Document farmingtonnm_gov_doc_250f8cf9ec

This report was funded in part through grants from the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. The contents of this report published by this agency do not necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. Department of Transportation. www.farmingtonmpo.org Adopted April 15, 2010 Amended on April 21, 2011 Amended on December 1, 2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- i Farmington mpo F a r m i n g t o n m p o Metropo M e t r o p o l i t a n t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTIONS PAGE Chapter 1 Introduction 1-1 1.1) Background … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 1-2 1.2) Vision and Mission Statements … … … … … … … … 1-2 1.3) FMPO Goals and Objectives … … … … … … … … … 1-3 1.4) Recently Completed Regional Projects … … … … 1-5 1.5) SAFETEA-LU Planning Factors … … … … … … … … 1-6 1.6) Livability Principles … … … … … … … … … … … … 1-8 Chapter 2 Existing and Future Population & Employment Conditions 2-1 2.1) Background … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 2-1 2.2) Transportation and Land Use Characteristics … … 2-2 2.3) Historical Populations … … … … … … … … … … … 2-2 2.4) Current and Future Populations … … … … … … … 2-3 2.5) Historical Employment … … … … … … … … … … … 2-5 2.6) Current and Future Employment … … … … … … … 2-7 2.7) VISUM … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 2-7 SECTIONS PAGE Chapter 3 Public Participation 3-1 3.1) Overview … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 3-1 3.2) Kick-Off Meeting … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 3-1 3.3) MTP Surveys … … … … … … … … … … … … … 3-2 3.4)Public Participation … … … … … … … … … … … … … 3-2 3.5) Stakeholder Meetings … … … … … … … … … … 3-3 Chapter 4 Future Road Plan 4-1 4.1) Overview … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 4-1 4.2) Roadway Functional Classification … … … … … … 4-1 4.3) Congestion … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 4-4 4.4) Year 2035 Roadway System … … … … … … … … … 4-4 4.5) Establishing Priorities in the FMPO … … … … … … 4-12 4.6) Major Thoroughfare Plan … … … … … … … … … … 4-12 4.7) Roadway Policies … … … … … … … … … … … … … 4-12 4.8) Roadway Actions … … … … … … … … … … … … … 4-13 ---PAGE BREAK--- ii Farmington mpo F a r m i n g t o n m p o Metropo M e t r o p o l i t a n t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTIONS PAGE Chapter 5 Transit Plan 5-1 5.1) Overview … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 5-1 5.2) Existing Transit Services … … … … … … … … … … … 5-2 5.3) Current Red Apple Ridership … … … … … … … … … 5-4 5.4) Greatest Transit Need … … … … … … … … … … … … 5-6 5.5) Transit Study Recommendations… … … … … … … … 5-10 5.6) Transit Expansion Beyond 2020 … … … … … … … … 5-13 5.7) Transit Policies … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 5-13 Chapter 6 Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan 6-1 6.1) Overview … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 6-1 6.2) Purpose and Need … … … … … … … … … … … … … 6-1 6.3) Goals and Objectives … … … … … … … … … … … … 6-2 6.4) Walking and Biking Improvements … … … … … … 6-3 6.5) Bicycle and Pedestrian Priorities … … … … … … … 6-3 6.6) Bicycle and Pedestrian Policies … … … … … … … … 6-6 6.7) Bicycle and Pedestrian Recommended Standards 6-7 6.8) Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding Strategies … … … 6-8 6.9) Bicycle and Pedestrian Implementation Strategies 6-9 6.10) Bicycle and Pedestrian Actions … … … … … … … 6-11 SECTIONS PAGE Chapter 7 Other Modal Connections 7-1 7.1) Overview … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 7-1 7.2) Freight … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 7-1 7.3) NMDOT Freight Study … … … … … … … … … … … 7-2 7.4) Future Freight Considerations … … … … … … … … 7-4 7.5) Air Cargo … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 7-4 7.6) Commuter Rail/Light Rail … … … … … … … … … … 7-5 7.7) Equestrian … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 7-5 Chapter 8 Safety 8-1 8.1) Overview … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 8-1 8.2) Roadway Safety … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 8-1 8.3) Intersection Safety … … … … … … … … … … … … … 8-3 8.4) Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety … … … … … … … … 8-5 8.5) Safe Routes to School … … … … … … … … … … … 8-8 ---PAGE BREAK--- iii Farmington mpo F a r m i n g t o n m p o Metropo M e t r o p o l i t a n t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTIONS PAGE Chapter 9 Security 9-1 9.1) Overview … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 9-1 9.2) San Juan County Emergency Operations Plan … 9-1 9.3) Security Planning and the Role of the MPO … … 9-2 9.4) Security Goals and Strategies … … … … … … … … 9-3 9.5) Evacuation Planning … … … … … … … … … … … … 9-3 9.6) Transit Security … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 9-3 Chapter 10 Transportation Policies and Strategies 10-1 10.1) Overview … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 10-1 10.2) Transportation and Land Use … … … … … … … … 10-1 10.3) Environmental … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 10-3 10.4) System Preservation … … … … … … … … … … … … 10-5 10.5) Intelligent Transportation Systems … … … … … … 10-5 SECTIONS PAGE Chapter 11 Financial Plan 11-1 11.1) Overview … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 11-1 11.2) Funding Sources … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 11-2 11.3) Estimated Roadway Costs and Revenues … … … 11-3 11.4) Approved Scenarios and Project Lists … … … … … 11-3 11.5) Revenue Analysis … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 11-4 11.6) Operating Revenues … … … … … … … … … … … … … 11-7 11.7) Transit Revenues … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 11-7 11.8) Potential Revenue Streams … … … … … … … … … 11-8 Appendix A – Public Participation … … … … … … … … … … A-1 Appendix B – Future Road Projects … … … … … … … … … B-1 Appendix C – Bicycle/Pedestrian Projects … … … … … … … C-1 Appendix D - Acronym List … … … … … … … … … … … … … … D-1 Index ---PAGE BREAK--- iv Farmington mpo F a r m i n g t o n m p o Metropo M e t r o p o l i t a n t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n TABLE OF CONTENTS MAPS PAGE Map -1-1 – Farmington MPO Map … … … … … … … … … … 1-3 Map 5-1 – Proposed Linear Route System in Farmington … 5-11 Map 5-2 – Proposed Regional Transit Route System … … … 5-12 Map 6-1 – Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements by Tier … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 6-5 Map 7-1 – Truck Routes in the FMPO … … … … … … … … … 7-3 Map 9-1 – Identification of Evacuation Routes in the FMPO 9-4 FIGURES PAGE Figure 2-1 – Historical Population in San Juan County from 1970 to 2006 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 2-3 Figure 2-2 – Population Growth Components in San Juan County … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 2-4 Figure 2-3 – Historical Employment in San Juan County from 1970 to 2006 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 2-6 Figure 5-1 – Annual Ridership on Red Apple Transit … … … 5-4 Figure 8-1 – Number of Crashes by Entity … … … … … … … 8-2 Figure 8-2 – Pedestrian Crashes by Entity from 2004-2007 … 8-7 Figure 8-3 – Pedestrian Crashes with Alcohol Involved by Entity from 2004-2007 … … … … … … … … … … 8-7 ---PAGE BREAK--- v Farmington mpo F a r m i n g t o n m p o Metropo M e t r o p o l i t a n t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p l a n TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLES PAGE Table 1-1 – Goals and Objectives of the FMPO … … … … … 1-4 Table 2-1 – Future Population Growth … … … … … … … … 2-5 Table 2-2 – Future Employment Growth … … … … … … … … 2-6 Table 3-1 – Public Meeting held by the FMPO … … … … … … 3-2 Table 3-2 – FMPO Presentation to Local Organizations … 3-4 Table 4-1 – Functional Classification System … … … … … … 4-3 Table 4-2 – Priority Projects for the FMPO … … … … … … … 4-6 Table 5.1 – 2010 Greatest Transit Need … … … … … … … … 5-7 Table 5.2 – 2020 Greatest Transit Need … … … … … … … … 5-8 Table 5.1 – 2035 Greatest Transit Need … … … … … … … … 5-9 Table 6-1 – Tier 1 Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Priorities in the FMPO … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 6-4 Table 8-1 – Crash Rates by Entity (per thousand people) … … … 8-3 Table 8-2 – Road Intersections with the Most Crashes by Entity between 2005 and 2007 … … … … … … … 8-4 Table 8-3 – Number of Crashes Involving Bicyclists on the Local and Statewide Level in 2006 and 2007 … 8-5 TABLES PAGE Table 10-1 – Four Highest 8-Hour Average Ozone Readings 2007-2009 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 10-4 Table 11-1 – Federal Funding and Local Contributions by Year … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … 11-5 Table 11-2 – Revenue Scenarios for Funding Future Transportation Projects … … … … … … … … … … 11-6 Table 11-3 – Future Transit Operating Revenues … … … … 11-7 ---PAGE BREAK--- vi Acknowledgements A c k n o w l e d g e m e n t s POLICY COMMITTEE POLICY COMMITTEE Councilor Dan Darnell - City of Farmington Councilor Dan Darnell - City of Farmington Commissioner Dr. James Henderson - San Juan County Commissioner Dr. James Henderson - San Juan County Councilor Sam Hinson - City of Bloomfield Councilor Sam Hinson - City of Bloomfield Commissioner Sherri Sipe - City of Aztec Commissioner Sherri Sipe - City of Aztec Mayor Bill Standley - City of Farmington Mayor Bill Standley - City of Farmington TECHNICAL COMMITTEE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE Julie Baird - City of Bloomfield Julie Baird - City of Bloomfield Steve Christensen - City of Aztec Steve Christensen - City of Aztec Dave Keck - San Juan County Dave Keck - San Juan County Cindy Lopez - City of Farmington Cindy Lopez - City of Farmington Chico Quintana - City of Farmington Chico Quintana - City of Farmington Nica J. Westerling - City of Farmington Nica J. Westerling - City of Farmington CITY OF AZTEC CITY OF AZTEC Kathy Lamb - Finance Director Kathy Lamb - Finance Director CITY OF BLOOMFIELD CITY OF BLOOMFIELD Kevin Rodolph - Finance Director Kevin Rodolph - Finance Director Cliff Steinmetz - Assistant Operations Supervisor Cliff Steinmetz - Assistant Operations Supervisor SAN JUAN COUNTY SAN JUAN COUNTY T. J. Richards - Compliance Specialist T. J. Richards - Compliance Specialist CITY OF FARMINGTON CITY OF FARMINGTON Bob Campbell - Assistant City Manager Bob Campbell - Assistant City Manager Rod Hunt – General Services Dir Rod Hunt – General Services Director Steve Krest - Traffic Engineering Steve Krest - Traffic Engineering Administrator Mike Sullivan - Communit Mike Sullivan - Community Development Director FEDERAL HIGHWAY AD FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION Bruce Bender - Planning & Program M Bruce Bender - Planning & Program Management Leader Leader NM DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NM DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Phil Gallegos - Assistant District Engi Phil Gallegos - Assistant District Engineer, District 5 David Martinez - Techn David Martinez - Technical Support Engineer, District 5 Ray Matthew - P Ray Matthew - Planner Dr. Bob Widoe - MPO Liaison Dr. Bob Widoe - MPO Liaison NORTHWEST NM COUNCIL OF GOVERNME NORTHWEST NM COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Roshana Moojen - Associate P Roshana Moojen - Associate Planner MPO STAFF MPO STAFF Joe Delmagori - MPO Planner Joe Delmagori - MPO Planner Martin Lucero - MPO Associate Planner Martin Lucero - MPO Associate Planner Dee Dee Moore - MPO Administr Dee Dee Moore - MPO Administrative Aide ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 1—1 Adopted on April 15, 2010 Intr I n t r o d u c t i o n The Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP), adopted by the Farmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), is the long-range transportation plan for the urbanized region that includes the Cities of Aztec, Bloomfield, and Farmington as well as parts of San Juan County. The Plan identifies future transportation investments, policies, goals, and strategies for all modes of transportation. Through the projections of where people will live and work, the plan strives to achieve a balance among all modes of travel, such as the automobile, public transit, pedestrian and bicycle, aviation, and freight. The Metropolitan Transportation Plan identifies specific services and projects for each mode of travel in order to create a balanced transportation system and one that meets the transportation needs of the region through 2035. Similar to virtually every community across the nation, anticipated revenues are not sufficient to fund all of the transportation needs. Therefore, projects have been prioritized for implementation so that the Plan can respond to financial constraints required by law. The Farmington MPO adopted its first Metropolitan Transportation Plan in April 2005. This update is a continuation of the guiding document that creates the region’s transportation framework for the next 25 years. The Farmington MPO is the formal regional transportation planning forum and is responsible for carrying out federal transportation regulations in order to ensure a comprehensive, coordinated, and continuing transportation planning process. 1 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1—2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 i n t r o d u c t i o n 1 1 1.1) BACKGROUND The Farmington MPO is located in the northwest corner of New Mexico. The City of Farmington and the neighboring cities of Aztec and Bloomfield serve as the economic center for the Four Corners region. The MPO planning area is illustrated in Map 1-1. Several major highways connect this area to cities in New Mexico, Arizona, and Colorado. The total estimated population in 2008 within the MPO planning area is approximately 98,000 people. The Federal transportation bill - Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act - a Legacy for Users (SAFETEA- LU) - determines the planning activities of the MPO. SAFETEA-LU continues and enhances many of the planning guidelines set forth by the two previous transportation bills: ISTEA - Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (1991) and TEA-21 - Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998). The MPO works in cooperation with the local entities, the New Mexico Department of Transportation, and the local transit operator to develop the federally mandated planning documents and activities. 1.2) VISION AND MISSION STATEMENTS The Metropolitan Transportation Plan is shaped within the framework of the vision and mission statements for the MPO. These were developed in response to the planning factors outlined by SAFETEA-LU and in cooperation with the MPO Technical Committee, the MPO Policy Committee, and NMDOT. Vision Statement The Farmington Metropolitan Planning Organization vision is for a safe, efficient and reliable multi-modal transportation system that meets the needs of residents and visitors in the region. Mission Statement Provide a forum to develop an effective transportation system to move people and goods safely, economically and efficiently while maintaining a high quality of life. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 1—3 Adopted on April 15, 2010 i n t r o d u c t i o n 1 1 1.3) FARMINGTON MPO GOALS and OBJECTIVES Table 1-1 describes the goals and objectives identified by the MPO that help to support and achieve the Vision and Mission statements. Map 1-1 – Farmington MPO Map ---PAGE BREAK--- 1—4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 i n t r o d u c t i o n 1 1 TABLE 1-1 – Goals and Objectives of the Farmington MPO GOALS OBJECTIVES  Support the economic vitality of the MPO region by providing a balanced, multi-modal transportation system that moves people, goods and information safely, economically and efficiently. 1. Provide adequate land area and access for commercial opportunities to serve future population growth 2. Minimize congestion to improve delivery of goods and services  Foster regional coordination and transportation system continuity 1. Maximize use of current transportation system 2. Involve local planners in the transportation planning process  Develop and connect transportation systems and associated facilities into a cohesive intermodal system 1. Increase transit, bicycle and pedestrian connections  Minimize congestion on the transportation system 1. Minimize congestion and minimize delay  Provide reasonable access to services and jobs for all of the region’s residents, regardless of age, income or disability 1. Increased multi-modal accessibility  Minimize negative environmental impacts and enhance the environmental quality of the MPO region 1. Minimize air quality impacts 2. Minimize impacts to existing neighborhoods 3. Develop strategies to educate the public about how travel choices affect air quality  Identify and develop funding sources adequate to build, operate and maintain the metropolitan transportation system 1. Minimize total transportation system costs 2. Maximize transportation system performance per project costs  Identify and implement new technology for balanced multi- modal transportation 1. Improve multi-modal street design for high activity areas 2. Increase mode split  Develop a transportation system that maintains and/or enhances the existing quality of life and works in concert with cultural and environmental resources and adopted local plans 1. Minimize access to adjacent developments along key arterials to maximize capacity  Integrate transportation and land use planning to improve quality of life and to protect the natural environment 1. Encourage the local entities to integrate regional transportation policies into their adopted local plans  Ensure public safety for all modes 1. Improve system safety through improved levels of service and reduced congestion 2. Promote safety design practices for all modes 3. Minimize emergency vehicle response time  Coordinate with local agencies on security planning and strategies 1. Implement Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) technologies for improving the safety and security of transportation modes ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 1—5 Adopted on April 15, 2010 i n t r o d u c t i o n 1 1 1.4) RECENTLY COMPLETED REGIONAL PROJECTS Some projects identified in the MTP adopted back in 2005 have been completed during the last five years. They include: Roadway Location Description Phase 1 of the US 64 Farmington to Bloomfield Project Farmington Intersection improvements at US 64/Browning Parkway and widening 0.5 miles east of the intersection. US 550 (Main Ave) Aztec Travel lane reconfiguration, new parking lanes, sidewalk improvements Piñon Hills Blvd Farmington Widening of road to 4 lanes from Butler to E. Main Preliminary Engineering and Design Farmington, San Juan County, Aztec Piñon Hills Extension over Animas River from East Main to CR 3000 Upgrading CR 3900 from CR 3000 to CR 390 Phase 1A of the East Arterial Route in Aztec Bicycle/Pedestrian Location Description Sullivan Ave Farmington New bike lanes from Main Street to 20th Street Piñon St. Farmington New bike lanes from Murray to Miller Ruth Lane Bloomfield New bike lanes from US 64 to West Blanco Blvd NM 516 & US 550 Aztec Wide shoulders marked as bike routes within the City Limits Ash St. Aztec New bike lanes from Llano to NM 516 Chaco St. Aztec New bike lanes from NM 516 to Ash St. Rio Grande Ave Aztec New bike lanes from Blanco to US 550 US 64 Farmington New sidewalks from Malta to Hillside (north side only) San Juan Blvd Farmington New sidewalks from Butler to Main St. West Blanco Blvd Bloomfield New sidewalks from US 550 to Ruth Lane Pedestrian Bridge Aztec New bridge across the Animas River from Riverside Park to Hartman Park In August 2006, Red Apple Transit created the Bloomfield Bobcat route from Orchard Plaza in Farmington to the Cultural Center in Bloomfield and headway times on the Farmington routes were reduced from one hour to 30 minutes. In December 2009, Road ---PAGE BREAK--- 1—6 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 i n t r o d u c t i o n 1 1 Runner Transit, the transit authority for the Southern Ute Tribe, began service from Ignacio, Colorado to Aztec, New Mexico with a connection to the Red Apple Transit. 1.5) SAFETEA-LU PLANNING FACTORS Federal guidance of MPO planning activities is achieved through the eight SAFETEA-LU planning factors. Examples of how the MPO can meet these factors are described as follows. 1) Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan area, especially by enabling global competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency. Description Transportation decisions spur economic development by providing convenient access to jobs and making the system more reliable. Transportation projects also create local jobs. MPO Actions  Make accurate predictions regarding future employment growth and identify transportation projects to best serve these areas  Seek transportation projects that reduce consumer cost and which in turn can stimulate the economy 2) Increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and nonmotorized users. Description Regardless of mode, residents and visitors must have proper facilities and amenities to reach destinations safely. MPO Actions  Retrofit existing corridors using access management techniques  Provide key pedestrian amenities at critical intersections  Adopt Complete Streets policies to facilitate proper street design ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 1—7 Adopted on April 15, 2010 i n t r o d u c t i o n 1 1 3) Increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users. Description In the event of an emergency, the transportation system must be able to accommodate the needs of people. The MPO should seek to bring together transportation decision makers and emergency personnel to coordinate security plans. MPO Actions  Identify critical transportation facilities for evacuation planning  Provide a forum for security and transportation agencies to coordinate prevention strategies 4) Increase the accessibility and mobility of people and for freight. Description Destinations that are easily accessible help reduce travel time and transportation related costs. Transportation should make it convenient to reach neighborhoods and public locations. Mobility is typically measured by distance covered and travel speed. MPO Actions  Provide mode choice for improving travel options  Maintain mobility on regional corridors through access management principles 5) Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve the quality of life, and promote consistency between transportation improvements and State and local planned growth and economic development patterns. Description Transportation plans must consider their impact to the environment and quality of life. Transportation and land use planning plays an integral role in reducing sprawl and reinforcing the importance of a centralized economic business district. MPO Actions  Expand transit, bicycle, and walking options for system users  Integrate local land use planning strategies into the development of transportation plans ---PAGE BREAK--- 1—8 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 i n t r o d u c t i o n 1 1 6) Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between modes, for people and freight. Description A well-balanced transportation system enables users to transfer between modes and does not require complete dependence on one mode, particularly the automobile. MPO Actions  Ensure walking and biking facilities are connected to transit stops  Develop intermodal facilities between air and freight for the efficient movement of goods 7) Promote efficient system management and operation. Description Existing infrastructure should be optimized through the implementation of systems and projects that preserve capacity and improve security, safety, and reliability. MPO Actions  Develop programs and strategies for arterial management, signal and traffic incident management to reduce congestion and delay  Implement Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) elements for optimal traffic operations 8) Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system. Description System preservation can reduce costs and improve the life spans of existing infrastructure. MPO Actions  Preserve right-of-way (ROW) for future expansion of existing roadways  Preserve future corridors for future facilities before land is developed  Enact pavement preservation strategies for roads and bridges before serious repair is needed 1.6) LIVABILITY PRINCIPLES In 2009, the US Department of Transportation (USDOT), Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) created an interagency partnership to help improve access to affordable housing, to provide more transportation options, and to lower transportation costs while protecting the environment in communities nationwide. This partnership has ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 1—9 Adopted on April 15, 2010 i n t r o d u c t i o n 1 1 developed six livability principles as a way to coordinate federal transportation, environmental protection, and housing investments. These principles are factored into many of the goals and policies identified in this document. 1) Providing more transportation choices MPO Actions:  Make stronger investments in multi-modal transportation  Identify expansion routes for Red Apple Transit to serve more population and employment areas  Fund regional and local bicycle/pedestrian projects to develop a network that links neighborhoods, jobs, and recreational destinations 2) Expanding access to affordable housing, particularly housing located close to transit MPO Actions:  Identify new transit service in the vicinity of existing affordable housing  Continue to construct sidewalks and bike facilities in neighborhoods with high concentrations of affordable housing 3) Enhancing economic competitiveness-–giving people access to jobs, education and services as well as giving businesses access to markets MPO Actions:  Encourage local planning agencies to promote in-fill development which helps cluster businesses together and maximizes the efficiency of existing transportation infrastructure  Designate freight corridors and truck routes that efficiently distribute local goods 4) Targeting federal funds toward existing communities to spur revitalization and protect rural landscapes MPO Actions:  Place emphasis on road projects that improve conditions within urban cores  Fund transit-oriented development and facilities that promote walking and biking ---PAGE BREAK--- 1—10 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 i n t r o d u c t i o n 1 1 5) Increasing collaboration among federal, state, and local governments to better target investments and improve accountability MPO Actions:  Encourage participation from representatives of all levels of government for the development of local and regional priorities  Work with NMDOT to program and fund prioritized projects 6) Valuing the unique qualities of all communities--whether urban, suburban, or rural MPO Actions:  Provide convenient transportation choices for accessing local national monuments and landmarks  Protect the rural landscape of this area by reducing sprawl and encouraging system preservation strategies ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 2—1 Adopted on April 15, 2010 Exist E x i s t i n g a n d f u t u r e population & employment p o p u l a t i o n & e m p l o y m e n t conditions c o n d i t i o n s 2.1) BACKGROUND To effectively plan for the next 25 years it is essential that a determination of the area’s base year demographics (population, household size, employment, household income, and land use) is firm. It is necessary to look at how the local economy is affected by periods of national recession. Does the local economy slow or decline during a national recession, or does it appear unaffected? This will ensure that the future projections based on the base year’s demographics are focused and accurate. The MPO used 2008 as the base year for the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) update. Various federal and state government data sources were used for the population and employment forecast totals for the Farmington MPO region. All long-term trends in population, employment, and real personal income have been analyzed and adjusted for inflation. When developing future travel patterns one needs to achieve a comfort level with the demographic totals used in the development process. The tendency is to be more comfortable with the recent trends. When the economy is doing well, the tendency is to select an optimistic forecast. The tendency to select a conservative forecast usually occurs if the current or most recent trend is decreasing or flat. However, economies are circular in nature and upturns and downturns tend to counteract each other over a 20 or 30-year time span. For the MTP update staff annualized growth rates over a 25 year window for long term demographic projections. 2 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 2—2 Adopted on April 15, 2010 2.2) TRANSPORTATION and LAND USE CHARACTERISTICS The interaction between transportation and land use go hand in hand. Whether the land use is residential, commercial, industrial, or other types, the activities that occur in each land use form the basis of trip making and travel demand. Typically, residential areas produce trips and employment areas will attract trips. To connect these areas, travel choice is influenced by several factors, such as distance, cost, and transportation modes that are available. Part of the update process requires estimates and assumptions about future land use developments and new transportation options that will best serve future travel demand. 2.3) HISTORICAL POPULATIONS From 1970 to 2006 the San Juan County population grew by 68,984 people, a 131% increase in population over a 36 year span (Figure 2-1). This population increase translates into an annual rate of increase of 2.3%. When comparing San Juan County over the last 36 years to New Mexico and the United States, population growth in San Juan County outpaced that of the State and the nation, 131% vs. 90% and 47% respectively. In 2008 the total population for the Farmington MPO was approximately 98,000. The population distribution by entity shows that Aztec and Bloomfield have approximately 8,100, and 7,500 respectively. The City of Farmington has approximately 45,000 and the urbanized areas (a group of census blocks which have a population density of at least 1,000 people per square mile) of San Juan County have 38,500 within the MPO Boundary. Population within the MPO boundary represents about 80% of the total population within the county. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 2—3 Adopted on April 15, 2010 E x i s t i n g & f u t u r e c o n d i t i o n s 2 2 Figure 2-1 – Historical Population in San Juan County from 1970 to 2006 2.4) CURRENT and FUTURE POPULATION The process for forecasting future growth in population and employment is not an exact science. To evaluate the population change within San Juan County and ultimately within the MPO region, various components of population change are taken into account. Total population growth is measured by the natural growth plus total migration. Natural growth is defined by the total number of births less total deaths, and total migration is defined as the change in international and domestic migration (Figure 2-2). By - 52,779 82,318 91,567 114,043 121,763 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0 People (1,000'S) SanJuan County Population National Recessions ---PAGE BREAK--- 2—4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 E x i s t i n g & f u t u r e c o n d i t i o n s 2 2 understanding the components of population growth, insight can be gained into the cause of the growth (or decline). The total population within the Farmington MPO was derived from the total population of San Juan County. Population numbers were originally obtained through data mining techniques that gathered San Juan County socio-economic information from 1970 to 2008. Once this information was gathered the information was graphically produced using the software program ArcGIS to visually display the growth patterns and then reviewed by each member entity. The information was also presented to other stakeholder groups and the numbers were then adjusted to reflect proposed annexation, future developments and other factors such as the lack of utilities and other inhibiting factors. The Farmington MPO population ranges from 80-85% of the total San Juan County Population (Table 2-1). This method ensures that the population is capped. Figure 2-2 – Population Growth Components in San Juan County Population numbers after the year 2015 were also furthered constrained by future assumed conditions which would limit the growth rate of the future population within the MPO boundary. Some of the assumed growth restrictions were the lack of developable land, the existing topography, archeological sites, current zoning and lack of transportation and utility infrastructure. An inhibiting growth factor was developed to reflect the constrained conditions, allowing the model to allocate the remaining population to the portions of San Juan County outside of the MPO boundary. 14,617 (5,740) 8,877 914 (704) 210 9,087 (10,000) (5,000) - 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 People Components of Population Change (2000 to 2007) ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 2—5 Adopted on April 15, 2010 E x i s t i n g & f u t u r e c o n d i t i o n s 2 2 TABLE 2-1 – Future Population Growth Jurisdiction 2008 Population 2015 Population 2020 Population 2030 Population 2035 Population Aztec 7,600 8,127 8,473 9,083 9,367 Bloomfield 7,561 9,985 10,422 11,196 11,557 Farmington 45,038 51,929 54,147 58,072 59,900 San Juan County (within the MPO) 38,444 49,273 51,304 54,897 56,571 MPO Total 98,643 119,314 124,346* 133,248* 137,395* San Juan County (whole county) 110,973 131,245 141,754 154,568 160,752 *Population growth was constrained within the MPO boundary due to available land, zoning, archaeological sites and natural topography. While area-wide demographic control totals were readily available, these figures needed to be disaggregated to census tracts and eventually to the TAZ - Traffic Analysis Zone (a geographical cluster of similar land uses) level for use in the travel demand model. It should be noted that the disaggregation process will produce an estimate of what may happen in the future; there is no way to predict the occurrence of unforeseeable changes that would affect the future distribution of population. 2.5) HISTORICAL EMPLOYMENT To better understand the economic profile within the FMPO boundary, staff looked at two main economic components: 1. Industry employment and 2. Occupation employment within each industry (staffing patterns) Staff then developed and evaluated historical employment trends, which were used in its employment projections. This was done by looking at the detailed Quarterly Census Employment and Wages Report (QCEW) for San Juan County and aggregating the data to each individual TAZ. The time series is the foundation for developing industry employment projections which reflect 25 years of historical data and a smaller 6 year window, from 2000-2006, of industrial trends (Figure 2-3). It illustrates what is likely to happen, excluding major changes from past trends. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2—6 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 E x i s t i n g & f u t u r e c o n d i t i o n s 2 2 Figure 2-3 – Historical Employment in San Juan County from 1970 to 2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 2—7 Adopted on April 15, 2010 E x i s t i n g & f u t u r e c o n d i t i o n s 2 2 2.6) CURRENT and FUTURE EMPLOYMENT The Farmington Metropolitan Planning Organization statistically accounts for approximately 85 percent of the County’s economic production. TABLE 2-2 – Future Employment Growth Jurisdiction 2008 Employment 2015 Employment 2020 Employment 2030 Employment 2035 Employment Aztec 4,254 4,517 4,963 5,909 6,522 Bloomfield 4,229 4,490 4,933 5,874 6,484 Farmington 36,324 38,566 42,374 50,452 55,691 San Juan County (within the MPO) 12,781 13,570 14,910 17,752 19,596 Total 57,588 61,143 67,180 79,987 88,293 San Juan County (whole county) 67,378 75,962 84,284 104,135 116,203 2.7) VISUM VISUM is a travel demand modeling software that provides a reasonable and disaggregated forecast of travel patterns. VISUM combines employment, residence location, and transportation networks in a single comprehensive package embedded in a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) environment. The model allocates the total employment, households, and land use for an area into its sub-regional component zones. This allocation is made possible by using regional trends, transportation facility descriptions, and data on current locations of employment and households. This model incorporates a connection between land use and the transportation system. The required data for the VISUM model runs include current population and employment by place of work, travel times between zones and current land use information. In order to develop this data as input into the model, staff acquired a computerized parcel and database file from the San Juan County Assessor Office. The files were merged and the information grouped to reflect land use types throughout the ---PAGE BREAK--- 2—8 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 E x i s t i n g & f u t u r e c o n d i t i o n s 2 2 FMPO boundary. Land use checks were performed by aerial photos and windshield surveys by staff. Staff then analyzed potential land use changes by meeting with local stakeholders and using local area knowledge of on- going developments. Staff also collected data from the Cities of Aztec, Bloomfield and Farmington and the San Juan County to assess near term growth patterns in the area. Since the travel demand model requires population and employment by traffic analysis zones (TAZs), the final forecasting output was at the TAZ level. The control totals for FMPO were approved by the MPO Policy Board in June 2009. The model runs were performed for the 2008 base year and for the 2035 forecast year. Several scenarios were run to indicate potential change in traffic volumes and patterns if new, identified roadways were built. The demographic forecasting output at the traffic analysis zone level for each future year increment is the result of an evaluation process through the MPO Technical Committee. Concurrence by each member entity on future demographics was necessary prior to commencement of any subsequent model run. Concurrence ensures minimizing duplication of effort in data development and maximizes local confidence in demographic forecasts. Additionally as future population and economic trends progress attention to scenario planning activities will need to take place as each entity develops and grows to ensure support of the development of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan. How do you forecast 2035 traffic volumes and evaluate improvements? Forecasting traffic volumes typically involves three basic steps:  Trip Generation: Based on existing and forecast socioeconomic data including the number of dwelling units and employment by category, the model estimates trips by trip type, such as work trips. The socioeconomic data is aggregated to the TAZ level. By comparing base year trip generation to forecast 2035 trip generation, one can see the estimated growth in trip activity within the area.  Trip Distribution: The trip distribution process examines the relationship between where trips are produced or generated in relationship to where they are attracted or the destination end of the trip. As an example, a Home Based Work Trip begins at the residence and travels to the place of work..  Trip Assignment: This is the process where the trip distribution patterns are assigned to various routes between where the trip originates and its destination. The model recognizes that as the roadways fill up, congestion might occur and that alternate routes might be more attractive for assignment. In review of the various deficiencies and needs, several improvements were tested to determine which improvements best addressed future conditions. The model is designed to provide performance summaries of each improvement in terms of vehicle miles of travel, congestion, and delay. Using the model, various improvements were compared to one another to determine which improvements best addressed the region’s future needs. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 3—1 Adopted on April 15, 2010 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION P U B L I C P A R T I C I P A T I O N 3.1) OVERVIEW The public participation plan outlines a process for involving the public in the transportation planning process. The plan also allows for the Farmington MPO to meet the requirements of Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act - a Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), which calls for a “proactive public involvement process that provides complete information, timely public notice, full public access to key decisions, and supports early and continuing involvement of the public in developing plans.” Through the public involvement program and detailed technical analysis, transportation needs were identified and consensus was developed on system improvement strategies. A good public participation plan allows planners to identify and understand aspects of the transportation system directly from the users, the general public. This process was integrated into the overall development of the MTP update. A summary of public comments received during the MTP update process is found in Appendix A. 3.2) KICK-OFF MEETING In November 2008 shortly after the MTP update process started, the MPO hosted a kick-off public meeting to introduce the public to the various elements that would be analyzed and developed. The presentation explained what the MTP is and how the public can play an integral part in its development. Further discussion explained the planning process with regards to roadways, transit, bicycle/pedestrian, and other issues. 