrians.
Curry: Number six. CL06 specifically says "Pedestrian Refuge."
Bencomo: Okay.
McAdams: Right.
Bencomo: I am corrected. There is one on there, it's a pedestrian refuge, it's to ...
Curry: And, and CL08 as well.
Bencomo: Okay. Thank you for that clarification. I just feel like we, we, we're, we're
still taking the pass of, path of least resistance. This is, this is, what we're,
what we're looking at isn't just this upcoming fiscal year or even the year
after that. We, we need to start putting project recommendations in place
into the ICIP that are not going to be probably approved for a decade, but
we have to put them in there now because they're not going to move up
the list unless we do that. And we have to do hard things like if we want to
put multi -use trails like Roadrunner Parkway, you're putting bike lanes in,
there's no sidewalks on half of that road.
Murphy: Exactly.
Bencomo: Well, what, how you going to do that? So a multi -use trail could serve
both purposes there and you could still have bike lanes if you wanted to. I
mean bike lanes, as you're, it has to be a combination of things but we're
not adding those things in here that need to be in there long-term. It took
us 12 years of ICIP on the list to get Fire Station 7 from on the list to
actually start construction, 12 years. Over a decade. They have to be put
in now. We can't wait for those larger projects that are higher -dollar, more
costly, more ambitions. We, we have to do them now. We can't wait.
These ones are great. I don't, not arguing that we shouldn't do these,
especially as we mentioned before the east -west connections there, we
50
I
don't have good east -west. For example the, the mapping that I've been
2
looking at and things like that, it would include Roadrunner Parkway multi-
3
use trail. Espina is wide enough that with a reconstruction project you
4
could actually add that. Is a reconstruction project very costly in long-
5
term? Absolutely it is. But is that, that, is that something we want to look
6
at into the future? Do we want to just keep saying, "Oh let's put them in
7
the roads and people can walk on side," or do we want to start adding
8
those features to our city? And if we start now adding those in, then in ten
9
or 15 years from now we will have those. But we have to start right now.
10
We have to, or it's not going to happen ever if we keep doing this. Thank
11
you Mr. Chair.
12
13
Curry:
Mr. Chair. May I add something as well? I think we really need to be, I, 1
14
feel like sometimes these things are rushed and I know we're always on a
15
time schedule and people are tired and want to go home and whatnot, but
16
1 really feel like we need to be looking at our overview big picture,
17
connecting the schools, connecting the multi -use trails, connecting all of
18
the various pieces. And I, 1 see that you've ordered these in some way but
19
1 would love to see our big -picture map on here of what we have. I know
20
you've got a little bit of what we have but where are we ultimately going
21
and how are all of the little pieces on this recommendation furthering our
22
ultimate goal? And like Mr. Bencomo said we're looking at the, at, at the
23
long-range picture and there's a little piece here and a little piece there
24
because somebody came to the meeting last month and made that
25
recommendation. But how is that enhancing our bigger connectivity
26
between all of our alternative modes of transportation?
27
28
McAdams:
Mr. Chair, Ms., Ms. Curry. I think that planning is incremental. And it, 1
29
agree with, with Mr. Bencomo too, we have to make bold choices often.
30
But often we have to make little choices too. Often the big choices, they
31
have to be in the Cl, ICIP many many years before they come about. But
32
also project being done right away is also imperative too. And I would
33
love to have the money, I think the City and the State would all also love
34
the money to do these things but I think that in planning we have to plan
35
what we can do right now and also put, push long-range project too. And 1
36
think, I agree with you and I bet, agree with Mr. Bencomo as well. So it's,
37
it's difficult I think right now and, and always we have deadlines. It, it,
38
deadlines will never go away. And I guess what we're saying, in the
39
essence we wait would be another year, we may get nothing and so we
40
have to put forth something in the realization that if we don't ask for
41
something we'll get nothing. So I agree with both of you. It's a dilemma.
42
43
Herrera:
Mr. Chair.
44
45
Pearson:
Yes.
46
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
McAdams: Yeah.
Herrera: With all being said ...
McAdams: Right.
