Loading...
09-13-2000 I LAS CRUCES METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION 2 POLICY COMMITTEE (PC) MEETING 3 Wednesday, September 13, 2000 4 Las Cruces City Council Chambers 5 6 Following are the verbatim minutes from the Policy Committee (PC) meeting held on Wednesday, 7 September 13, 2000, at 7.00 p.m. in the Las Cruces City Council Chambers, 200 N Church 8 Street, Las Cruces,NM. 9 10 Members Present: Chairman Tommy Tomlin 11 Mayor Michael Cadena 12 Councillor Steven Trowbridge 13 Trustee Nora Barraza 14 Commissioner Ken Miyagishima 15 16 Members Absent: Trustee Carlos Castaneda 17 Commissioner Joseph Cervantes 18 Councillor John Haltom 19 Commissioner Carlos Garza 20 21 Staff Present: Brian Denmark (CLC/Planning MPO) 22 Tim McAllister(CLC/Planning) 23 Kirk Clifton (CLC/Planning) 24 David Carpenter(CLC/Planning) 25 26 Others Present: Trina Witter 27 28 29 I. CALL TO ORDER 30 31 Meeting was called to order by Chairman Tomlin at 7 04 p.m. 32 33 Tomlin. I would like to call the meeting to order We have a quorum. 34 35 II. REVIEW OF MINUTES 36 37 Tomlin. The first item of business is the review of minutes of the June 14, 2000 Policy Committee 38 meeting. If there's no discussion, I would like to entertain a motion for approval of the minutes 39 as submitted. 40 41 Miyagishima. So moved, Mr Chairman. 42 43 Tomlin. Moved by Commissioner Miyagishima. Do I have a second? 1 I Barraza. Second. 2 3 Tomlin. Seconded by Trustee Barraza. Any discussion?Anyone? All those in favor signify by 4 saying "Aye." 5 6 All. Aye. 7 8 Tomlin. All those "Nay" Motion carnes unanimously 9 10 III. NEW BUSINESS/ACTION 11 12 A. Resolution No. 00-009. A resolution to endorse an application for the use of 13 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5311 funding assistance by 14 Dona Ana County. This funding will be used to provide transit service to 15 portions of Dona Ana County for the general public. 16 17 Tomlin. The second item under new business is Resolution No 00-009, a resolution to endorse an 18 application for the use of Federal Transit Administration Section 5311 funding assistance by Dona 19 Ana County This funding will be used to provide transit service to portions of Dona Ana County 20 for the general public. Do we have a motion to approve this,put it on the floor? 21 22 Cadena. So moved. 23 24 Miyagishima. Second. 25 26 Tomlin. It's been moved and seconded to approve Resolution No 00-009 Mr Denmark. 27 28 Denmark. Mr Chairman, members of the Policy Committee, good evening. This particular 29 request is from Dona Ana County and it's similar to the one they submitted last year There's two 30 sets of funds that we've talking about. One is 5310 and 5311 5310 are rural public 31 transportation funds that are available through State Highway that will address the elderly and the 32 disabled as far as transit services and then 5311 are monies that can be used in rural transit setting 33 for all types of clients. In this particular case, we have checked with the County to see if they are 34 applying for both, as indicated in the letter, actually they're dust asking for the 5311 funds which is 35 what they currently have received for this Federal fiscal year We've crafted a Resolution as 36 approved last year which essentially indicates that since this is a County request, any matching 37 funds or any additional operating costs above and beyond what the grant has provided would be 38 covered by Dona Ana County With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. 39 40 Tomlin. Questions? Comments? Seeing none, we will, let me call the role on this one. Mayor 41 Cadena. 42 43 Cadena. Aye. 2 I Tomlin. Commissioner Miyagishima. 2 3 Miyagishima. Aye. 4 5 Tomlin. Trustee Barraza. 6 7 Barraza. Aye. 8 9 Tomlin. Steven. 10 11 Trowbridge- Yes. 12 13 Tomlin. Chair votes no Motion carnes four to one. Okay 14 15 IV STAFF REPORTS/OTHER DISCUSSION 16 17 Tomlin. The next item, staff reports and other discussion. 18 19 Denmark. Just real quickly Mr Chairman. I sent a letter out a few weeks ago talking about a 20 logo This is what the logo looks like. I never received any comments back so I assumed 21 22 Cadena. Because we liked it. 23 24 Denmark: Okay, you didn't get the color, this colors actually a little lighter, it'll actually be a little 25 bit darker red. That's what it looked like on a letterhead for example. So we'll go ahead and 26 send that out to prints if that's okay 27 28 Trowbridge- It's Halloweeny 29 30 Denmark: It's Halloweeny Well actually it's, it will be red Councilor, it's more like that. 31 32 Tomlin. There's nothing wrong with Halloween. 