3 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- 3—2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n 3 3 3.3) MTP SURVEYS MPO residents were invited to participate in the development of the MTP by completing two surveys. Through March and mid-April of 2009, the MPO issued two surveys to solicit public input on general travel characteristics, public transit services, and improvements needed for our regional transportation system. Overall, 639 surveys were received: 248 were transit surveys and 391 were surveys on general transportation characteristics and needed improvements. The surveys were available through a link on the MPO website and paper copies were provided at many public destinations including libraries, city halls and community centers. A summary of the survey results is provided in Appendix A. Top transportation improvements identified by the public included:  More sidewalks and bicycle facilities  Engineering improvements  Signal  Expanding the transit system  Making transit service more convenient for travel 3.4) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Public meetings were held at various locations at key points in the development of the plan (Table 3-1). TABLE 3-1 - Public Meetings held by the Farmington MPO WHEN WHERE WHAT November 12, 2008 MPO Office, 100 W. Broadway Open House presentation introducing the MTP Update February 18, 2009 Farmington Public Library Identification of needed improvements for all modes February 19, 2009 Aztec Commission Chambers Identification of needed improvements for all modes February 23, 2009 Bloomfield Cultural Center Identification of needed improvements for all modes August 11, 2009 Farmers Market, Farmington Identification of the public’s preferred improvements August 12, 2009 Connie Mack World Series, Ricketts Park Identification of the public’s preferred improvements August 14, 2009 San Juan County Fairgrounds, McGee Park Identification of the public’s preferred improvements August 26, 2009 San Juan College Graphics Art Court Identification of the public’s preferred improvements August 26, 2009 San Juan College Health & Human Performance Center Identification of the public’s preferred improvements ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 3—3 Adopted on April 15, 2010 P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n 3 3 WHEN WHERE WHAT January 25, 2010 San Juan College Graphics Art Court Bloomfield Cultural Center Present the draft MTP document January 26, 2010 Aztec Public Library Present the draft MTP document January 27, 2010 Farmington Public Library Present the draft MTP document The MPO website was continually updated with new information, maps, and data as it was prepared by staff, reviewed by the entities, and approved by the Policy Committee. Quarterly newsletters summarized key accomplishments during the development of the update. 3.5) STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS During the MTP update, staff met with several stakeholders to seek input and provide information on the development of the plan. Some of the stakeholder groups included:  Northwest Regional Planning Organization (NWRPO)  San Juan Center for Independence (SJCI)  Local Councils and Commissions  Navajo Nation DOT  New Mexico Environmental Department (NMED)  San Juan County Office of Emergency Management MPO Staff was asked by several organizations to give presentations on the MTP Update (Table 3-2). These presentations were targeted to the audiences and allowed staff to hear specific concerns from members of these public groups. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3—4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 p u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n 3 3 TABLE 3-2 - Farmington MPO Presentations to Local Organizations WHEN WHERE WHAT April 8, 2009 Northwest New Mexico Seniors, Farmington An MPO Overview was presented to the members at the Northwest New Mexico Seniors Meeting. Surveys were handled out to members to take back to their agencies and have patrons fill them out. April 25, 2009 Earth Day Event - Aztec Ruins The MPO had a booth to educate the public on the Bicycle Pedestrian Plan. April 27, 2009 Elks Lodge, Farmington The MPO was invited to present a description of projects and programs that the MPO administers in order to meet federal requirements. May 5, 2009 San Juan Center for Independence- Farmington An MPO Overview and a discussion on transit was presented to the San Juan Center for Independence, which is a community based nonprofit agency that was established by people with disabilities for people with disabilities. May 27, 2009 Kiwanis Club - Farmington Meeting The MPO Planner presented an overview of the public survey results for the MTP Update. May 30, 2009 SRTS Bike Rodeo - San Juan College, Farmington MPO Staff set up an information booth with pamphlets relating to the Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan, the Access Management Plan, and the MTP. October 19, 2009 San Juan Center for Independence- Farmington Presentation on an initial needs assessment and identification of transit expansion routes for Red Apple Transit. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 4—1 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on December 1, 2014 F u t u r e r o a d w a y p l a n 4.1) OVERVIEW The future roadway plan is based on determining new improvements to meet the needs of projected population and employment growth. As more growth occurs, new infrastructure is needed to serve these areas or to provide relief to existing facilities that may be experiencing congestion and delay. Improvements to existing infrastructure are also needed for system preservation. Through its coordination with the local entities, NMDOT, and the general public, the MPO identified several new road projects and road improvements. Through an alternatives analysis, future population and employment growth, these new road options were studied to determine their benefits. The road options were grouped into various scenarios, giving the MPO and its entities flexibility to adapt to changing factors that may influence the selection of regional priorities. The recommended projects and improvements described later in this chapter are expected to address the area’s most critical roadway needs in the future. Policies and actions are identified in order to guide development of the future road system. 4.2) ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION The MTP is primarily concerned with regionally significant roadways that will be built or expanded using federal funding sources. These roadways are part of the “functionally classified roadway system.” A functionally classified roadway system allows for urban streets to be grouped by their purpose or function. There are three main functions for urban streets: 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- 4—2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on December 1, 2014 F u t u r e r o a d p l a n 4 1. Movement of traffic, 2. Distribution or collection of traffic, and 3. Provide access to terminal points. Principal Arterial streets are intended to have the highest mobility for long distance travel and connecting cities. Minor Arterial streets support the principal arterial system by providing a moderate level of mobility with some access to surrounding land use. Collector and local streets primarily provide access to public facilities and neighborhoods. Each class of urban street serves as a collection device for the next lower class of street. The functional classification system is further defined in Table 4-1. The purpose for using the functional classification system is to help determine which roadways should be included in a regional transportation system. Furthermore, functionally classified roadways describe the various levels of vehicular mobility. Using functional class in the transportation planning process ensures that adjacent land uses and local development are compatible with both existing and future transportation needs. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 4—3 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on December 1, 2014 F u t u r e r o a d p l a n 4 TABLE 4-1 – Functional Classification System FUNCTIONAL CLASS DESCRIPTION FUNCTION PURPOSE Urban Principal Arterial (UPA) The Urban Principal Arterial provides the greatest mobility for through movements and forms an integrated network without stub connections for long distance, intercity/cross town travel. It shall have designated access points. Mobility with limited access points Serves the major centers of activity in a metropolitan area and serves intra- and inter-regional trips. Provides access to major traffic generators. Urban Minor Arterial (UMA) The Urban Minor Arterial interconnects with and augments the urban principal arterial system. It is intended for trips of moderate It shall have designated access points with a reduced spacing requirement. Maintain mobility while providing access points Provide intra-community connectivity but ideally should not penetrate identifiable neighborhoods. Urban Collector (UCol) The Urban Collector distributes trips between the arterial system and the local road network. Access & Mobility for connecting all types of roads Provide land access & traffic circulation for residential and commercial neighborhoods Rural Principal Arterial (RPA) The Rural Principal Arterial provides minimal interference to through movements for long distance trips. It handles a high percentage of heavy commercial vehicles and forms an integrated network without stub endings except where unusual geographic conditions exist. It is part of the critical transportation infrastructure. Mobility with limited access points Provides access to important traffic generators and major cities not served by the Interstate; provides access to inter- modal facilities. Rural Minor Arterial (RMA) The Rural Minor Arterial provides a high level of mobility and minimizes interference to through movements. It forms an integrated network without stub endings except where unusual geographic conditions exist. Maintain mobility Provide inter-county access; used for long distance trips. Rural Major Collector (RCol) The Rural Major Collector connects urban areas with populations over 5,000 and tends to collect traffic from local roads to rural minor arterials. Maintain mobility while providing access points Serve traffic generators typically of intra- county importance and serves trips between low density residential & commercial areas. Rural Local (RLoc) The Rural Local collects traffic from local roads to rural major collectors and has the lowest traffic volumes. This classification has been defined by the Farmington MPO for access management purposes. Dual function of maintaining mobility and providing access Serves small population centers and provides access to residences and businesses ---PAGE BREAK--- 4—4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on December 1, 2014 F u t u r e r o a d p l a n 4 4.3) CONGESTION Congestion occurs when roadways do not have sufficient carrying capacity to meet the demand for traffic loading onto the roadway. The term "capacity" refers to the ability of a street to carry traffic, which is a function of actual space on the roadway and is determined by the number of lanes, lane width, percent of slope, length of left or right turn bays, on- street parking, percent of truck and bus traffic, number of pedestrians or cyclists, and signal timing and phasing. For travel demand modeling purposes, capacity was defined in terms of the number of lanes, functional classification and area type. Congestion for the MPO region was defined as the volume over capacity ratio greater than 0.78 and based on the output from the travel demand model. Traffic conditions are described in terms of level of service (LOS) with the levels ranging from LOS A, the best, to LOS F, the worst. Level of service C is generally considered the design level of service, while LOS D is generally considered as the acceptable limit during peak hours. Level of service E is typically at or near the capacity of the roadway or intersection and generally involves unacceptable delays. 4.4) YEAR 2035 ROADWAY SYSTEM The future year (2035) roadway system was developed using an extensive public involvement process and technical analysis. Working from the current functionally classified roadway system as an overall framework, a future year roadway network was developed. Arterials and collector streets in the MPO study area comprise the future year roadway networks. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is actively encouraging and supporting scenario planning. FHWA believes that scenario planning can help citizens, businesses, and government officials understand the impacts of growth, especially the relationship between transportation and the social, environmental and economic development of regions. FHWA sees scenario planning as an enhancement of, not a replacement for, the traditional transportation planning process. It enables communities to better prepare for the future. Scenario planning highlights the major forces that may shape the future and identifies how the various forces might interact, rather than attempting to predict one specific outlook. As a result, regional decision makers are prepared to recognize various forces to make more informed decisions in the present and be better able to adjust and strategize to meet tomorrow's needs. Level Of Service Description A Free Flow B Reasonable Free Flow C Stable conditions, but noticeable congestion D Approaching capacity E At capacity, unstable conditions F Failing, above capacity, heavy congestion ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 4—5 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on December 1, 2014 F u t u r e r o a d p l a n 4 Scenario planning is a new effort for the Farmington MPO region. Scenario planning enhances the traditional transportation planning process by raising the awareness of citizens and decision makers of the factors that affect growth and impact the regional transportation system. Scenario planning was initiated to engage residents and policy makers in a discussion of the region’s future growth and development patterns. After a technical analysis of all projects identified during the update process, the MPO has agreed that the focus for road improvements should continue to be between the three cities and through the Crouch Mesa area of San Juan County (the triangle of unincorporated land among the three cities). Five scenarios were approved by the MPO to meet the needs of these areas. Within the scenarios, six critical regional projects were identified. The five approved scenarios include combinations of these six projects. The scenarios provide flexibility to the entities to adapt to factors that influence transportation decisions, such as changes in land use and zoning, demographic shifts, cost estimates, and expected revenues. Other road projects identified in the MTP update process are included in Appendix B. These projects will remain as secondary needs in the event that priorities change or additional funding opportunities become available. Table 4-2 describes project details for the six regional priorities for the MPO region. The five approved roadway scenarios are illustrated on pages 4-7 to 4-11. Note: Project which was treated as one project at the time scenarios were run, was amended to projects 9A, B, & C in December 2014 to reflect project phasing that was required by NMDOT. As of December of 2014: Project #9A- Construction of this project (Control No. F100100) is scheduled for early 2015. Project#9B- This project is at 90% Design (approved by NMDOT), has 100% of ROW acquired, and has a draft environmental report, all funded by State of New Mexico and City of Farmington funds. Final Design is planned for FFY 2017. Project #9C- San Juan County secured FHWA funding ($1.3 million) for a portion of this project in FFY2008 (CN F100020) for environmental and engineering services, final design, and right-of-way/easement acquisition. The total amount of FHWA funds expended is $917,849. Facility & Location Scenario #1 Scenario #2 Scenario #3 Scenario #4 Scenario #5 #9A, B, & C - Piñon Hills Extension/CR 3900 – East Main to CR 390 X X X X X # 17 - US 64 widening – Browning Pkwy to US 550 X X X # 15 - East Arterial (south) – US 550 to NM 173 X X X X X # 16 - East Arterial (north) – NM 173 to US 550 X X # 14 - Highline Road – CR 350 to US 550 X X X X X # N8 - Piñon Hills Ext to CR 350 Connector X X X ---PAGE BREAK--- 4—6 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on December 1, 2014 F u t u r e r o a d p l a n 4 TABLE 4-2 – Priority Projects for the Farmington MPO Map Num Facility Name Termini Project Description Functional Class Jurisdictions Regional Significance Other Comments Length (feet) Est. Project Cost 17 US 64 Farmington to Bloomfield 1.5 mi. east of Browning Pkwy to Bloomfield City Limit Widen to 6 lanes; implement access management; install traffic signals Principal Arterial Farmington, Bloomfield, County Major east-west arterial; developing economic corridor Phase 1 complete; Phase 2 has committed funding; Phase 3 partial funding programmed for 2012 & 2013 36960 $65,000,000 9A East Pinon Hills Blvd Extension (Phase I) NM 516 to Hubbard Full rebuild of the Intersection of Piñon Hills and NM 516; Extension of Piñon Hills Blvd to include earthwork, asphalt, street lighting, drainage improvements and signalization upgrades. Principal Arterial (other) Farmington Improves access for Crouch Mesa area to East Main; relieves congestion on connecting principal arterials. Improves network effeciency by reducing travel distance between river crossings at Browning Parkway and CR 350. 4440 $4,155,000 9B East Pinon Hills Blvd Extension (Phase II) Hubbard to South Side River Road (CR 3000) Includes earthwork, asphalt, intersection lighting, bridges over the Animas River and oxbow, drainage improvements, environmental mitigation. Minor Arterial Farmington, County Improves access for Crouch Mesa area to East Main; relieves congestion on connecting principal arterials. Improves network effeciency by reducing travel distance between river crossings at Browning Parkway and CR 350. 7340 $14,250,000 9C East Pinon Hills Blvd Extension (Phase III) South Side River Road (CR 3000) to CR 390 Includes earthwork, asphalt, intersection lighting, drainage improvements, environmental mitigation. Minor Arterial County Improves access for Crouch Mesa area to East Main; relieves congestion on connecting principal arterials. Improves network effeciency by reducing travel distance between river crossings at Browning Parkway and CR 350. 11620 $8,250,000 15 East Arterial (South) US 550 to NM 173 Construct new 2 lane road (preserve ROW for 2 additional lanes) Proposed Principal Arterial Aztec Direct heavy truck traffic away from downtown; create bike/ped friendly environment Funding has been secured for Phase 1A & 1B 14784 $18,700,000 14 Highline Road CR 350 to US 550 Construct new 2 lane road Proposed Principal Arterial All New east-west arterial to support regional network Will distribute traffic to/from Crouch Mesa; connects PHB Ext. to East Arterial 27880 $14,987,142 N8 Pinon Hills Blvd Extension to CR 350 Connector Corridor to be determined Construct a facility to connect Pinon Hills Blvd Extension to Highline Rd Proposed Minor Arterial County Complete an east-west segment for improved traffic distribution 8980 $4,164,027 16 East Arterial (North) NM 173 to US 550 Construct new 2 lane road (preserve ROW for 2 additional lanes) Proposed Principal Arterial Aztec Direct heavy truck traffic away from downtown Continues relief route for heavy truck traffic and pass-through travel 19025 $11,031,837 Estimated Total: $140,538,006 TIER 1 PROJECTS ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 4—7 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on December 1, 2014 F u t u r e r o a d p l a n 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- 4—8 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on December 1, 2014 F u t u r e r o a d p l a n 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 4—9 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on December 1, 2014 F u t u r e r o a d p l a n 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- 4—10 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on December 1, 2014 F u t u r e r o a d p l a n 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 4—11 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on December 1, 2014 F u t u r e r o a d p l a n 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- 4—12 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on December 1, 2014 F u t u r e r o a d p l a n 4 4.5) ESTABLISHING PRIORITIES IN THE FARMINGTON MPO Upon adoption of the MTP, the six regional roadway projects described above are established as priorities by the Farmington MPO. Initial analysis has shown that these new roadway projects can provide relief to existing state-owned highways by redistributing traffic volumes and patterns. New road facilities also provide the opportunity for implementing walking and biking facilities which can be difficult due to ROW constraints on existing infrastructure. Performing cost/benefit analyses will become essential to show the importance of investing federal funding into these new regional priorities. The MPO will work in cooperation with NMDOT to secure federal funding for these projects for further planning and engineering analysis and eventually for construction. These projects will be incorporated into the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) so that the project development process can be started. 4.6) MAJOR THOROUGHFARE PLAN The area’s current regional road network is composed primarily of Principal and Minor Arterial streets and provides the necessary transportation support and access to and from local land uses. Since many corridors are constrained from acquiring additional right-of-way, much of the future demand will likely have to be accommodated through a better connected and more efficient arterial street system. During development of the MTP, many current and future roadways were identified that could become part of a Major Thoroughfare Plan for the Farmington MPO. As a by-product of the MTP development process, a Farmington MPO Major Thoroughfare Plan will need to go through a collaborative process in which all member entities review and agree to the existing and future expansion of the classified roadway network. Once a Major Thoroughfare Plan is adopted by the MPO Policy Committee it will then need to be adopted by each member entity’s governing body. A Major Thoroughfare Plan that is adopted by all member entities will allow for corridor preservation and will lead towards a coordinated and cooperative implementation of future roadway projects. With an adopted thoroughfare plan, local planning staffs and developers can make better decisions about the expansion of commercial and residential development that integrates transportation and land use planning. 