Herrera: Can we group some of these together and put them in as one project
instead of having little teeny separate projects? So maybe do like the
pedestrian stuff, so CLC06 I guess is a pedestrian one. Which other one
is a pedestrian?
Curry: 08.
Herrera: 08, so group those together cause they're so small the cost is probably
lower.
Curry: Although, I'm sorry, I say 08 but we really should just strike that from the
list because that's already in funding.
Herrera. Okay. And then also I think we need to get rid of CLC09 which is what we
just talked about, the University part. So take those out and then try to
group some of the others together.
Pearson: Yeah. Roadrunner's probably a project on its own.
Herrera. Right, but some of the smaller ones, and then I also would like to propose
Pearson: But the road diets can be talked about together.
Herrera: Exactly, that we do one project for road diets.
Pearson: And then that leaves the bike lanes for the rest.
Herrera: Yeah. Can we do that? Is that enough prioritization?
Murphy: Mr., Mr. Chair, Ms. Herrera. I believe, I believe so. I'm, with the, with the
caveat this is the first time that the City's invited us into this, this part of
their process so I am, I am uncertain how it's all going to shake out. You
know I, I, the only thing I'm certain on is that we'll hit some point and the
City Council will assign their own priorities so I think that probably is great
help as far as consolidating some, some groups of projects that, you know
that can be put forward. And staff will work on that and we will get a
submittal based on, based on ...
Pearson: Okay.
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Murphy: All commentary here into the City CIP process and then we'll keep ...
Pearson: So this is an action item, so Jolene could you make a ...
Curry: Can, can I ask another quick question? I'm sorry to, to drag things on, but
what's the difference here under the recommendation for bike lanes
versus bike facilities?
McAdams: I think bike, bike facilities would be like, things like bike tracks I think is a
rule, but they could be interchangeable as well.
Curry: So "bike tracks" meaning?
McAdams: Bike tracks would be separate ...
Pearson: Yeah.
McAdams: Lanes like we talk at University and 1-10 that would be separate lanes
going through that area, all right. There's a, we've studied that before.
There's a median there at 1-10 and University and that, that would be
possible, but ...
Murphy: Ms....
Curry: Well, so like a multi -use trail?
Murphy: Mr. Chair ...
McAdams: Yes.
Murphy: Ms....
McAdams: I think that was suggestion ...
Murphy: Ms. Curry. I, 1 think that the difference on our list really extends from the
fact of the individual that wrote on the map how they termed things.
Curry: Thank you.
Herrera. Mr. Chair. I'm willing to make the motion. I just want to clarify what roads
we're talking about for the road diets. So we got Spruce, Alameda and ...
Pearson: Idaho.
Herrera: Idaho, okay
53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Curry: Walton's is a road diet, CLC06.
Herrera: Okay. So I don't even know how to make that motion. Mr. Chair. I move
that we direct MPO staff to group projects together and submit them to the
City for the ICIP. Is that clear enough? I don't ...
Pearson: Well actually list the groups.
Herrera: Okay. So the groups would be pedestrian projects, bicycle projects, and
then road diet projects, and the road diets are to include all the, the roads
that we just listed.
Curry: Might we say rather than ped, bicycle projects and road diets, cause road
diets will be more specific to bicycles, multi -use or multimodal projects?
Because if there's some like those ones that if Mr. McAdams was talking
about a separate, a separated lane like a multi -use trail maybe we should
include those as bicycle/pedestrian as opposed to pedestrian refuges.
Are there any that we're talking about specifically that would be
separated? You're talking about on University at 1-10 would be a multi -use
McAdams: That, again like Mr. Murphy, that came from a comment. I think they were,
the person wanted to, was talking about multi -use.
Curry: So maybe we should separate them as multi -use, road diet which is
specific to bicycle, and then pedestrian which is more the pedestrian
refuge.
Herrera: Well road diets aren't specific to bicycles. I mean road diets help.
McAdams: Well yeah.
Herrera: Everything, all elements.
Curry: But you couldn't, you're not necessarily going to walk with a road diet. I
mean you, it's going to make walking safer but it's really more of a you
know ...
Herrera: Well road diets can add room to add sidewalks too.
Curry: Got you. Yeah.