33 34 Denmark. I thought it looked nice and a lot better than what we have so and the only thing else 35 that I had to report was that David Carpenter will be taking over the MPO Officer ship, 36 responsibilities, after this meeting. For those of you that have never meet David Carpenter, he's 37 Senior Planner over in Advanced Planning. He's worked for the City for several years and he's 38 been involved with MPO on and off. In fact,he has helped MPO staff with the transportation 39 plan since last Spring and he's been currently working with the two RFP's that we're working on 40 right now, which is the Travel Behavior Survey and well as the Transit Study So, the MPO will 41 still be a part of my department so I'll still be involved but David will help out more with the day 42 to day operations. With that Mr Chairman, that's all I have. 43 3 1 Tomlin. Well Brian, thank you very much for your service. It's been a pleasure to do business 2 with you and all those kind of things and so I'm glad you're not leaving and going very far away 3 and David welcome. David's made several presentations over the years to the MPO and the 4 latest,biggest thing was the Bicycle thing I believe, last time we saw you. 5 6 V. PUBLIC COMMENTS 7 8 Tomlin. Any public comments from anyone? Okay, what we need to do then is, Steve. 9 10 Trowbridge I was dust going to weigh in under the public comments section if I could. Last, the 11 minutes that have accompanied this agenda have be enlightening. It's a very good summary of 12 what we've approved tonight, the initiative by the Dona Ana County by Mr Noonchester and 13 others but the thing I wanted to focus on and I wanted to go on record on is Mr Denmark on 14 page 2 of the last minutes, gave some very good recommendations and advice on how the US 15 DOT Policy Statement could be brought forward as an amendment and I wanted to know, I think 16 that's gone to the BFAC Committee, and I think that they have approved them, I'm not sure what 17 the status of that is,but I would like to ask Mr Denmark what's his best advice on how that US 18 DOT Policy Statement on bicycle paths can be brought forward. Should it be brought forward as 19 an amendment, stand alone, a resolution, or an amendment to our transportation plan. 20 21 Denmark. Do you recall Kirk what their, what the BFAC is wanting to recommend. I mean, I 22 know they want to recommend that the policy almost alright but was it actually within the bicycle 23 element of the plan. 24 25 Clifton. It was my understandings,based on the committees recommendations,was to actually 26 amend the transportation plan as some type of appendices to the plan. 27 28 Denmark. That's what I recall so it would require them to, I figure this point they're still in the 29 discussionary stage and they haven't formalized a recommendation that they send to the Policy 30 Committee. And the only concern that we had is that the language is pretty strong under the US 31 DOT's statement in that you, it's insinuating that you shall incorporate the bicycle facility and 32 that's maybe not necessarily the case in all applications. It should be considered but it might not 33 necessarily be incorporated when it's all said and done for a variety of factors. And one of the 34 example, I think we talked about was, you know, Highway 70 of having a bicycle facility across 35 that interchange would be considered very dangerous and so the policy wouldn't be applicable in 36 that particular case where, and the State Highway Department agreed with that. So we had some 37 concerns with that but we're discussing that with the BFAC and hopefully we can come to some 38 consensus on policy and then we'll bring a resolution to the Policy Committee as far as the formal 39 amendment to the Transportation Plan to address that. 40 41 Trowbridge- Okay, Mr Chairman, if I could Just, I'll dust read out, that right as highlighted last, 42 last meeting, "that they will encourage bicycle facilities to be incorporated in all transportation 43 projects unless exceptional circumstances exist," and it says some of that language that's, that 4 I people are trying to modify and including the inclusion of shall which is a little strict. So Mr 2 Denmark, if your best, what's your best advice, the BFAC Committee formally brings it to your 3 offices so that it can be sent forward to us or 4 5 Denmark. Right, that's the process essentially It's, the MPO staff is working with the BFAC and 6 once they make their recommendation the MPO staff will forward it to the Policy Committee for 7 consideration. 8 9 Trowbridge Thank you very much. 10 11 Witter- Can I make a public comment? 12 13 Tomlin. Sure, identify yourself please for the record. 14 15 Witter- My name is Trina Witter and I am with the Mesilla Valley Bicycle Coalition and I was at 16 the BFAC meeting as a proxy for George Pearson, no it was Ed Macbeth, sorry, and the BFAC 17 looked at the DOT Policy Statement and they made some changes to it and they voted to pass it 18 with those changes with a recommendation that it be brought to the Policy Committee with MPO 19 And dust from the cyclists viewpoint, this is something that the US Department of Transportation is 20 encouraging municipalities, local governments, organizations to adopt because it's a statement of 21 intent that you will include a bicycle facilities in areas except where extenuous circumstances exist 22 and then they ask you to define those circumstances and they give you guidelines in the document 23 for how to do that. And so that's something that the cyclists have been trying to push for, more 24 safer facilities out there and it, the Highway 70 thing, that would be, I guess, an extenuating 25 circumstance if it meet the criteria then that would be something, that wouldn't be put through. 