4.7) ROADWAY POLICIES Developing and maintaining a comprehensive network of streets and highways that supports the needs of automobile, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic is critical to reducing congestion, improving safety, and increasing mobility within the MPO region. As population and employment continue to grow in the Farmington Metropolitan Area, a higher burden will be placed on the transportation system. The proposed policies below will assist in developing the best transportation system for the area: ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 4—13 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on December 1, 2014 F u t u r e r o a d p l a n 4 • All new arterial roads shall be controlled using access management standards • Develop a roadway system that is compatible with the needs of other modes such as bicycles, pedestrians, public transportation and truck freight • Consider safety in the project selection process • Require land developers to preserve the necessary right-of- way in future travel corridors • Require private developer contributions in roadway construction in undeveloped areas through the development process • When approving new land development, ensure that internal, connecting and adjacent streets are able to handle the expected type and intensity of development that is proposed • Implement access management strategies found within the FMPO Access Management Plan to improve safety and traffic flow • The MPO should establish a regional major thoroughfare plan, approved by the entities, that indicates future roads and the preservation of ROW for these corridors • Develop a Complete Streets policy 4.8) ROADWAY ACTIONS In order for the regional system to support the needs of the community and provide acceptable level of service, a number of broad actions are needed. These actions create proactive opportunities to address future transportation concerns. • Develop access management corridor plans for system preservation and major retrofit projects, such as for 20th Street and Main Street in Farmington and NM 516 and US 64 • Develop access management corridor plans for new roads, such as the East Arterial and Highline Rd • Intersection data collection, such as turn movement counts • Develop intersection design standards and signal timing plans • Signal progression analysis for new developments • Level of Service (LOS) standards for functionally classified roads ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 5—1 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on April 21, 2011 transit plan t r a n s i t p l a n 5.1) OVERVIEW Transit service, whether fixed-route or demand-responsive, is intricately linked to many other governmental and planning actions. Providing fixed-route transit service relies upon and reacts to the density of development within the city, locations of transportation corridors and activity centers, and the design of developments along the corridors and centers it serves. Travel corridors and activity centers with a mix of uses and a large number of travelers provide the demand that can effectively support higher levels of transit service. A balanced, multi-modal transportation system sometimes requires shifts in public investment given the historical emphasis on roadways and automobiles. To facilitate a higher level of transit service in the region, new developments and land use patterns should be planned in such a way as to support the non- automobile modes. Ridership on Red Apple Transit continues to increase each year as the system becomes an integrated part of daily commuting. Due to this growth in the MPO region, the MPO and Red Apple Transit worked with a consultant to conduct a transit needs assessment and evaluation of the current system. The Red Apple Transit Study was completed in January 2011 and provided short and long term recommendations for how transit can expand its services to meet future demand. 5 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- 5—2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on April 21, 2011 t r a n s i t P L A N 5 5 5.2) EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES Red Apple Transit, owned and operated by the City of Farmington, is the primary transit service in the MPO region. Within the city limits of Farmington, two loop routes (Red and Green Routes) operate counter-clockwise and serve several apartment complexes, neighborhoods, and public destinations. A third route (Express Route) operates along the East Main corridor to serve the mall and many of the big box retailers. For all three routes, bus stops are found at specific locations. Buses run from 7am to 6pm Monday through Saturday. All routes are on 30 minute headways. Red Apple Transit also runs three regional routes that connect Farmington to Aztec, Bloomfield, and the community of Kirtland. These routes too have specific stops and connect to the Farmington routes at Orchard Plaza as a transfer point. The regional routes only operate three times a day: early morning, mid-day, and late afternoon. Navajo Transit serves the Farmington area with two routes and provides connections to Shiprock and other places on the Navajo Nation. Navajo Transit has two transfer points with Red Apple Transit at American Plaza in Farmington and in Kirtland. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 5—3 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on April 21, 2011 t r a n s i t P L A N 5 5 Red Route Bus Stops Green Route Bus Stops Express Route Bus Stops Orchard Plaza Orchard Plaza Orchard Plaza Conquistador Library Museum At Gateway San Juan Apt. Apple Ridge Mall San Juan Career Smith’s Grocery Warehouse San Juan College Airport Wal-Mart – Sam’s Club Social Security Police Department Plaza Farmington 28th/Crescent Northgate Apt. K-Mart Smith’s Wal-Mart-West Mesa Shopping Safeway-West Senior Center Civic Center Civic Center PMS Clinic Mesa Village Apt. Totah (Ojo Court) San Juan Energy San Juan Regional MOC State Building Ricketts Park/Aquatic Center Butler/Murray Scott Ave. Aztec Tiger Route Bus Stops Bloomfield Bobcat Route Bus Stops Kirtland Bronco Route Bus Stops Animas Village Apartments Ambulance Station Central Center Kirtland Aztec Safeway Bloomfield Cultural Center Mesa Mobile Home Park Westside Plaza Pinos Blancos Apartments Orchard Plaza Transfer Location Flora Vista Circle K McGee Park Orchard Plaza Transfer Location SJC Detention Center Wildflower Drive Orchard Plaza Transfer Location ---PAGE BREAK--- 5—4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on April 21, 2011 t r a n s i t P L A N 5 5 5.3) CURRENT RED APPLE RIDERSHIP Annual ridership for Red Apple has steadily increased since 2003 (Figure 5-1). ridership reports provided by Red Apple show the change in ridership as the year progresses. There tends to be seasonal trends that affect ridership month to month. In 2010, ridership on the Farmington routes totaled 121,840. Ridership on the Kirtland route was 3,244, the Aztec route was 2,464, and the Bloomfield route was 4,986. The Aztec and Bloomfield routes witnessed a decline from 2008 to 2009, whether because it has reached its service threshold or economic factors have reduced those who need to take the bus. FIGURE 5-1 – Annual Ridership on Red Apple Transit 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 [PHONE REDACTED] 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Red Apple Annual Ridership ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 5—5 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on April 21, 2011 t r a n s i t P L A N 5 5 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 Farmington Routes 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Tiger (Aztec) Bobcat (Bloomfield) Bronco (Kirtland) ---PAGE BREAK--- 5—6 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on April 21, 2011 t r a n s i t P L A N 5 5 5.4) GREATEST TRANSIT NEED Certain population types tend to use transit more often than the choice rider; in other words, those who are transit dependent are more likely to use the system than those who own a personal automobile. Those population types that are typically transit dependent include those younger than 18, the elderly, those with a disability, households that do not own a vehicle, and low-income households. Census 2000 data provides these populations by census tract. During development of the transit study, this information was collected for analysis to better understand where the focus of transit service should be. The data for these population types was compared to total population of these census tracts to determine a percentage of the total population. These percentages were then ranked within each type. The ranks from all of the population types were scored to establish an overall rank. The highest score indicates the greatest transit need. Greatest transit need was developed for 2010, 2020 and 2035 (Table 5-1 through 5-3). When comparing the three years of data, certain census tracts began to rise to the top because they had large numbers of these population types: • Areas in central and south Farmington • The north and west areas of Crouch Mesa • The northwest and southwest areas of Bloomfield Using data by Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ), staff grouped population and employment data to project where the largest areas of growth are expected to occur in 2020 and 2035. The data were developed as a way to gauge locations of high concentrations of population and employment. Besides further growth within the three cities, Crouch Mesa and Kirtland will become the fastest growing areas within the MPO. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 5—7 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on April 21, 2011 Table 5-1 – 2010 Greatest Transit Need Zero- Total Total Number Total Census Land Vehicle # of of Elderly Poverty Overall Final Population Census Block Area 60 & over Population Score (Persons) Tract Group (sq.ml.) # Density rank # # Density rank # Density rank # Density rank (4-20) (1-5) # 1 1 0.73 0 0 1 89 35 49 2 28 38 3 34 47 2 8 3 248 1 2 0.94 71 75 5 621 220 234 4 143 152 4 546 581 5 18 5 1,823 1 3 1.65 32 19 3 455 243 147 3 88 53 3 239 145 3 12 4 1,332 1 4 2.36 9 4 2 650 140 59 2 171 72 3 631 267 3 10 3 1,833 1 5 0.36 56 156 5 278 138 383 4 66 183 5 189 526 5 19 5 735 2.01 1 2.42 17 7 3 454 188 78 3 34 14 2 0 0 1 9 3 1,237 2.01 2 2.59 6 2 2 869 297 115 3 127 49 3 118 46 2 10 3 2,415 2.02 1 5.48 0 0 1 800 414 76 3 23 4 1 28 5 1 6 2 2,488 2.02 2 3.05 9 3 2 495 178 58 2 16 5 1 39 13 2 7 2 1,389 2.02 3 0.40 0 0 1 272 127 317 4 73 183 5 21 52 2 12 4 705 2.04 1 0.88 0 0 1 215 139 158 3 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 1 6 2 653 2.04 2 1.03 38 37 4 676 239 232 4 123 120 4 397 385 4 16 4 2,000 2.05 1 0.44 18 42 4 635 220 500 5 89 203 5 278 633 5 19 5 1,585 2.05 2 0.22 22 100 5 400 53 239 4 109 494 5 74 339 4 18 5 1,158 2.05 3 0.57 137 240 5 728 155 272 4 38 66 3 643 1,129 5 17 5 1,879 2.05 4 1.32 83 63 4 1,109 386 292 4 112 85 4 508 385 4 16 4 3,057 3.01 1 0.31 12 39 4 780 238 768 5 87 280 5 359 1,158 5 19 5 1,767 3.01 2 0.22 9 39 4 424 259 1,177 5 20 89 4 55 250 3 16 4 1,067 3.01 3 0.26 7 28 3 347 112 432 4 9 33 3 98 376 4 14 4 1,035 3.01 4 0.37 137 370 5 867 435 1,175 5 117 317 5 156 422 4 19 5 1,897 3.02 1 0.23 15 64 4 497 270 1,173 5 60 260 5 160 695 5 19 5 1,291 3.02 2 0.12 0 0 1 303 187 1,557 5 29 244 5 56 468 4 15 4 737 3.02 3 0.15 35 236 5 359 99 659 5 6 41 3 154 1,026 5 18 5 780 3.02 4 0.27 17 63 4 458 179 665 5 87 321 5 271 1,004 5 19 5 1,159 4.01 1 0.45 0 0 1 508 260 578 5 37 81 4 20 43 2 12 4 1,375 4.01 2 0.58 15 25 3 614 398 686 5 83 143 4 62 107 3 15 4 1,630 4.01 3 2.64 103 39 4 811 192 73 3 128 49 3 585 222 3 13 4 2,134 4.01 4 0.12 13 112 5 324 212 1,770 5 73 611 5 96 804 5 20 5 807 4.02 4 0.89 79 89 5 725 128 144 3 100 112 4 519 583 5 17 5 1,868 4.02 5 0.85 74 88 5 703 465 547 5 145 171 4 404 475 4 18 5 1,775 5.01 1 5.74 40 7 3 839 214 37 2 126 22 2 580 101 3 10 3 2,800 5.01 2 145.62 28 0 1 814 176 1 1 61 0 1 253 2 1 4 1 2,459 5.02 1 3.44 10 3 2 633 242 70 2 109 32 3 174 51 2 9 3 1,966 5.02 2 8.66 13 2 2 1,167 279 32 2 178 21 2 672 78 3 9 3 4,168 5.02 3 56.49 15 0 1 181 36 1 1 26 0 1 95 2 1 4 1 542 5.02 4 6.79 31 5 2 584 187 27 2 113 17 2 391 58 2 8 3 1,939 6.01 1 0.59 44 75 5 614 191 324 4 59 99 4 280 474 4 17 5 1,576 6.01 2 15.98 15 1 2 589 275 17 1 104 7 1 94 6 1 5 2 1,717 6.01 3 8.86 67 8 3 896 310 35 2 71 8 1 396 45 2 8 3 2,201 6.01 5 94.60 8 0 1 494 213 2 1 39 0 1 128 1 1 4 1 1,439 6.05 1 25.36 7 0 1 1,032 499 20 1 240 9 1 345 14 2 5 2 2,876 6.05 2 13.86 17 1 2 451 230 17 1 74 5 1 62 4 1 5 2 1,149 6.05 3 2.00 8 4 2 454 194 97 3 37 19 2 280 140 3 10 3 1,895 6.05 4 1.91 11 6 3 408 203 106 3 74 39 3 162 85 3 12 4 1,172 6.06 1 18.27 97 5 2 1,612 477 26 2 285 16 2 532 29 2 8 3 4,634 6.06 2 17.83 12 1 2 965 267 15 1 98 5 1 388 22 2 6 2 3,332 6.06 3 1.82 0 0 1 471 236 129 3 70 38 3 495 272 3 10 3 1,274 7.02 2 107.75 0 0 1 284 124 1 1 64 1 1 14 0 1 4 1 856 7.03 1 320.63 39 0 1 835 345 1 1 228 1 1 303 1 1 4 1 2,575 7.03 2 1.99 35 18 3 603 210 106 3 154 77 4 128 64 2 12 4 1,521 7.03 3 6.15 28 4 2 1,048 371 60 2 105 17 2 479 78 3 9 3 2,873 7.04 1 20.36 24 1 2 1,213 490 24 2 216 11 2 649 32 2 8 3 3,800 7.04 2 5.30 31 6 3 1,120 390 74 3 199 38 3 630 119 3 12 4 3,385 7.04 3 0.84 31 37 4 735 319 379 4 164 195 5 260 310 4 17 5 2,141 9430 1 186.10 76 0 1 767 200 1 1 257 1 1 1,084 6 1 4 1 3,221 9432 1 46.90 45 1 2 1,243 313 7 1 185 4 1 460 10 1 5 2 3,749 1,156 1,747 2,124 36,515 13,596 5,555 16,073 105,120 Population Mobility- Below- Limited ---PAGE BREAK--- 5—8 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on April 21, 2011 t r a n s i t P L A N 5 5 Table 5-2 – 2020 Greatest Transit Need Zero- Total Total Number Total Census Land Vehicle # of of Elderly Poverty Overall Final Population Census Block Area 60 & over Population Score (Persons) Tract Group (sq.ml.) # Density rank # # Density rank # Density rank # Density rank (4-20) (1-5) # 1 1 0.73 0 0 1 105 42 57 2 33 45 3 40 55 2 8 2 292 1 2 0.94 83 89 5 733 259 276 4 168 179 4 643 684 5 18 4 2,149 1 3 1.65 37 23 3 537 286 174 4 104 63 3 282 171 3 13 3 1,570 1 4 2.36 10 4 2 766 166 70 2 201 85 3 744 315 4 11 3 2,160 1 5 0.36 66 184 5 328 163 452 4 78 216 5 223 620 5 19 5 866 2.01 1 2.42 20 8 3 535 222 92 3 40 17 2 0 0 1 9 2 1,458 2.01 2 2.59 7 3 2 1,025 350 135 3 150 58 3 140 54 2 10 2 2,847 2.02 1 5.48 0 0 1 943 488 89 3 27 5 1 33 6 1 6 1 2,933 2.02 2 3.05 10 3 2 583 210 69 2 19 6 1 46 15 2 7 1 1,638 2.02 3 0.40 0 0 1 321 150 374 4 86 216 5 24 61 2 12 3 830 2.04 1 0.88 0 0 1 253 164 186 4 0 0 1 0 0 1 7 1 770 2.04 2 1.03 45 43 4 797 282 274 4 145 141 4 468 454 4 16 4 2,357 2.05 1 0.44 22 49 4 748 259 589 5 105 239 5 328 746 5 19 5 1,868 2.05 2 0.22 26 118 5 472 62 281 4 128 582 5 88 399 4 18 4 1,364 2.05 3 0.57 161 283 5 858 183 321 4 45 78 3 758 1,331 5 17 4 2,215 2.05 4 1.32 98 74 4 1,307 455 345 4 132 100 4 599 454 4 16 4 3,604 3.01 1 0.31 14 46 4 920 281 905 5 102 330 5 423 1,365 5 19 5 2,083 3.01 2 0.22 10 46 4 499 305 1,387 5 23 105 4 65 294 4 17 4 1,258 3.01 3 0.26 9 33 4 409 132 509 5 10 39 3 115 443 4 16 4 1,220 3.01 4 0.37 161 436 5 1,022 512 1,385 5 138 373 5 184 498 4 19 5 2,237 3.02 1 0.23 17 75 5 586 318 1,383 5 71 307 5 189 820 5 20 5 1,521 3.02 2 0.12 0 0 1 357 220 1,835 5 35 288 5 66 552 4 15 3 869 3.02 3 0.15 42 278 5 423 117 777 5 7 48 3 181 1,209 5 18 4 920 3.02 4 0.27 20 75 5 540 212 784 5 102 378 5 320 1,183 5 20 5 1,366 4.01 1 0.45 0 0 1 599 307 681 5 43 96 3 23 51 2 11 3 1,621 4.01 2 0.58 17 30 4 724 469 809 5 98 169 4 73 127 3 16 4 1,921 4.01 3 2.64 121 46 4 956 226 86 3 151 57 3 689 261 3 13 3 2,516 4.01 4 0.12 16 132 5 381 250 2,087 5 86 720 5 114 947 5 20 5 951 4.02 4 0.89 94 105 5 855 151 170 4 118 133 4 612 687 5 18 4 2,202 4.02 5 0.85 88 103 5 829 548 645 5 171 201 5 476 560 4 19 5 2,093 5.01 1 5.74 47 8 3 989 252 44 2 148 26 2 684 119 3 10 2 3,300 5.01 2 145.62 33 0 1 960 207 1 1 72 0 1 298 2 1 4 1 2,899 5.02 1 3.44 12 3 2 746 285 83 3 129 37 3 206 60 2 10 2 2,546 5.02 2 8.66 16 2 2 1,375 329 38 2 210 24 2 792 92 3 9 2 5,397 5.02 3 56.49 18 0 1 213 43 1 1 31 1 1 112 2 1 4 1 702 5.02 4 6.79 36 5 2 688 220 32 2 133 20 2 461 68 3 9 2 2,511 6.01 1 0.59 49 82 5 671 209 354 4 64 108 4 306 518 4 17 4 1,723 6.01 2 15.98 17 1 2 644 301 19 1 114 7 1 102 6 1 5 1 1,876 6.01 3 8.86 73 8 3 979 339 38 2 78 9 1 433 49 2 8 2 2,406 6.01 5 94.60 9 0 1 540 233 2 1 42 0 1 140 1 1 4 1 1,573 6.05 1 25.36 8 0 1 1,128 545 21 2 262 10 2 378 15 2 7 1 3,143 6.05 2 13.86 20 1 2 531 271 20 1 88 6 1 73 5 1 5 1 1,354 6.05 3 2.00 9 4 2 497 212 106 3 41 20 2 306 153 3 10 2 2,071 6.05 4 1.91 12 6 3 445 221 116 3 81 42 3 177 92 3 12 3 1,281 6.06 1 18.27 106 6 3 1,762 521 29 2 311 17 2 581 32 2 9 2 5,065 6.06 2 17.83 13 1 2 1,054 315 18 1 115 6 1 458 26 2 6 1 3,928 6.06 3 1.82 0 0 1 515 278 153 3 82 45 3 583 320 4 11 3 1,501 7.02 2 107.75 0 0 1 310 166 2 1 85 1 1 18 0 1 4 1 1,146 7.03 1 320.63 42 0 1 913 462 1 1 304 1 1 405 1 1 4 1 3,445 7.03 2 1.99 47 24 3 659 281 141 3 206 103 4 171 86 3 13 3 2,035 7.03 3 6.15 37 6 3 1,402 497 81 3 140 23 2 641 104 3 11 3 3,843 7.04 1 20.36 32 2 2 1,622 656 32 2 289 14 2 868 43 2 8 2 5,084 7.04 2 5.30 42 8 3 1,499 522 98 3 266 50 3 843 159 3 12 3 4,529 7.04 3 0.84 42 50 4 983 426 508 5 219 261 5 348 414 4 18 4 2,865 9430 1 186.10 102 1 2 1,026 268 1 1 344 2 1 1,450 8 1 5 1 4,171 9432 1 46.90 60 1 2 1,662 418 9 1 248 5 1 615 13 2 6 1 5,016 1,156 2,075 2,507 43,223 16,263 6,720 19,394 127,110 Population Mobility- Below- Limited ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 5—9 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on April 21, 2011 t r a n s i t P L A N 5 5 Table 5-3 – 2035 Greatest Transit Need Zero- Total Total Number Total Census Land Vehicle # of of Elderly Poverty Overall Final Population Census Block Area 60 & over Population Score (Persons) Tract Group (sq.ml.) # Density rank # # Density rank # Density rank # Density rank (4-20) (1-5) # 1 1 0.73 0 0 1 116 46 63 2 37 50 3 45 61 2 8 2 323 1 2 0.94 92 98 5 810 287 305 4 186 198 4 712 757 5 18 5 2,377 1 3 1.65 41 25 4 594 317 192 4 115 69 3 312 189 3 14 3 1,737 1 4 2.36 11 5 2 847 183 78 3 223 94 3 823 349 4 12 3 2,390 1 5 0.36 73 203 5 363 180 500 4 86 239 5 247 686 5 19 5 958 2.01 1 2.42 22 9 3 592 245 101 3 45 18 2 0 0 1 9 2 1,613 2.01 2 2.59 8 3 2 1,134 387 149 3 166 64 3 154 60 2 10 3 3,149 2.02 1 5.48 0 0 1 1,043 540 98 3 30 6 1 37 7 1 6 1 3,245 2.02 2 3.05 11 4 2 645 232 76 3 21 7 1 51 17 2 8 2 1,812 2.02 3 0.40 0 0 1 355 166 414 4 96 239 5 27 68 3 13 3 919 2.04 1 0.88 0 0 1 280 182 206 4 0 0 1 0 0 1 7 2 852 2.04 2 1.03 49 48 4 882 312 303 4 161 156 4 517 502 4 16 4 2,608 2.05 1 0.44 24 54 4 828 287 651 5 116 264 5 363 825 5 19 5 2,067 2.05 2 0.22 29 130 5 522 68 311 4 142 644 5 97 441 4 18 5 1,509 2.05 3 0.57 178 313 5 949 202 355 4 49 87 3 839 1,472 5 17 4 2,450 2.05 4 1.32 108 82 5 1,446 503 381 4 146 111 4 662 502 4 17 4 3,987 3.01 1 0.31 16 51 4 1,017 310 1,002 5 113 365 5 468 1,510 5 19 5 2,304 3.01 2 0.22 11 51 4 552 338 1,534 5 25 116 4 72 326 4 17 4 1,392 3.01 3 0.26 10 37 4 452 146 563 5 11 43 2 127 490 4 15 3 1,350 3.01 4 0.37 178 482 5 1,130 567 1,532 5 153 413 5 204 551 4 19 5 2,474 3.02 1 0.23 19 83 5 648 352 1,530 5 78 339 5 209 907 5 20 5 1,683 3.02 2 0.12 0 0 1 395 244 2,030 5 38 318 5 73 610 5 16 4 962 3.02 3 0.15 46 308 5 468 129 860 5 8 53 3 201 1,337 5 18 5 1,017 3.02 4 0.27 22 83 5 597 234 867 5 113 419 5 353 1,309 5 20 5 1,511 4.01 1 0.45 0 0 1 662 339 754 5 48 106 4 25 57 2 12 3 1,793 4.01 2 0.58 19 33 4 801 519 895 5 108 187 4 81 140 3 16 4 2,126 4.01 3 2.64 134 51 4 1,057 250 95 3 167 63 3 763 289 4 14 3 2,783 4.01 4 0.12 18 146 5 422 277 2,309 5 96 796 5 126 1,048 5 20 5 1,052 4.02 4 0.89 103 116 5 946 167 188 4 131 147 4 677 760 5 18 5 2,436 4.02 5 0.85 97 114 5 917 607 714 5 189 223 5 527 620 5 20 5 2,315 5.01 1 5.74 53 9 3 1,094 279 49 2 164 29 2 756 132 3 10 3 3,651 5.01 2 145.62 37 0 1 1,062 229 2 1 80 1 1 330 2 1 4 1 3,207 5.02 1 3.44 13 4 2 825 315 92 3 143 41 2 227 66 3 10 3 2,810 5.02 2 8.66 17 2 2 1,522 364 42 2 232 27 2 877 101 3 9 2 5,956 5.02 3 56.49 20 0 1 236 48 1 1 35 1 1 124 2 1 4 1 775 5.02 4 6.79 40 6 3 762 243 36 2 147 22 2 510 75 3 10 3 2,770 6.01 1 0.59 54 91 5 741 231 391 4 71 120 4 338 573 5 18 5 1,904 6.01 2 15.98 18 1 2 712 332 21 2 126 8 1 113 7 1 6 1 2,074 6.01 3 8.86 81 9 3 1,082 375 42 2 86 10 2 478 54 2 9 2 2,659 6.01 5 94.60 10 0 1 597 257 3 1 47 0 1 154 2 1 4 1 1,739 6.05 1 25.36 8 0 1 1,246 603 24 2 290 11 2 417 16 2 7 2 3,474 6.05 2 13.86 22 2 2 588 299 22 2 97 7 1 81 6 1 6 1 1,498 6.05 3 2.00 10 5 2 549 235 117 3 45 23 2 338 169 3 10 3 2,289 6.05 4 1.91 13 7 3 492 245 128 3 89 47 2 195 102 3 11 3 1,416 6.06 1 18.27 117 6 3 1,948 576 32 2 344 19 2 642 35 2 9 2 5,597 6.06 2 17.83 16 1 2 1,258 349 20 1 127 7 1 506 28 2 6 1 4,345 6.06 3 1.82 0 0 1 615 307 169 3 91 50 3 645 354 4 11 3 1,661 7.02 2 107.75 0 0 1 421 184 2 1 95 1 1 20 0 1 4 1 1,271 7.03 1 320.63 58 0 1 1,239 512 2 1 338 1 1 449 1 1 4 1 3,821 7.03 2 1.99 52 26 4 894 312 157 3 228 115 4 189 95 3 14 3 2,258 7.03 3 6.15 41 7 3 1,554 551 90 3 156 25 2 710 116 3 11 3 4,263 7.04 1 20.36 35 2 2 1,799 727 36 2 321 16 2 963 47 2 8 2 5,639 7.04 2 5.30 46 9 3 1,662 579 109 3 295 56 3 935 176 3 12 3 5,023 7.04 3 0.84 46 55 4 1,091 473 563 5 243 289 5 386 459 4 18 5 3,178 9430 1 186.10 108 1 2 1,089 284 2 1 365 2 1 1,539 8 1 5 1 4,603 9432 1 46.90 67 1 2 1,844 464 10 1 275 6 1 683 15 2 6 1 5,563 1,156 2,303 2,773 48,393 17,987 7,423 21,399 140,637 Population Mobility- Below- Limited ---PAGE BREAK--- 5—10 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on April 21, 2011 t r a n s i t P L A N 5 5 5.5) TRANSIT STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS The Red Apple Transit Study identified several recommendations for modifying the existing system to meet future need. The recommendations needing minimal to no funding increases would occur within the next five years. Others that require additional funding could be completed within ten years. Please see the Red Apple Transit Final Report for full details on these recommendations. A simple, but effective change includes adding in new bus stops to the current routes to reduce the service gaps. These new stop locations would create reasonable walking distances for residents in nearby neighborhoods. Additionally, these stops could have shelters built when funding allows. In Farmington, any future transit expansion will require the conversion of the one directional loop system into a two-directional line route system. In the Transit Study, a linear system has been proposed that would run along many of the city’s arterial streets and link popular public destinations from all parts of the city. The line routes would also create several more transfer points. All-day service would run from McGee Park to the Four Corners Regional Airport and from Flora Vista to west side of Farmington (Map 5-1). On the regional side, the existing routes should seek funding to provide additional runs each day to close the operational gaps. An additional run during the mid-morning and the mid-afternoon has been recommended. Aztec and Bloomfield should also consider creating a new route between the cities (Map 5-2). Other recommendations include starting evening service for the Farmington routes and developing a marketing program to inform the public about identified changes to the system. One improvement that will be necessary before any type of expansion will be the location of a transit hub within the City of Farmington. The hub should be located in the vicinity of residential and commercial development and should be accessible to pedestrians and bicyclists. Once a location is established, modifications to the Farmington routes can occur. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 5—11 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on April 21, 2011 t r a n s i t P L A N 5 5 MAP 5-1 – Proposed Linear Route System in Farmington ---PAGE BREAK--- 5—12 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on April 21, 2011 t r a n s i t P L A N 5 5 MAP 5-2 – Proposed Regional Transit Route System ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 5—13 Adopted on April 15, 2010; Amended on April 21, 2011 t r a n s i t P L A N 5 5 5.6) TRANSIT EXPANSION BEYOND 2020 While the Transit Study offers recommendations to 2020, this section identifies further areas of study to be consistent with the 2035 planning horizon of this document. With the understanding that Crouch Mesa is one of the fastest growth areas of the MPO, a transit system for the land area within the three cities should be planned for to accommodate future growth. CR 350, Wildflower Pkwy/CR 390, CR 3000, CR 3150, and the proposed Piñon Hills Blvd extension provide key arterials for developing a route structure. Within Aztec and Bloomfield, feeder routes that circulate through these cities would carry passengers to the existing regional routes and would serve many popular destinations. 5.7) TRANSIT POLICIES To support implementation of an expanded transit system and to promote efficiency, Red Apple Transit should use the following policies as guidance: • Ensure all bus stops are ADA accessible and that sidewalks are constructed to provide direct access to the stops • Provide bus shelters at main public destinations • Encourage mixed use development and higher density areas that support transit • Identify activity and retail centers and business parks that serve as transfer hubs for transit routes • Monitor and modify transit service in response to future growth and changes in development patterns • Develop a long term funding strategy for sustaining the expansion of the system ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 6—1 Adopted on April 15, 2010 BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN PLA B I C Y C L E / P E D E S T R I A N P L A N 6.1) OVERVIEW The Farmington MPO and the four local municipalities adopted a Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan for the cities of Farmington, Aztec, and Bloomfield and the surrounding communities of San Juan County in June 2008. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan is intended to provide residents and visitors with more options to get to and from their destinations. The plan is a guiding document that was the result of strong input from the MPO member agencies and the participants of the Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Group (BPAG). Overall, the walking and biking system should provide more mode choices that help to preserve and enhance the quality of life in urbanized areas. Regional projects identified in the Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan were ranked and prioritized by the MPO as part of the MTP development process. These projects will create a regional bicycle and pedestrian network that links the three cities and surrounding communities. The Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan outlines policies and recommended standards for implementation as new developments occur, as new roads are built, and as existing infrastructure is reconstructed. Various funding and implementation strategies are described in order to assist the agencies involved with planning and developing the preferred walking and biking network. 6.2) PURPOSE and NEED The purpose of the Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan guides future development and needs statements strive to provide a balance that meets the needs of all users of the system: 6 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- 6—2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 B i c y c l e p e d e s t r i a n P L A N 6 6 • The purpose of the Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan is to link communities, provide access to parks, schools, residences and businesses, encourage walking and biking for commuting, and improve the health of the citizens and the communities within the Farmington MPO boundaries. • There is a need to serve those who do and those who do not currently bike and walk on a regular basis. These persons include: children; the elderly, commuters, students (elementary through college), and persons with disabilities. • There is a need to improve pedestrian and bicyclist access from residences to destinations such as parks, schools, medical facilities, shopping centers, libraries, and places of employment. • There is a need to educate motorists and the general public about the rights and responsibilities of bicyclists and pedestrians who use the roads and sidewalks, respectively. 6.3) GOALS and OBJECTIVES With assistance from the BPAG and the member entities, a list of goals and objectives were developed, all of which fall within the framework of the goals described in the MPO Metropolitan Transportation Plan. GOALS Goal 1 - Encourage kids to ride bikes as a life-long, healthy habit. Goal 2 - Increase the quality and quantity of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in a strategic manner. Goal 3 - Promote the idea of walking and biking for commuting as well as for recreation. Goal 4 - Educate motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians about bicyclist and pedestrian rights and responsibilities for the proper use of roads, sidewalks, and paths. OBJECTIVES Link resources and programs, such as Safe Routes to School, to improve unsafe walking and biking locations. Encourage and support groups (e.g. bike clubs and stores, police departments) to provide bicycle safety equipment. Develop education programs that clearly define rules for safe walking and biking to motorists, children, and adults. Collect data on bicycle and pedestrian trips as a way to evaluate the effectiveness of walking and biking facilities. Identify the current deficiencies in the bicycle/pedestrian network and develop a method to eliminate gaps in the existing bicycle and pedestrian system. Monitor TIP project descriptions to ensure that bicycle and pedestrian facilities are included where appropriate. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 6—3 Adopted on April 15, 2010 B i c y c l e p e d e s t r i a n P L A N 6 6 OBJECTIVES Identify locations for bicycle and pedestrian facilities and amenities, such as bicycle racks at civic buildings and safe, convenient connections to transit stops. Develop the MPO to be the clearinghouse for collecting and updating data on bicycle and pedestrian activity (pedestrian counts, surveys) and making the data accessible for entity staff, elected officials, and the public. Increase public awareness of pedestrians and bicyclists. Support the efforts of local municipalities in including bicycle and pedestrian facilities as components of their capital programs and site review approval processes. Develop walking/biking and trails maps for use by local residents, visitors, and others. Publish information that outlines safety tips and rules of the road responsibilities for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians regarding the appropriate use of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Encourage and promote multi-modal strategies to all those involved with the planning and design of transportation facilities. 6.4) WALKING and BIKING IMPROVEMENTS Walking and biking facility improvements were identified during development of the Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan by collecting information from city plans, proposed river trail plans, and the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP). With input from the BPAG, additional improvements were incorporated into the plan’s development. Identified projects were then divided into two groups: regionally significant and local. Regional projects are defined as those that connect two or more cities, get a person across town, or follow the rivers. These projects were the focus of prioritization efforts by the MPO. Local projects are smaller in scale and primarily serve neighborhoods or other specific areas of the cities. The local governments will decide how to fund and prioritize their own local projects. The plan serves as a mechanism for the identification of corridors to preserve for future walking and biking improvements. For many of the regional projects identified, this plan indicates where corridors should be preserved for future bicycle and pedestrian projects. 6.5) BICYCLE and PEDESTRIAN PRIORITIES The MPO performed ranking exercises to develop prioritized lists of regional bicycle/pedestrian improvements. Approved criteria were used to rank and evaluate the regional projects. The ranked projects are shown in Map 6-1. The first 10 projects (Table 6-1) will serve as the critical projects for the MPO. The Farmington MPO and the participating entities will work together to secure funding for these projects. The remaining ranked projects are found in Appendix C and are provided in the event additional funding becomes available. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6—4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 B i c y c l e p e d e s t r i a n P L A N 6 6 TABLE 6-1 – Tier 1 Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Priorities in the MPO Map Num City or Area Road/Facility Name From Road/ Place To Road/ Place Type of Facility Location Type Surface Connects to Length EST. COST Avg Ranked Score 8 Fmtn Butler to San Juan College along Sunrise Butler San Juan College Multimodal Multi-Use Path Concrete residential, college, transit 4700 $137,000 20.6 38 East Blanco Blvd US 550 N (1st St) US 64 Bike lanes and sidewalks On road Concrete residential, school 14200 $831,000 20.1 43 Fmtn San Juan and East Main San Juan/ Butler E Main/ Piñon Hills Wide sidewalk/ path Multi-Use Path Hard Residential, retail 24500 $712,000 18.6 14A Fmtn Pinon Hills Blvd 30th Sports Complex Bike lane (westbound) On road Hard Park 3500 $143,000 18.6 11 County Wildflower Parkway Approx. at Yarrow CR 350 Multimodal Multi-Use Path Hard Residential 19500 $566,000 18.5 37 County CR 350 US 64 NM 516 Bike lanes On road Existing Residential, retail 39700 $1,622,000 18.4 21 B,F,C Path parallel to US 64 Andrea/US 64 Ruth Ln/US 64 Multimodal Multi-Use Path Hard Retail 42000 $1,220,000 18.2 19 Aztec, Connect from Animas River trail to Bloomfield Hartman Park (Aztec) Blanco/Ruth Ln (Bloomfield) Multimodal Multi-Use Path Hard Residential, school, park 37300 $1,084,000 17.8 49 Aztec Oliver- McWilliams Trail 50 acre open space Ruins Road trail junction Multimodal On- and off- road Hard Residential, school, park 8600' on- road & 4600' off- road $986,000 17.3 45 Aztec Ruins Road Trail Chaco/NM 516 Trail Junction Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines Aztec Ruins, residential 4600 $42,000 17.3 Estimated Cost (based on cost of material times length of project: $7,343,000 TIER ONE PRIORITIES ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 6—5 Adopted on April 15, 2010 B i c y c l e p e d e s t r i a n P L A N 6 6 MAP 6-1 – Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements by Tier ---PAGE BREAK--- 6—6 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 B i c y c l e p e d e s t r i a n P L A N 6 6 6.6) BICYCLE and PEDESTRIAN POLICIES Policies provide guidelines for future development of the walking and biking network. The policies offer an overall framework as to how and why bicycle and pedestrian facilities need to be implemented as cities grow and new roads are built. • For all new residential and commercial development, encourage the provision of complete pedestrian and bicycle facilities to create consistent networks rather than installing these facilities on a piece-meal basis at the time when the property is built. • For rural areas (or low density areas) reasonable efforts should be made to obtain right-of-way (ROW) for future construction of pedestrian and bicycle facilities. • Construct appropriate pedestrian and biking facilities simultaneously with the construction of new road projects and major road reconstruction projects for roads classified as collector and above. • Locate applicable bicycle and pedestrian facilities in a safe and efficient manner on all arterial and collector streets. For example, for arterial roads with a speed limit greater than 30mph, consider building a separated multi-use trail in the vicinity of the road. Safety and convenience should be analyzed when determining whether to construct on-road or off-road facilities. • Transit stops shall be ADA accessible and be connected to residential neighborhoods, commercial buildings, and retail shops by pedestrian and bicycle facilities. • Each road classification should have a typical road section that incorporates applicable bicycle and pedestrian facilities. • Maintain/preserve cross-development access in new developments so that new construction does not block off planned biking/walking paths. • Provide a hearing process and public notification if a new development will block, disrupt, or interfere with an existing walk and/or bike route. • Provide posted signs and on-road pavement markings to let motorists and bicyclists know when bike lanes end so that motorists and bicyclists know where/when to yield or merge. • Publish the “rules of the road” for bicyclists, pedestrians, and motorists and make these publications available at public facilities such as libraries, city halls, motor vehicle division offices, and similar places. • Sweep highway shoulders and bike lanes on a regular basis to minimize debris that has the potential to cause accidents. • Preserve ROW for future facilities, use existing corridors, and ensure consistency with adopted plans. Bicycle and pedestrian projects can reduce or eliminate ROW acquisition costs when implemented in existing corridors. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 6—7 Adopted on April 15, 2010 B i c y c l e p e d e s t r i a n P L A N 6 6 6.7) BICYCLE and PEDESTRIAN RECOMMENDED STANDARDS Standards provide specific criteria for the construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. This enables users of the system to have certain expectations about where facilities are located, how they should look, and how they will function. The standards described here are recommended practices by the entities as they implement bicycle and pedestrian projects. Where applicable, it is strongly recommended that facilities are constructed based on guidelines set forth in the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities and the AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities. For signage and markings, guidelines in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) should be followed. Facility Description Bicycle & Pedestrian Recommended Standards Sidewalks  Width  Buffer Zone  4’ minimum (to meet ADA requirements)  5’-6’ recommended on minor/principal arterials and collectors  Between curb and sidewalk: 3’ minimum; 4’-5’ recommended Curb Cuts  2 curb cuts per corner  Install special texture at corners to identify crosswalk  See applicable ADA requirements (http://www.access-board.gov/adaag/html/adaag.htm) Median Refuge Island  Recommend installing at intersections with roads of 5 lanes or more, where feasible Bicycle Lanes  Width  Lane Markings  Signage  5’ minimum for all road classifications  Use appropriate markings as described in MUTCD  Use appropriate signage as described in MUTCD  Install signs alerting users to limited visibility areas Multi-modal Paths  Location  Corridors with minimal intersections and with available ROW  On rural roads in the vicinity of urban areas ---PAGE BREAK--- 6—8 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 B i c y c l e p e d e s t r i a n P L A N 6 6 Facility Description Bicycle & Pedestrian Recommended Standards  Width  Markings  10’ minimum; 12’ recommended if used by both bicyclists and pedestrians  Use appropriate marking to delineate use by pedestrians and bicyclists Bicycle Routes  Install ‘share the road’ and ‘bicycle route’ signage as described in MUTCD  Provide additional lane width to outside travel lane where possible to accommodate bicyclists  Evaluate speed and volume of identified bike route corridors from a safety perspective. Bicycle Traffic-Actuated Signals  Ensure that loop detectors that detect bicycles are present at signalized intersections Special Bicycle Signal Timing  Provide additional time for bicycle movements through the intersection, where appropriate Additional Recommendations  Shoulders  Traffic Signals  Drainage Grates  Typically 8’ minimum for vehicle emergency  In lieu of sidewalks and/or bike lanes, provide 4’ minimum of asphalt for use by pedestrian/bicyclist, where feasible  Provide adequate green times for bicyclists  Provide adequate crossing time for pedestrians as outlined in MUTCD  Use countdown pedestrian signals  Install bars perpendicular to direction of travel 6.8) BICYCLE and PEDESTRIAN FUNDING STRATEGIES There are several ways to secure funding for the proposed improvements that have been identified. Beyond common funding options from the federal, state, and local levels, the Farmington MPO and the entities should proactively seek out other funding sources, whether through grants, private contributions, or creating a budget dedicated to funding the projects. Funding for the regional improvements will be a primary responsibility of the Farmington MPO. Federal funding that is awarded to entities of the Farmington MPO must be included in the TIP, and subsequently added into the Statewide TIP (STIP). ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 6—9 Adopted on April 15, 2010 B i c y c l e p e d e s t r i a n P L A N 6 6 Federal Funding Walking and biking improvements that focus on serving a transportation commuting purpose stand the greatest chance of receiving federal funding. While not all-inclusive, many regional walking and biking improvements could be funded from the following programs: • National Highway System (NHS) • Surface Transportation Program (STP) • Transportation Enhancements (TPE) • Hazard Elimination • Recreational Trails • Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Local Funding The local governments should dedicate or continue to dedicate a portion of road funding in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to the construction or maintenance of new and existing facilities. Opportunities to apply for grants should be actively pursued. To complement the development of the regional walking and biking system, local governments should consider: • Funding pedestrian and bicycle improvements at the same time new roads are built or existing roads are retrofitted. • Setting aside local funds that are dedicated to walking and biking improvements. • Road impact fees that may be used for motorized and non-motorized improvements. 