Herrera: So I mean...
Curry: Yeah.
54
1
2
Herrera:
I think we need to look at all of those ...
3
4
Curry:
Yeah.
5
6
Herrera:
Elements.
7
8
Curry:
Okay.
9
10
Nunez:
And potentially bike paths too.
11
12
Curry:
Multi -use paths.
13
14
Nunez:
Well multi -use, well yeah.
15
16
Pearson:
Want to try again?
17
18
Herrera:
Not really.
19
20
Murphy:
Mr. Chair. If, if I may, I'm, this isn't a formal action going up to the Policy
21
Committee so I think staff is probably comfortable just based on
22
discussion on, on what idea we have to go ...
23
24
Pearson:
Okay.
25
26
Murphy:
Go forward. I don't, don't think we need to twist, or figure out a way to
27
make it fit into a motion.
28
29
Pearson:
Okay.
30
31
Murphy:
And then just to kind of, hopefully the last thing I, 1 have to say is we've
32
also been invited to do, to, to get involved into the County's ICIP process
33
come January so take some time, think over what County projects that,
34
that we could be submitting applications for as well.
35
36
Pearson:
Okay.
37
38
Murphy:
But ...
39
40
Pearson:
So we can...
41
42
Murphy:
I think we're ...
43
44
Pearson:
Talk about this next time.
45
46
Murphy:
Comfortable without a motion or a vote.
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
Pearson: Okay.
Murphy: If the, if the Committee is comfortable.
Curry: May I, may I make a request? Because you have to get this in by
November 1st there really isn't time for another meeting for us to sit, but
would you be willing to e-mail us before it goes forward so that we can see
how it finally goes as a recommendation? I mean I know we're only ten
days out but I'd like to see before it goes forward, just what it finally boiled
down to.
Murphy: Yeah. I think we can e-mail you what I, it, it's fairly, fairly small document
sizes so I think Michael can get those e-mailed out.
Curry: Thank you.
Pearson: Okay. So I think we can move on then.
6. COMMITTEE AND STAFF COMMENTS
7.1 MPO Staff Update
Pearson: So we're after our 7:00 closing time so are there any important staff
comments?
7.2 Local Projects update
Pearson: Any important updates that anybody wants to offer? County?
Castillo- Just real quickly. So we did have a, a TAP project that went through the
El Paso MPO, we mentioned that the last time. So it made it through the
Technical Committee and it made it through the Transportation Policy
Advisory Board so it should be on its way to Santa Fe for review and
competition I guess. And also I would like to reiterate something that Ms.
Curry had mentioned about the need for like a regional map of projects, of
both bicycle and pedestrian projects. I think we can all can benefit from
that. So hopefully maybe come the next calendar year or something we
can, we can work on together. Thank you.
Wray: We're, excuse me Mr. Chair, Mr. Castillo. When you say "regional map,"
we have the MPO Trail Priorities Plan and the Bicycle Priorities Plan
currently existing on our, our website. Those documents exist. They've
been recommended by this Committee and approved by the Policy
Committee so we do have some vision documents out there for review. I
56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
don't know if that's exactly what you're, you're asking for but we do have
some, some documents in that line that exist now.
Castillo: Well as we move forward with this list that we have ...
Wray: Okay.
Castillo: The, the, the, the new list.
Wray: Okay. Got you.
Pearson: Okay. James.
Nunez: If I could, yes. I have a couple things. I'll be, I'll be brief as I can here.
For the City updates real fast, right, cause we're trying to close the
meeting.
Pearson: Right.
Nunez: The Dam Trails is about 80% and with the big rains they did actually have
some washout and stuff and those are for, for the trails so they're going to
work on trying to do maintenance and assess how to drain those better.