26 27 Tomlin. Okay, thank you. 28 29 Witter- Thank you. 30 31 Trowbridge And Mr Chairman, thank you if I may, that's what I think we dust need to start 32 focusing on, is some guidelines for the future. We obviously can't put bicycle paths everywhere 33 but we had to have some sort of nomenclature in there that we recognize where we can, where 34 we can't. Thank you. 35 36 Tomlin. Do we by matter of course in any roadway that we're considering new or reconstruction 37 of a roadway due an analysis of whether to include bicycle facilities? 38 39 Denmark. Yes, Mr Chairman, we are required to consider all modes of transportation and so 40 every facility that comes in, we have to look at bicycle movement as well, check to see what the 41 bicycle element of the transportation plan says to see if there's an established route and if there is 42 then usually it's pretty clear If it's dust a study corridor then we got to go beyond that and do an 43 analysis of that. 5 I Tomlin. Because I think one of the important things to do in that process if there is a decision 2 after the analysis is complete did not include bicycle facilities in there or even if they're, if it is 3 decided to include them, is to make sure that the justification, either way, for the recommendation 4 or not, is there so that people can look at this and determine why rather than dust present a design 5 that doesn't include them. If you have all of that information up front, then it saves a lot of 6 unnecessary discussion and debate kind of thing. I think the primary thing is we want to make 7 sure that we look at providing those facilities and we may have adequate justification for not 8 including them but we need to let people know why we've decided not to, it'll be nice if we had 9 clear guidelines on that but even when you get that specific there's some roadways that would not 10 lend itself for whatever reason. 11 12 Denmark: That's right. I think that's what some of the discussion was related to this Policy 13 Statement, you know, defining exceptional circumstances and then they used the word shall which 14 is, as Councilor Trowbridge indicated, is a strong term and I think that's where some of the 15 debate was but discussion with staff, the reason this hasn't been forwarded to the Policy 16 Committee is because they did vote on this issue but it was only a discussion item, it wasn't new 17 business to be acted upon by that particular committee so in order to follow proper procedure 18 they're going have to formalize it as a specific item on their agenda and then make their 19 recommendation and vote on it at that point. 20 21 Tomlin. I would like to suggest that they do it on the next one so, I don't know when they're 22 going to meet again,but. 23 24 Denmark: Be next month, I believe. 25 26 Tomlin. They can do that so that we can have it at our next MPO meeting. 27 28 Denmark: November 29 30 Tomlin. Yeah, in November to be able to do that. Okay Alright, any other public comments? 31 Anything else before we adjourn? What we're going to do is,we're going to adjourn the MPO 32 meeting because our agenda's complete but we do have a presentation concerning some elements 33 on Highway 70 that we're going to have right after this and this is a public meeting, I believe it's 34 been advertised for this purpose. 35 36 VI. ADJOURNMENT 37 38 Tomlin. And so if I can have a motion to adjourn and encourage members of the committee to 39 stick around if at all possible for this presentation. But I would like to entertain a motion to 40 adjourn. 41 42 Miyagishima. So moved Mr Chairman. 43 6 I Trowbridge Second. 2 3 Tomlin. It's been moved, seconded to adjourn. All if favor signify by saying "Aye." 4 5 All. "Aye" 6 7 Tomlin. Motion carnes unanimously 8 9 Meeting adjourned at 7 17 p.m. 10 11 12 13 APPROVED 14 15 16 17 18 19 Chairman Tommy Tomlin Date 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 7 �- LAS CRUCES METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION TOWN OF MESILLA — CITY OF LAS CRUCES — DONA ANA COUNTY AGENDA for the LAS CRUCES METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION The following is the agenda for the meeting of the Policy Committee of the Las Cruces Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) to be held Wednesday, September 13, 2000 at 7:00 p.m., in the Las Cruces City Council Chambers, 200 North Church Street, Las Cruces, New Mexico The City of Las Cruces does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age or disability in the provision of services. The City of Las Cruces will make reasonable accommodation for a qualified individual with a disability who wishes to attend this public meeting. Please notify the City at least 48 hours before the meeting by calling 528-3222 (Voice) or 528-3157 (TTY) This document can be made available in alternative formats by calling the same numbers listed above I CALL TO ORDER II REVIEW OF MINUTES A. June 14, 2000 Policy Committee III NEW BUSINESS / ACTION A. Resolution No. 00-009- A resolution to endorse an application for the use of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5311 funding assistance by Dona Ana County. This funding will be used to provide transit service to portions of Dona Ana County for the general public IV STAFF REPORTS / OTHER DISCUSSION V PUBLIC COMMENTS VI ADJOURNMENT P O Box 20000 Las Cruces, New Mexico 88004 Phone (505)528-3222 Fax (505)528-3155