6.9) BICYCLE and PEDESTRIAN IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES The Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan outlines several strategies for funding projects and implementing policies. Strategy 1 – Responsibilities and Support The Farmington MPO will coordinate the Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan. Activities will include: • Develop a prioritization process for regional projects • Seek federal funding and work with the local entities and NMDOT to obtain it • Monitor and update the Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan as necessary • Ensure the plan is consistent with the MTP and other comprehensive transportation plans • Assist with development review to ensure new subdivisions and businesses follow approved policies • Consult with local organizations and the general public who are involved with walking and biking improvements ---PAGE BREAK--- 6—10 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 B i c y c l e p e d e s t r i a n P L A N 6 6 The local governments will develop the elements of the Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan. Activities will include: • Construct applicable walking and biking facilities in conjunction with maintenance projects • Incorporate applicable elements of this plan into local planning documents and processes • Dedicate local funding to the construction of new pedestrian and bicycle facilities • Modify the CIP to fund walking and biking improvements • Ensure that all traffic control plans comply with MUTCD • Review the Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan as part of the subdivision and development review process • Coordinate local projects among the cities in preparation for the regional projects • Map out projects using assessor and township maps and aerial photography to better define locations for the projects Strategy 2 – Multi-modal Improvements The importance of incorporating multi-modal aspects into all road projects is becoming increasing more critical. From the national level to the local level, legislation is being passed to implement “complete streets”, meaning roads must accommodate all types of users. The Farmington MPO and its members should actively pursue ways to incorporate multi- modal elements into new improvements. Strategy 3 – Educate and Encourage Walking and Biking Public awareness and acceptance of walking and biking as a viable means of transportation will require the use of effective education and encouragement methods. While the Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan describes tools for providing more mode choice, the MPO should investigate ways to get people involved and interested in walking and biking: Strategy 4 – Maintain the Facilities Sufficient maintenance of current walking and biking facilities requires staff time and funding. Regular inspection, cleaning, and striping are critical to user safety. Strategy 5 – Pedestrian and Bicycle Amenities Pedestrians and bicyclists routinely need amenities to complement their walking or biking trip. Possible ideas for cities and local business to implement include installing benches and bike racks at public destinations, and posting signs and informational kiosks. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 6—11 Adopted on April 15, 2010 B i c y c l e p e d e s t r i a n P L A N 6 6 6.10) BICYCLE and PEDESTRIAN ACTIONS The Farmington MPO will investigate implementing these actions to further promote the plan: • Create a permanent bicycle and pedestrian committee to ensure that bicycle/pedestrian planning activities and projects constructed by the entities within the Farmington MPO are consistent with the strategies and policies outlined in the Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan. • Create a Pedestrian Safety Action Plan, which would be integrated into the Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan and would serve as a self-contained document. • Collect data on bicycle and pedestrian trips in an effort to prioritize investments. • Establish bicycle/pedestrian targets for the creation of a mode split component in the MPO traffic model. • Assist local governments and the school districts with applying for federal Safe Routes to School funding. • Create a Bicycle Suitability Map. • Create a budget that dedicates specific funding to bicycle and pedestrian projects annually. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 7—1 Adopted on April 15, 2010 Other modal connec O t h e r m o d a l c o n n e c t i o n s 7.1) OVERVIEW Transportation systems must be multimodal. Beyond the typical modes of travel, the region's transportation system must consider the movement of people and freight as well as airports and potential rail facilities. Existing and future intermodal connecting points are a vital part of the system MTP's goals, objectives and policies. Enhancing freight mobility improves regional economic development while simultaneously minimizing impacts to the neighborhoods and the environment. The growth of air cargo and its linkage to freight corridors will require new and existing road facilities to ensure appropriate transport of goods. Now that passenger rail is recognized as a viable option between Santa Fe and Albuquerque, this area could stand to benefit from a commuter rail connection from Farmington to Albuquerque. Establishing an equestrian trail network will maintain the rural nature of many parts of the county. 7.2) FREIGHT With an expansive mineral extraction industry and the need to bring in finished products to support the expanding retail sector, freight movement is an important need throughout the Farmington MPO region. Now, as the movement of goods continues to grow, the result will be more trucks, and possibly an increase in air cargo transport traffic using the transportation system. More trucks on the region’s state highways will require capacity improvements and route upgrades. Finally, intermodal exchanges, locally and regionally, will need to be enhanced to improve the efficiency of goods delivery. 7 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- 7—2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 O t h e r m o d a l c o n n e c t i o n s 7 7 The role of the Farmington MPO in freight planning is to develop a framework for facilitating and enhancing freight mobility and goods movement in the region, improving the region’s economic competitiveness, and minimizing negative environmental and community impacts within the MPO region. 7.3) NMDOT FREIGHT STUDY In 2008, NMDOT published a statewide Multimodal Freight Study. Although the focus was on the interstate corridors and the Albuquerque region, some highlights about the MPO region include: • US 550 is an identified freight corridor that links the Farmington area to regional, state, and national markets; US 550 is critical to the oil and gas industry. • US 550 has a projected truck Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) of 3,000 to 7,000 in 2035. • There is a strain on US 550 infrastructure conditions and there is concern that maintenance for these roads is deferred to other areas of the state. • US 64 between Farmington and Bloomfield has a projected truck AADT of 7,000 to 15,000 in 2035. Area truck routes, as stated in the Freight Study, are as follows: Federally-Designated US 64 from Farmington west to Arizona NM 516 from US 64 to US 550 US 550 from Aztec to Colorado State Designated US 64 Farmington to Bloomfield US 550 from I-25 to Aztec NM 371 from Farmington south ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 7—3 Adopted on April 15, 2010 O t h e r m o d a l c o n n e c t i o n s 7 7 MAP 7-1 – Truck Routes in the Farmington MPO ---PAGE BREAK--- 7—4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 O t h e r m o d a l c o n n e c t i o n s 7 7 7.4) FUTURE FREIGHT CONSIDERATIONS Future freight considerations for this area: • What does Bloomfield plan for freight movement, given freight traffic to/from Colorado and Albuquerque as well as the proposed industrial park north of town? Will all truck traffic rely on US 550? • How will the potential industrial corridor of CR 350 impact the area road network? • How will future industrial expansion affect Farmington and Aztec? In order to facilitate the development of a freight framework, the following considerations should be taken into account to support the vision of an accessible, safe, and efficient surface transportation system that integrates convenience, affordability and improved air quality: • Increase the efficiency of the existing transportation system and decrease traffic congestion through coordination of traffic operations and development of strategies to reduce travel demand at both the regional and corridor levels. • Develop and implement operational improvements for the management of traffic along major travel corridors, including incident management, intersection improvements, construction coordination, access management, signal re-timing programs, and freight management. • Monitor freight travel patterns and identify preferred truck routes and the implementation of truck lanes. 7.5) AIR CARGO The potential for growth of air cargo at either the Farmington or Aztec airports is tied to the growth and movement of products within the Four Corners region. Most of the air cargo transported via the airport involves goods moving to or from regional sorting centers and warehouses in Albuquerque or within New Mexico. Mail and other products are shipped via air cargo to facilitate “just-in-time” arrivals. Improvements in area arterials, such as Piñon Hills Extension Bridge and the Aztec East Arterial, are needed to facilitate possible increases in air cargo. Another improvement to serve the airports which merits implementation is preserving the corridor and future construction of the Northern Route to allow establishment of a connection between both airports and facilities located in Southwest Colorado. The Northern Route would be a proposed relief route to NM 516 and would connect from the northeast part of Farmington to north and west parts of Aztec. Being in the vicinity of the Aztec Airport, this new route would provide convenient mobility for shipping freight and air cargo. It is to note that Aztec has considered an industrial park to be located near the Aztec Airport and currently has expanded industrial parks in the south part of the city along US 550. A market analysis and runway justification study may be needed if gradual increase in aircraft operations occurs over the next 20 years. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 7—5 Adopted on April 15, 2010 O t h e r m o d a l c o n n e c t i o n s 7 7 7.6) COMMUTER RAIL/LIGHT RAIL The RailRunner is the first commuter line in New Mexico, running from Santa Fe to Belen and serving Albuquerque. The rail line has been a great success in the past four years and has witnessed increasing ridership as new stops opened along the route. Possible expansion could see the RailRunner reaching as far south as Las Cruces. With a main rail corridor already in place, New Mexico has the potential for creating branch lines that serve various cities to the east and west of Albuquerque. As an idea for a long term, potential project the MPO and its entities should consider the costs and benefits of a spur route from the RailRunner to connect this area to the Albuquerque region. On a more local scale, the MPO could stand to benefit from a light rail system that serves the three cities and other unincorporated communities such as Kirtland and Flora Vista. A light rail system would provide a fast and convenient mode choice. The system could parallel the existing roadways or be integrated into those corridors. Light rail would be an excellent opportunity for transit-oriented developments to occur and would strengthen the connection between transportation and land use planning. At one time there was a freight rail line that transported goods between Farmington and Durango, CO. Although the line has been abandoned and many segments of the corridor have been sold to private ownership, reconnecting the Four Corners region with rail may be a viable option for transporting people and helping to generate economic development. Moving goods by rail could alleviate future truck traffic which in turn helps reduce deterioration of current infrastructure. 7.7) EQUESTRIAN Horseback riding is a popular activity which speaks to the agricultural history of this area. There are times when riders need to use public highways to reach remote trail destinations. Horseback riders must ride defensively, and always anticipate the unexpected. In identifying potential locations for equestrian trails, safety concerns are crucial. Different situations to be aware of include minimizing the potential for conflicts between equestrians and other modes of transportation (bridges, bike/pedestrian trail crossings, motorized and nonmotorized traffic). There are currently no specifically-designated equestrian trail systems within the MPO region; however, equestrians are permitted to use the riverwalk trail in Farmington and wide shoulders on state owned highways. The MPO should consider working with local equestrian stakeholders to identify key locations for equestrian trails. The trails could be mechanism for attracting future residents who enjoy this activity. ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 8—1 Adopted on April 15, 2010 safety s a f e t y 8.1) OVERVIEW As one of the eight planning factors outlined in SAFETEA-LU, safety needs to be addressed for all modes of transportation. Safety is addressed during design of new roadways, intersections, and bicycle/pedestrian facilities. Safety is measured by the reduction in crash rates and can be achieved through the implementation of a variety of existing and innovative techniques. 8.2) ROADWAY SAFETY The State of New Mexico ranks fairly high above the national scale for vehicle crash and fatality rates (NMDOT Traffic Safety Bureau 2006 Annual Crash Report). NMDOT completed its Comprehensive Transportation Safety Plan (CTSP) in 2006 which presented 12 safety emphasis areas and 94 strategies. As of early 2009, nearly 70 percent of the strategies are being implemented to some degree. Data has shown that since 2006, total highway fatalities dropped by 15 percent, a good indication that the strategies in the CTSP are having an effect. The NMDOT Traffic Safety Bureau has data on the number of crashes for each entity from 1998 to 2007. Figure 8-1 illustrates crash data from 2004 to 2007. Aztec witnessed a gradual increase from 2004 to 2006 but had a significant reduction in 2007. Crashes in Bloomfield have dropped since 2005. During this timeframe, Farmington has had almost a consistent number of crashes. San Juan County has seen a slight increase from 2004 to 2006. 8 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- 8—2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 s a f e t y 8 8 FIGURE 8-1 – Number of Crashes by Entity 1601 1571 1689 1531 1018 1049 829 799 191 253 219 214 134 148 172 175 0 200 400 [PHONE REDACTED] 1200 1400 1600 1800 2007 2006 2005 2004 Local Entity Traffic Crash Data - 2004-2007 Bloomfield Aztec SJ County Farmington **Note: The totals for San Juan County exclude the totals shown for the three cities ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 8—3 Adopted on April 15, 2010 s a f e t y 8 8 Table 8-1 provides a three year comparison of crash rates by entity to the State’s crash rate. Bloomfield and San Juan County fall below the state’s rate. The crash rate is the number of crashes divided by entity population, times 1000. Roadway Safety Goals The focus of vehicle safety should be on reducing the chances of a crash occurring through either infrastructure improvements or policy enforcement:  Fund safety studies for area corridors with high levels of crashes to determine what measures can be taken to reduce the number of crashes  Fund corridor access management studies that reduce conflict points and control turning movements Table 8-1 - Crash Rates by Entity (per thousand people) 2005 2006 2007 3 Year Change Aztec 31 36 28 -3 Bloomfield 23 20 19 -4 Farmington 39 36 38 -1 San Juan County 24 23 22 -2 State of New Mexico 25 25 25 0 (Source: NMDOT Traffic Safety Bureau – 2005-2007 Annual Reports for each entity; Crash rate is number of crashes divided by entity population, times 1000) 8.3) INTERSECTION SAFETY Most often crashes occur at an intersection. A typical intersection includes 32 conflict points based on through and turning movements. Driver inattentiveness and red light running violations are common causes for intersection crashes. Pedestrians and bicyclists often need to negotiate an intersection, which can increase the potential for conflict even more. ---PAGE BREAK--- 8—4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 s a f e t y 8 8 Several approaches are already in place for making intersections safer:  Improving corner sight distances by keeping corners free of signs, landscaping, and other obstacles  Replace a signalized intersection with a roundabout  Installing pedestrian countdown signals  Installing pavement flashers that are activated by pedestrians  Painting crosswalks or using highly visible material for crosswalks Top Crash Locations Crash data obtained from the NMDOT Traffic Safety Bureau describes certain corridors and specific intersections that have the highest number of crashes (Table 8-2). The MPO can use this information to inventory and prioritize safety improvements to achieve a reduction in the number of crashes at these locations. For each entity, these roads tend to have the highest volumes of daily traffic. Table 8-2 – Road Intersections with the Most Crashes by Entity between 2005 and 2007 Aztec Total Farmington Total Bloomfield Total  NM 516 (Aztec Blvd) at Oliver 30  20th Street at Butler 80  US 550 (1st Street) at Blanco Blvd 16  NM 516 at Lt. Plant Rd 42  20th Street at E. Main St 131  US 550 (1st Street) at US 64 52  NM 516 at Ruins Rd 24  NM 516 at E. Main St 110  US 550 (Bloomfield Blvd) at US 64 47  NM 516 at Chaco 29  NM 516 at Cliffside 89  US 550 (Main Ave) at NM 516 21  NM 516 at 30th Street 130 (Source: NMDOT Traffic Safety Bureau – 2005-2007 Annual Reports for each entity) ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 8—5 Adopted on April 15, 2010 s a f e t y 8 8 Intersection Safety Techniques The FHWA, based on the National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 500 - Volumes 5 & 12, is considering new technologies to address intersection safety. Pilot projects using some of the techniques are in place; however, the FHWA acknowledges that substantial data has not yet been collected regarding the full benefit of these technologies:  Investigate the potential benefit of innovative technologies for pedestrians crossing at intersections  Raised pavement markers for illuminating crosswalks or turning movements at intersections  Install red signal enforcement lights to reduce red light running violations  Embedding LEDs into traffic control signs for better visibility Intersection Safety Goals  Maintain clear sight lines at all intersections by developing and enforcing standards that prevent  Construct applicable pedestrian amenities that increase safety at intersections with multiple lanes 8.4) BICYCLE and PEDESTRIAN SAFETY In the State of New Mexico, bicyclists have all the rights and responsibilities as a vehicle when traveling on a roadway. Through education and better awareness, motorists and bicyclists can share the road and reduce the chances of potential conflict. Table 8-3 shows the number of crashes involving bicyclists by entity in 2006 and 2007. Table 8-3 – Number of Crashes Involving Bicyclists on the Local and Statewide Level in 2006 and 2007 New Mexico San Juan Co. Farmington Aztec Bloomfield 2006 2007 2006 2007 2006 2007 2006 2007 2006 2007 Crashes Involving Bicyclists 389 N/A 13 21 7 11 3 5 1 1 Fatalities 5 N/A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (Source: NMDOT Traffic Safety Bureau – 2006-2007 Annual Reports for each entity) ---PAGE BREAK--- 8—6 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 s a f e t y 8 8 The 2007 Annual Report from the Traffic Safety Bureau indicates improper driving and driver inattention are the leading causes of crashes. From 2004 to 2007, there were a total of 87 pedestrian crashes combined within the three cities. In San Juan County – and excluding the three cities, there were 57 pedestrian crashes during this timeframe. Figure 8-2 and 8-3 provide details on pedestrian crashes in the four entities from 2004-2007. Bicycle/Pedestrian Safety Goals  Publish information that outlines safety tips to educate motorists about the rights of bicyclists  The entities should inventory and prioritize sidewalks that need to be reconstructed or retrofitted  Build bike lanes or bicycle facilities and sidewalks at the same time new roads are built or major reconstruction of existing roads occurs  Develop a Complete Streets policy that promotes equal consideration of needs for motorists, transit users, bicyclists, and pedestrians  Implement innovative crosswalk technologies that reduce vehicle speeds and make pedestrians more visible to motorists ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 8—7 Adopted on April 15, 2010 s a f e t y 8 8 Figure 8-2 –Pedestrian Crashes by Entity from 2004-2007 Figure 8-3 – Pedestrian Crashes with Alcohol-Involved by Entity from 2004-2007 Aztec Bloomfield Farmington County 2004 2 5 4 9 2005 6 2 13 15 2006 4 1 11 7 2007 1 1 14 4 Aztec Bloomfield Farmington County 2004 1 1 5 3 2005 0 2 2 1 2006 0 1 5 14 2007 0 0 6 4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 2004 2005 2006 2007 Aztec Bloomfield Farmington County 0 4 8 12 16 2004 2005 2006 2007 Aztec Bloomfield Farmington County ---PAGE BREAK--- 8—8 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 s a f e t y 8 8 8.5) SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL The Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program is an initiative to make walking and biking to school a safer endeavor for students through engineering improvements, educational trainings, encouragement activities, and enforcement practices. The program has been implemented by many schools and cities over the years. Marin County in California has been the most noteworthy SRTS program in the United States. In 2008, stakeholders in the City of Farmington, led by a Safe Routes to School Coordinator, created a SRTS Committee to encourage participation in the SRTS program. The Coordinator started with holding events and identifying safety concerns at Mesa Verde Elementary. As the program grew, interest spread to two other schools in Farmington – McKinley Elementary and Apache Elementary – through the efforts of parents at those schools. In 2009 the City of Farmington successfully received Phase 1 funding through the federal SRTS program. The funding has been used for various school activities to promote the program as well as for developing Action Plans for the participating schools. The Action Plans outline improvements and strategies and those involved with achieving safer walking and biking routes for our students. Various improvements have been identified by each of the three participating schools: Apache Elementary McKinley Elementary Mesa Verde Elementary  Improve sidewalks near the school grounds  Mark a school zone  Delineate walking and biking areas from vehicle drop-off areas  Construct a new pedestrian walkway along the east side of the parking lot to connect the school building to the sidewalk along Apache St  Evaluate traffic conditions along Monterey St. to determine if signage or engineering improvements are needed  Increase the size of waiting areas at intersections that have crosswalks ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 8—9 Adopted on April 15, 2010 s a f e t y 8 8 The SRTS Coordinator and other parent volunteers have prepared several safety trainings and presentations at the schools. As parents and students are educated, they become more inclined to participate and assist with promoting the program. The schools are in the early stages of developing walking and biking goals. Through the efforts of those involved, each school will soon develop a successful and sustainable SRTS program. Safe Routes to School Goals  Achieve a 20% walking ratio for each participating school  Have other schools join the Safe Routes to School program each year  Perform at least one SRTS activity at each participating school each year ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 9—1 Adopted on April 15, 2010 security s e c u r i t y 9.1) OVERVIEW As one of eight planning factors, each MPO must plan for security as a way to safeguard travelers and the transportation system. Security planning involves effective communication and coordination among various emergency and enforcement agencies. Furthermore, plans for how the transportation system can effectively serve the needs of the public in the event of an emergency must be readily understood and utilized by these agencies. 