And then I did have some information of course on those road diets and
all. But then to jump head, we're doing a bunch of ADAs. You see along
Solano ramps, etc. and then Palmer Subdivision and MacArthur school
will have that coming up soon. But I think a number of you know that in
our work study, or our work session we had in September we talked
about, I talked about trying to get some green bike paths in the city. What
I learned in talking to Mr. Soo Gyu Lee is that he's really pretty much
under, underfunded even to keep the other stop bars and other hangings
of, and crosswalks and everything else so he's, it's a real challenge for
him. So that's why they really haven't gone with additional, like the green
bike paths indicators. But what I was able to arrange with his permission
was for Ennis -Flint, E-N-N-I-S F-L-1-N-T, Ms. Kara Griffin has, well is going
to actually donate quite a bit of material for us to be able to put some
indicators down and with Mr. McAdams we were able to find a pretty good
location where we can get those donated and installed. Here's our hope,
and I'm glad you had, what was his name, Marcus in your office and you
guys had done the study and I don't remember if you all saw this or
remember it from the work group but this is the map that they had of the
pedestrian and bicycle crashes in the city. And you can see the
concentrated areas in red close to the, along University Avenue and then
over here at Missouri and then also at the south, south end of Main Street
along what we call the racetrack. The, and I almost brought up with this in
our last discussion too, because if you lay this map over the map you still
have up here on the Recommended Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects,
57
1
3
4
5
G
7
8
9
1.0
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1.8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
25
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
some of this overlaps this. So even to that end if you use this and maybe
your argument to the City Council Members is that your hope is, is to have
less crashes and more bicycle facilities, right that you hopefully would
reduce crashes. So anyway to get to the point is that what we've decided,
have found an area within this red region is at the corner of Locust and
University. There is a pretty neat facility there. They have the center bike
lane that goes in to go straight heading south onto campus. So Ms. Kara
Griffin is going to do a demonstration for us and have this thermal plastic
where they heat it up with a torch and we're going to have green patches
there. It's going to say "Bike" and then a, probably a straight arrow. And
then additionally at, at Locust, same intersection right by that bar, I can't
know the name of it anymore, but going north on Locust and University
we're going to have a bicycle symbol in the bike path and then an, and
also a wide arrow on green. So we're working out the details to see when
we might be able to do that but it's looking like right now maybe the last
week in November or first week in December. So hopefully, and here's
the idea is hopefully we can somehow get maybe the Council, person in
charge, I think it's Smith for that region at the university there and then
have others hopefully at some point find a way to, to fund Mr., the Traffic
Department at the City and then even whoever else. You know the,
hopefully it'll reduce accidents, increase awareness that the paths are
there and, and also hopefully find a means to, to dig, get funds for more of
these. So that's the current plan.
Pearson: Okay.
McAdams: Mr. Chair. Can I comment real quickly? We are now monitoring that
corner. We've put out video cameras at, we're now at two sides and
we're, we're going to count the cars, excuse me, counts of bicycles and
also look at vehicular movement with conflicts there as well. So we have,
hopefully went, we'll have a before and after, before the situation before
the, the bike, green bike lanes and after too. So I think this will be, we're
hoping this will be a impetus to look at, for the City to consider this as part
of their, their regular process and institutionalize the process. Santa Fe is
already, they're in the process of looking at bike lanes and they are trying
to make this a, an institutional part of their but, you know their, their
restripings etc. and often these can be done, the green bike lanes can be
done at the same time they're doing routine maintenance.
Pearson: Okay.
7.3 NMDOT Projects update
Pearson: Okay. NMDOT is on break.
58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
Herrera: Mr. Chair. There's really no construction projects going on in the city. The
next one coming up will be the intersection of Spitz/Solano/Three Crosses.
That one goes to bid next month, in November so we should start seeing
construction spring of next year. It's going to be a mess but we're hoping
to get it done quicker than the last phase went. And then also just so the
Committee Members know I delivered a set of plans to the Chair for the
project over the Pass, widening the shoulders and adding the bike lanes
and things so we hope to get comments from him on those and we ...
Pearson: If anybody wants to see those at some point let me know and we'll get
together.
Herrera: And everything else is peachy.
Pearson: Okay.
7. PUBLIC COMMENT
Pearson: We're on to public comment. Anybody from the public? Seeing none.
8. ADJOURNMENT (7:31 p.m.)
Pearson: Motion to adjourn?
Herrera: So moved.
Curry: Second.
Pearson: All in favor, "aye."
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
Pearson: We're adjourned. Thank you.
Chairperso
59