9.2) SAN JUAN COUNTY EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN San Juan County has an established Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) that outlines policies and procedures for the four governments to save lives, minimize injuries, protect property, preserve functioning civil government, and perform other essential activities as a result of any natural, technological or terrorist incident. A comprehensive evacuation plan is included in the EOP that describes the procedures to be conducted and the responsibilities of various agencies in the event of incident or emergency. 9 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- 9—2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 s e c u r i t y 9 9 9.3) SECURITY PLANNING and THE ROLE OF THE MPO While the role of the Farmington MPO may be small in terms of security planning, the MPO can be instrumental in identifying evacuation routes and can partner with various agencies to create a regional emergency response plan. The MPO is encouraged to take the following steps related to security planning:  Review local and statewide plans for emergency planning/security elements  Incorporate transit security planning into the MTP  Define the role of public transportation operators, the MPO, and the state in promoting security  Identify critical facilities and transportation system elements for evacuation planning  Develop security goals and appropriate strategies  Work with emergency response agencies for disseminating information to the public as quickly as possible There are a few roles an MPO can perform with regards to security planning:  Traditional – The MPO incorporates system operations and management (O&M) into its ongoing transportation planning activities. The focus would be on specific O&M projects that arise as part of the transportation planning process, but the primary responsibility for operations-type projects would rest elsewhere, most likely with the region’s operations agencies.  Convener – The MPO would act as a forum where operations plans could be discussed and coordinated with other plans in the region. Regular meetings on operations issues would be held, but the MPO would still not be responsible for developing a regional operations plan.  Champion – The MPO works aggressively to develop a regional consensus on operations planning. MPO planners work with operating agencies to create programs and projects that improve system performance. The MPO takes the lead in developing regional agreements on coordinated operations. Currently, the MPO does not have the staff or resources to develop or implement security measures. It is very likely that the MPO, as a regional transportation planning forum, could program funding for O&M strategies for improving the abilities of the transportation system to handle emergency situations. Additional roles and responsibilities could be further studied and/or analyzed at a later time. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 9—3 Adopted on April 15, 2010 s e c u r i t y 9 9 9.4) SECURITY GOALS and STRATEGIES In order to perform any type of role related to security, the MPO should consider the following strategies for achieving security goals:  Provide a forum for security/safety agencies to coordinate prevention strategies  Coordinate with security officials in development of prevention strategies  Fund new strategies/technologies/projects that can help prevent events  Conduct vulnerability analyses on regional transportation facilities and services  Secure management of data and information on transportation system vulnerabilities  Develop techniques for disseminating information to the public in the event of an emergency  Fund communications systems, such as ITS, and other technologies to speed response to incident 9.5) EVACUATION PLANNING In coordination with San Juan County Office of Emergency Management, the MPO has identified primary and secondary evacuation routes in the event that a security incident occurs (Map 9-1):  Primary Routes – US 64, US 550, NM 516, Piñon Hills Blvd, CR 350, and NM 170  Secondary Routes – NM 371, Twin Peaks/CR 6480, Wildflower/CR 390, East Blanco Blvd, NM 574, 20th St, 30th St, and Butler. It should be noted that the San Juan County already has an emergency alert system in place which sends out radio messages to inform the public about severe weather or other incidents. It is conceivable that the identified evacuation routes could be incorporated into this alert system so as to direct the public to which routes to use. 9.6) TRANSIT SECURITY All efforts should be made to ensure the safety and security of public transit users. The perceptions of an unsafe system may discourage or prevent people from using the system. While crime on Red Apple Transit is minimal, preventive measures should be taken, such as:  Bus stops and shelters should be well-lit and located in places that are highly visible  Install on-board cameras to discourage crime and monitor activities ---PAGE BREAK--- 9—4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 s e c u r i t y 9 9 MAP 9-1 – Identification of Evacuation Routes in the Farmington MPO ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 10—1 Adopted on April 15, 2010 Trans T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P o l i c i e s And strategies A n d s t r a t e g i e s 10.1) OVERVIEW The following sections focus on specific areas that relate to or are affected by transportation decisions. By concentrating on these areas, the MPO can make better decisions for achieving its vision, mission, and goals. 10.2) TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE Transportation and land use are intrinsically linked – one affects the other and each must be considered as cities continue to grow. The location of various land uses and development patterns will dictate the infrastructure that is needed to serve these uses. Land uses tend to put a strain on transportation infrastructure, especially if developments are spread out across a city. As a result, the vehicle becomes the only practical choice for travel. Transit, walking, and biking become ineffective due to long distances and safety concerns. Likewise, this type of transportation facilities will encourage and attract particular land uses. Principal arterials draw businesses and big box stores while smaller roadways, such as collectors and minor arterials, tend to attract residential and small local shops and professional businesses. 10 10 ---PAGE BREAK--- 10—2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 T r a n s p o r t a t i o n p o l i c i e s & s t r a t e g i e s 10 10 Smart transportation and land use decisions increase the viable options people have for accessing opportunities, goods, services, and other resources to improve the quality of their lives. A balance between transportation and land use must be achieved. The MPO, along with NMDOT, local transit systems, and the entity planning staffs must develop partnerships and incorporate land use considerations into their transportation planning activities. The following policies and strategies should be implemented to achieve the transportation/land use balance: • Develop a Complete Streets policy that integrates all transportation modes into the design and construction of roadways • Adopt a major thoroughfare plan for the MPO area that preserves corridors and prevents future developments from interfering with future corridors • Encourage the development of complimentary land uses • Identify activity centers that become the focal point for a variety of surrounding land uses • Promote reuse and in-fill development to strengthen existing parts of the city • Create transportation and land use master plans for developing areas in San Juan county that are outside the city limits of the three local jurisdictions • Develop a specific budget to construct more walking and biking facilities Source: Iowa Access Management Handbook Land Use Change Increased Land Value Increased Accessibility Arterial Construction/ Improvements Traffic Flow Deterioration Increased Traffic ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 10—3 Adopted on April 15, 2010 T r a n s p o r t a t i o n p o l i c i e s & s t r a t e g i e s 10 10 10.3) ENVIRONMENTAL Transportation decisions have a direct impact on air quality and environmental issues. More vehicles on the road and longer commute increase pollutants emitted into the air. Ozone and particular matter are two of more common pollutants that can be caused by transportation. Standards for these pollutants, which measure how much is allowed to be emitted, is monitored and enforced by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Currently, the Farmington MPO is in attainment for all air quality standards. However, recent data collected at regional monitoring stations and a reduction in the ozone standard to 0.075 parts per million (ppm) have indicated that San Juan County is on the threshold of being in non-compliance for ozone standards (Table 10-1). In January 2010, EPA once again proposed new ozone standards which would reduce the standard to a range of 0.060ppm to 0.070ppm. If this standard goes into effect in August 2010, there is a strong possibility that San Juan County could be designated non- attainment for ozone. As a result, more stringent requirements for the MPO and its transportation planning efforts would go into effect. Violations of air quality standards can lead to federal funds being withheld from the MPO. As of early 2010, the New Mexico Environmental Department (NMED) has focused its efforts on point sources of pollution; that is, what impacts are coal power plants and oil wells having on ozone levels. No research has been conducted as to how vehicles and trucks affect ozone. To avoid falling into non- attainment and the subsequent additional requirements, the MPO should pro-actively implement policies that reduce the sources that contribute to ozone from a transportation standpoint: • Implement ITS elements that reduce congestion • signals on major corridors to improve arterial travel flow movements • New housing, business, and retail developments should be built around transit stops • Encourage the use of walking and biking by creating higher density and mixed-use developments • Research and invest in cleaner fuels that have a smaller impact on air quality ---PAGE BREAK--- 10—4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 T r a n s p o r t a t i o n p o l i c i e s & s t r a t e g i e s 10 10 Table 10-1 – Four Highest 8-Hour Average Ozone Readings 2007-2009 Substation (Farmington) Bloomfield Navajo Lake 2007 0.074 0.074 0.074 0.073 0.071 0.071 0.071 0.069 0.08 0.08 0.079 0.079 2008 0.071 0.070 0.070 0.069 0.065 0.064 0.064 0.063 0.077 0.075 0.069 0.069 2009 0.062 0.061 0.061 0.059 0.056 0.054 0.053 0.052 0.070 0.064 0.062 0.061 3 Year Average 0.067 ppm 0.061 ppm 0.069 ppm Data Readings are shown in Parts per Million (ppm) Source: New Mexico Environmental Department (February 2010) Nationwide, innovative strategies are being discussed or implemented as the newest ways to reduce transportation- related emissions. While typically seen in non-attainment, large metropolitan areas, the MPO may consider investigating the costs and benefits of the following strategies: • Tax drivers based on distance traveled • Charge vehicles to park at public facilities • Implement road pricing, where motorists pay directly for using a particular road or for traveling in certain areas during peak time periods • Create car-sharing programs to minimize personal automobile use • Build rail systems that reduce vehicle trips and promote denser developments • Telecommuting • Incentives from businesses to employees to use other alternatives modes of travel ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 10—5 Adopted on April 15, 2010 T r a n s p o r t a t i o n p o l i c i e s & s t r a t e g i e s 10 10 10.4) SYSTEM PRESERVATION Every effort should be made to preserve the existing transportation system. System preservation can reduce costs over the life of infrastructure. While it is understood that new facilities will need to be built in the future to meet demand, maintaining the existing system reduces costly future improvements, reduces the tendency for urban sprawl to occur, and maintains access to neighborhoods, jobs, and employment centers. The following policies and strategies should be implemented: • Preserve right-of-way (ROW) that allows future expansion of existing roadways without impacting or disrupting adjacent land uses • Select and enact pavement preservation strategies before roadways and bridges require serious repair. • Implement access management strategies to maintain the functionality of road classifications • Implement signal coordination plans for major corridors to reduce congestion and the need for adding more capacity to roadways • Research and implement the use of road diets, which typically replace two travel lanes with bike lanes and/or parking lanes to improve safety. Road diets can reduce the need to construct new facilities. 10.5) INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) are integrated technologies that improve safety and mobility on roadways, coordinate emergency management procedures, and distribute regional traveler information. ITS Program Areas include Traffic Management, Traveler Information, Public Transportation Management, and Emergency Management. The MPO adopted an ITS architecture for the area in November 2006 and renewed it in November 2008. An ITS architecture is a computer software program that an MPO uses to inventory the various ITS elements and stakeholders involved. The Farmington MPO architecture describes the stakeholders who are involved with ITS, the types of ITS technologies to implement, and the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders. Initial ITS projects that could be implemented include: • Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) along critical regional corridors such as US 64, NM 516, and US 550 that would provide traveler alerts, travel times, and roadway conditions • Arterial Management through a Traffic Management Center that monitors traffic flows and adjusts traffic control devices to reduce congestion • Signal that improves traffic flow on principal arterials • Information kiosks for communicating regional traveler information ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 11—1 Adopted on April 15, 2010 fInancial plan f I n a n c i a l p l a n 11.1) OVERVIEW According to SAFETEA-LU, the financial plan of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan must be ‘fiscally constrained’, meaning transportation projects must be funded through reasonable estimates of revenues. The proposed roadway system improvements in the MTP are confined to the amount of funding available, or those revenues that can be reasonably expected over the 25-year life of the MTP. While more infrastructure improvements were identified than what funding would be reasonably expected, the roadway projects address the most pressing areas within the MPO boundary. To complete the regional bicycle/pedestrian network, the entities will need to secure federal and local funding for many of the priorities discussed in Chapter 6. On-road bike facilities and sidewalks should be constructed in conjunction with new roads or with retrofit projects whenever feasibly possible. Funding these regional bicycle/pedestrian projects needs to be factored into the financial analysis. Transit is funded primarily through FTA 5307 Operating and FTA 5309 Capital as well as through required local matches. These funding sources will be maintained as the reasonable funding estimates out to the year 2035. Although the Red Apple Transit does charge a fare for a fare box recovery ratio, the system is primarily subsidized by federal funds through FTA. 11 11 ---PAGE BREAK--- 11—2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 F i n a n c i a l p l a n 11 11 11.2) FUNDING SOURCES The MPO typically receives funding from the following federal sources: • National Highway System (NHS) – Used to construct improvements on urban and rural roads that are part of the NHS system. • Surface Transportation Program (STP) – provides flexible funding that may be used by States and localities for projects on any Federal-aid highway, including the NHS and bridge projects on any public road. • Transportation Enhancements (TPE) – Part of the STP program, this source funds specific walking and biking improvements that create facilities, provide safety, or preserve rail corridors for conversion into walk/bike trails. • Highway Safety Improvement Program – Also part of STP, used for projects that provide safety or improve dangerous conditions on roadways, at intersections, or for walkers and bicyclists. • Highway Bridge Program – enables States to improve the condition of their highway bridges through replacement, rehabilitation, and systematic preventive maintenance. Other secondary federal sources occasionally received by the MPO include: • Recreational Trails Program – provides funds for the creation or maintenance of new or existing trails, typically for non-motorized modes of travel. • Safe Routes to School Program (SRTS) – A program that funds infrastructure improvements or educational activities that make it safer for students to walk or bike to school. • High Priority Projects Program – commonly known as ‘earmarks’, this program provides designated funding for specific projects identified in SAFETEA-LU. • Transportation, Community, and System Preservation (TCSP) – intended to improve efficiency of the existing transportation system by reducing environmental impacts and the need for new infrastructure. Typical state funding sources include the General Fund, Severance Tax, and the Municipal Arterial Program (MAP). Local entities may use their general funds as well as dedicated road-building funds to complete regional transportation improvements. These funds rely on revenues from various sources including local sales and property taxes, fees, bond levies, and private sector contributions including right-of-way dedication. Additional revenues sources may come from impact fees if established by the individual entities under NM State Statute. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 11—3 Adopted on April 15, 2010 F i n a n c i a l p l a n 11 11 11.3) ESTIMATED ROADWAY COSTS and REVENUES Conventional practice for estimating future revenues for financing future transportation projects begins with an examination of historical state and federal funding levels. An estimation of future federal and state funding for the Farmington MPO region would be made based on a forecast of previous authorizations; however, the insolvency of the Highway Trust Fund, federal funding rescissions, reduced District targets for federal funds, and the current economic recession make estimating the future funding levels based on historical data a challenge. Simply projecting current revenues over the past several years for the future is no longer a viable methodology for revenue forecasting. An alternative to a straight historical forecast is the development of future revenue scenarios. Due to varying revenue-impacting assumptions, three scenarios have been created by the MPO: a low-revenue, mid-range revenue, and high-revenue. The revenue scenarios allow the Farmington MPO to be flexible in its planning process and adaptable to the changing dynamics of the economy within the region and the state. The Farmington MPO and its entities should always seek out or research new innovative funding strategies as they are identified. In a tight economy, the challenge is finding creative ways to optimize and augment existing financing strategies to provide the best service and infrastructure to the area’s residents. 11.4) APPROVED SCENARIOS and PROJECT LISTS The final roadway scenarios and project lists that are expected to meet future travel demand and needs reflect consultation with the public, local entities and other stakeholders. The MPO has undertaken an extensive amount of technical analysis to arrive at the approved scenarios contained in this plan. The overall roadway project lists were reduced and grouped into categories in order to meet the SAFETEA-LU planning requirements of a fiscally constrained plan for the next 25 years. The approved scenarios include combinations of up to six projects that could potentially fall within projected revenues. Several additional projects are shown in Appendix B. This list shows an additional $201,000,000 in unfunded transportation needs. The MPO will maintain these projects as unfunded requests in the event that additional revenues or increased funding levels are achieved. A few identified projects have been removed as being not recommended due to high costs or not having much benefit to the regional system. For each revenue scenario, a dedicated amount should be reserved for regional bicycle/pedestrian projects. Projects should be selected from the short term priority list. Project selection would be determined in future years based on specific conditions and need. Project costs were developed in cooperation with the entities and NMDOT. The MPO used existing worksheets and formulas for cost estimation of road projects. Then, to achieve a year of expenditure amount, an inflation rate of 2.5% was applied ---PAGE BREAK--- 11—4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 F i n a n c i a l p l a n 11 11 to the projects. Cost of materials and project length were the primary factors for bicycle/pedestrian costs, but they do not calculate right-of-way or property acquisition costs at this time. After review by the entities, the project costs received approval through the MPO process. 11.5) REVENUE ANALYSIS Table 11-1 describes federal funding provided to NMDOT District 5 and the amounts programmed to the Farmington MPO during the past five years as well as through the current STIP cycle out to the year 2013. Each of the three scenarios is described as follows to indicate how the base funding level was developed and how projected funding levels are estimated. Assumptions are also explained as part of the financial analysis: Low Revenue Scenario • The Low Revenue scenario took the average federal funding per year (from FY2006 to FY2013) and reduced that amount ($6,076,000) by 25%. Due to a lack of having a federal transportation bill in place, a 25% reduction is applied to reflect the uncertainty of District targets. An average local contribution amount was also calculated using the same formula; however the average amount ($2,200,000) was reduced by 35% since most of the entities have indicated to MPO staff that they are cutting their capital budgets in the near term. After projecting the federal and local contributions out to the year 2035, the total estimated revenue for the Low Revenue scenario is $149,625,000. Table 11-2 shows what can be reasonably funded with this scenario. Mid-Range Revenue Scenario • The Mid-Range Revenue scenario takes historical and near-term amounts of federal funding programmed to the FMPO for a period of ten years (from FY2005 to FY2014) and assumes the funding will stay consistent for the next 25 years. In a ten year timeframe, the Farmington MPO can expect to receive about $49,897,000 in federal funding and about $17,575,000 in local contributions. For the 25 year timeframe, total estimated funding for this scenario is expected to be around $168,680,000 (Table 11-2). High Revenue Scenario  The High Revenue scenario calculates the average yearly amount of federal funding ($6,076,000) and the average yearly local contribution ($2,200,000) and continues these funding trends out to the year 2035. This scenario estimates a total revenue amount of $206,900,000 (Table 11-2). ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 11—5 Adopted on April 15, 2010 F i n a n c i a l p l a n 11 11 Each revenue scenario would allow flexibility for the Farmington MPO to fund some safety, bicycle and pedestrian projects over the next 25 years. The Metropolitan Transportation Plan and this scenario list can be revised, as necessary, to meet the changing needs of the community. TABLE 11-1 – Federal Funding and Local Contributions by Year Total District 5 Federal Funding by Year* District 5 % Change Year to Year Portion of District 5 Funding Programmed to FMPO* FMPO % Share of Federal Funding Year to Year 2005 $ 17,562,333 $ 1,288,333 2006 43,420,700 $ 147.24% 750,667 $ 2007 23,153,000 $ -46.68% 1,199,000 $ 5.18% 2008 26,431,800 $ 14.16% 6,381,000 $ 24.14% 2009 16,283,000 $ -38.40% 5,527,476 $ 33.95% 2010 29,948,000 $ 83.92% 13,640,000 $ 45.55% 2011 28,996,500 $ -3.18% 11,210,779 $ 38.66% 2012 24,359,000 $ -15.99% 5,500,000 $ 22.58% 2013 15,650,000 $ -35.75% 4,400,000 $ 28.12% * Funding shown for NHS, STP, TPE, Safety, and Bridge programs only District 5 Total Federal Funds from FY05-FY13 to FMPO 49,897,255 $ FMPO Annual Average Share of District 5 Federal Funds from FY06-FY13 6,076,115 $ Total Local Capital Funding for Regionally Significant Projects 2007 708,000 $ 2008 3,845,000 $ 2009 3,097,000 $ 2010 2,225,000 $ 2011 3,200,000 $ 2012 1,125,000 $ 2013 2,100,000 $ 2014 1,275,000 $ Local Total Capital Funding from FY07-14 for Regionally Significant Projects 17,575,000 $ Average Annual Share of Local Capital Funding from FY07-14 2,196,875 $ ---PAGE BREAK--- 11—6 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 F i n a n c i a l p l a n 11 11 TABLE 11-2 – Revenue Scenarios for Funding Future Transportation Projects OPTION #1 What can be funded with Option #1 FMPO Annual Avg Share of D5 Federal Funds (reduced by 25%) 4,557,000 $ US 64 widening 65,000,000 $ Assume funding trend continues for next 25 years Pinon Hills Extension/CR 3900 26,500,000 $ FMPO reasonable revenue estimate from D5 113,925,000 $ East Arterial (South) 18,700,000 $ Highline Rd 15,000,000 $ Estimated Local Avg Entity Contribution to Regionally Significant Roads (reduced by 35%) 1,428,000 $ Various Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Projects 12,000,000 $ Assume funding trend continues for next 25 years Various Bridge Improvements 10,000,000 $ MPO reasonable revenue estimate from Local Entities 35,700,000 $ Project Funding Estimation 147,200,000 $ Total Estimated Revenues 149,625,000 $ OPTION #2 What can be funded with Option #2 Approximate Federal Funding for FMPO every 10 years 49,897,000 $ US 64 widening 65,000,000 $ Assume funding trend continues for next 25 years Pinon Hills Extension/CR 3900 26,500,000 $ FMPO reasonable revenue estimate from D5 124,742,500 $ East Arterial (South) 18,700,000 $ Highline Rd $15,000,000 Estimated Local Entity Contribution every 10 years 17,575,000 $ CR 390 Widening or New CR350 to CR3900 Connector 4,164,027 $ Assume funding trend continues for next 25 years Various Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Projects 25,000,000 $ MPO reasonable revenue estimate from Local Entities 43,937,500 $ Various Bridge Improvements 10,000,000 $ Total Estimated Revenues 168,680,000 $ Project Funding Estimation 164,364,027 $ OPTION #3 What can be funded with Option #3 FMPO Annual Avg Share of D5 Federal Funds 6,076,000 $ US 64 widening 65,000,000 $ Assume funding trend continues for next 25 years Pinon Hills Extension/CR 3900 26,500,000 $ FMPO reasonable revenue estimate from D5 151,900,000 $ East Arterial (South) 18,700,000 $ Highline Rd 14,987,142 $ Estimated Local Avg Entity Contribution to Regionally Significant Roads 2,200,000 $ CR 390 Widening or New CR350 to CR3900 Connector 4,164,027 $ Assume funding trend continues for next 25 years East Arterial (North) 11,100,000 $ MPO reasonable revenue estimate from Local Entities 55,000,000 $ Various Tier 2 Road Projects 25,000,000 $ Total Estimated Revenues 206,900,000 $ Various Bridge Improvements 10,000,000 $ Various Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Projects 30,000,000 $ Project Funding Estimation 205,451,169 $ ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO 11—7 Adopted on April 15, 2010 F i n a n c i a l p l a n 11 11 11.6) OPERATING REVENUES District 5 and all four entities oversee operating budgets which maintain roadways typically through resurfacing, chip sealing, and other minor road repairs. District 5 oversees maintenance schedules for the state and US highways in this area. The entities maintain all other roads. For purposes of this financial plan, operating budgets are assumed to increase by approximately two percent each year. It should be noted that some entities expect operating budgets to remain constant for the near term. 11.7) TRANSIT REVENUES Revenue for Red Apple Transit is expected to continue to come from FTA 5309 Capital and FTA 5307 Operating. It will continue to be assumed that the fare box recovery ratio will be insufficient and that transit subsidies will still be needed to fully cover all transit expenditures. Future capital funds will be contingent on the ten year lifespan of the current fleet. With a fleet of nine trolley-style buses and each costing approximately $200,000, Red Apple would need $1,800,000 in 5309 funding every ten years to replace its fleet. Total capital funds needed by 2035 are projected to be $4,500,000. The MPO and Red Apple Transit will make the assumption that FTA 5307 Operating funding will remain constant for each ten year period. For one ten year timeframe to the next, Operating is assumed to increase by nearly fourteen percent, which reflects the most recent Operating increase back between FY2007 and FY2008. Table 11-4 reflects Operating per year and ten year estimates projected out to the year 2035. TABLE 11-3 – Future Transit Operating Revenues Timeframe (years) Operating per Year Total Operating 2011 to 2020 $1,118,000 $11,118,000 2021 to 2030 $1,273,478 $12,734,783 2031 to 2035 $1,450,579 $7,252,893 Total Estimated Operating Funding from 2011 to 2035 $31,167,675 ---PAGE BREAK--- 11—8 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 F i n a n c i a l p l a n 11 11 11.8) POTENTIAL REVENUE STREAMS It will be advantageous for the Farmington MPO and its members to investigate other revenue streams beyond the traditional federal, state, and local funding programs. Committees established by the New Mexico Legislature are researching new funding source options to aid transportation improvements throughout the state. When recommendations from these committees are issued, the MPO may consider implementing these funding options that are applicable to this area. Toll Collection/User Fees Facilities could be constructed through the selling of bonds and be operated and maintained by toll collections. There are currently no existing toll facilities in the region. Toll revenue estimates would depend on:  Traffic volumes of the roadway  Trip length  Established user fee Public/Private Partnerships Public/private partnerships could be used in financing transportation facilities. These ventures include roadways, bridges, right-of-way, pedestrian facilities, auxiliary lanes, and signalization. Public/private partnerships may also be used for parking facilities, bicycle facilities, transit improvements (including shelters), operational improvements, providing matching funds for transportation improvement projects (including enhancement projects), toll facilities, and other situations which may help leverage available financing for transportation improvements. Borrowing Borrowing allows the region the opportunity to build a project sooner, with the understanding that the borrowed money will need to be repaid out of future revenue streams. This could be accomplished through the issuance of bonds. New Mexico Transportation Commission Work with the New Mexico Transportation Commission to receive a larger portion of federal and state transportation funding allocated within District Five. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO A - 1 Adopted on April 15, 2010 Appen A p p e n d i x A Public participation P u b l i c p a r t i c i p a t i o n Public participation is a key component of any community based plan. For development of the Metropolitan Transportation Plan, the Farmington MPO engaged the public throughout the process to identify and understand aspects of the system directly from the users. Many types of public participation techniques were used, including formal public meetings, surveys, having an information table at public events, and giving presentations to various local agencies. November 12, 2008 - Farmington Downtown Center Staff held a kick-off public meeting to introduce the MTP process. It outlined the various components of the MTP and how the public could be involved in the decision making process. February 18, 2009 - Farmington Library February 19, 2009 - Aztec City Hall February 23, 2009 - Bloomfield Cultural Center Early in the process, three public meetings were held and the public was asked to identify needed improvements for all types of modes. Staff took into consideration many of these suggestions and studied them for further analysis. The following list highlights many of the comments received: A A ---PAGE BREAK--- A - 2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 A P P E N D I X A A Roadway Improvements  The Pinon Hills Extension should use CR 3900 and also head east to connect to CR 3720.  Morningstar Dr. from Browning into the County is a heavily traveled road. There is a blind intersection at Morningstar and CR 3950.  Improvements need to be made to the bottleneck at Butler/Broadway intersection.  Look to see if Browning can be extended north and west to Hutton.  Two roads need to be extended – Beckland Hills north to Pinon Hills Blvd and Sandalwood east to Foothills.  There is heavy traffic during the morning and evening on the two-lane stretch of 30th between Municipal and Sunset.  Piñon Hills Blvd and 30th Street is a bad intersection.  Can a new facility be developed soon that is parallel to CR 390 and CR 3720?  Can there be a connection from US 64 to CR 5500 west of Bloomfield that crosses the river and provides a new route for trucks?  Members of the public would like to see the PHB extension and the Highline Road built as soon as possible to give Crouch Mesa residents new outlets.  The Aztec East Arterial is a great proposal.  The Post Office in Bloomfield needs a back access point from Oak St. to keep people from having to go onto US 64 to reach the Post Office.  Traffic is extremely dangerous for those trying to enter and leave the Post Office. Traffic needs to be slowed down as no one pays attention to the 40 mph speed limit.  Conditions will only get worse as construction on US 64 begins. Transit Improvements  Need better transit service for seniors trying to get to doctor offices.  Pick-up and drop off times are inconvenient for travel to/from Farmington.  Need more regional bus runs during the morning and afternoon – there should be at least 5-6 per day.  Members of public stated a need for transit service between Aztec and Bloomfield.  Need more bus stops closer together to support seniors at Farmington and Aztec.  Loop routes are too long and waste too much time.  Routes to/from Farmington tend to take up half a day for a round trip.  Have bus stops at Dino’s at CR 350/CR 390 and at the Bloomfield Pool.  The Bronco Route should have a stop at the westside Wal-Mart and someplace in downtown Farmington.  Need a route to serve the south end of Bloomfield along US 550.  Light rail should be a transit option for the future.  Consider bus connections from the Farmington area to Durango.  Consider passenger rail service from the Farmington area to Albuquerque, possibly a spur route from the RailRunner. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO A - 3 Adopted on April 15, 2010 A P P E N D I X A A March-April 2009 - MTP Public Participation Survey Two on-line surveys were available for the public as a way to understand their transportation concerns. One survey focused on general transportation and the other looked at transit. The following observations summarize the survey:  87% of respondents drive alone.  Typical school or work trips are less than 10 miles, which presents opportunities for walking/biking options.  7am-8am is the most common depart from home time; after 4pm is the typical return to home time.  To reduce congestion, respondents suggested improving signal timing, implementing access management, having better road connectivity, and expanding transit.  Very few people who took survey ride the bus (approximately 10%).  To increase bike riding, the need for more on-road and more off-road facilities was virtually tied (35-36%).  65% of respondents not in favor of toll roads.  Most comments received pertained to engineering improvements, bike safety, rail service, signal timing, and transit improvements. March 11, 2009 - Farmington Senior Center Staff provided information on the MTP to members of the Farmington Senior Center. They were also asked to complete the MTP Public Participation survey. Transit Improvements  The bus kiosks should have the bus map and schedule posted.  Have a bus stop on Arrington near Airport to serve the local residences and the Safeway on Main St.  The circular routes in Farmington result in really long commutes.  The following residential neighborhoods were noted as not having transit in close proximity: o Municipal Dr between 20th and 30th o Butler/Carlton/30th  The Red and Green routes need to serve the big box and shopping destinations on East Main St.  There were requests for bus stops on East Main at Villa View and at Mickey. ---PAGE BREAK--- A - 4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 A P P E N D I X A A March 27, 2009 - Navajo DOT Staff met with Navajo DOT to discuss possible transportation connections between tribal lands and the MPO region.  New bus stops along the Bronco route could be located at the Four Seasons residential neighborhood, at CR 6200/US 64, and at San Juan College West.  Continue the Bronco route to loop through Kirtland (see map); have stops at CR 6675/CR 6100, at Kirtland High School, and at CR 6400/CR 6100. Potential New Bus Stop Locations in Kirtland  Consider a new bus route that serves the Ojo Amarillo area, including the neighborhoods, the elementary school, and the planned high school.  Have a new bus route that serves housing from NM 371 east on top of the mesa down to the paved road to CR 5500, and then further onto the Fairgrounds and points beyond.  There are dirt road connections that extend from CR 6480 in Kirtland that could be paved to create a new route to Shiprock. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO A - 5 Adopted on April 15, 2010 A P P E N D I X A A May 5, 2009 - San Juan Center for Independence A presentation on the MTP was given to staff at the San Juan Center for Independence. Input was provided mostly on how to improve and expand the transit system. Transit Improvements  Consider a bus stop at the dialysis center at Broadway/Lake in Farmington.  Add a bus stop at the 30th/Farmington medical area.  Service should be added to northeast Aztec along US 550 to serve retail and business destinations such as Construction Supply.  Overcrowding on buses prevents passengers from taking the bus. Example was given at Apple Ridge where a passenger was told they had to wait for the next bus because this one was too full.  Bus stops along CR 5500 are important for serving the residential neighborhoods and connecting them to Farmington and Bloomfield.  Have a stop at the Bloomfield courthouse.  The loop routes can add hours to travel time.  Many bus stops are too far away to access from residential neighborhoods.  Can headways be reduced to 15 minutes? August 11, 2009 - Farmer’s Market at Animas Park in Farmington August 12, 2009 - Connie Mack World Series in Farmington August 14, 2009 - San Juan County Fair August 26, 2009 - San Juan College During the summer, staff set up information tables at public events. Based on the list of identified improvements, the public was asked which projects they would fund over the course of 25 years given fiscal constraints. The majority of participants focused on funding roads but some indicated their preferred bicycle/pedestrian trail improvements. Based on responses, the most preferred road projects were:  The extension of Piñon Hills/CR 3900  The East Arterial in Aztec  The Northern Route from Farmington to Aztec  The Highline Road from CR 350 to US 550 in Crouch Mesa ---PAGE BREAK--- A - 6 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 A P P E N D I X A A October 19, 2009 San Juan Center for Independence Staff met again with the San Juan Center for Independence to see where they would like to see future transit service. Transit Improvements  A new housing development is being built at Piñon /Lake and will need a bus stop.  Serve the PATH organization on Piñon with a stop.  Add a bus stop at the 30th/Farmington medical area.  Service should be added to northeast Aztec along US 550 to serve business destinations and low income housing.  SJCI will be building a new office on San Juan Blvd across from Sonic. A bus stop should be located there once the office is operational.  Can the stop at Apple Ridge be located at the north end for easier accessibility (current driveway at the south is too sloped).  Have a stop at the Bloomfield courthouse.  Have bus service to all of the apartment complexes along Blanco Blvd (east and west).  A bus shelter should be built at the Kirtland stop.  A mid-block crosswalk should be painted from the Civic Center to the south parking lot. January 25, 2010 - San Juan College January 25, 2010 - Bloomfield Cultural Center January 26, 2010 - Aztec Library January 27, 2010 - Farmington Library With a draft document in place, staff held a series of public meetings to give the public an opportunity to review project analysis, identified improvements, policies, and strategies. The following comments were received: Roadway Improvements  Improve Hood Mesa Trail for better circulation.  Make sure that drainage is considered when putting in new infrastructure.  There needs to be better connectivity throughout Aztec.  The Piñon Hills Blvd connection to Crouch Mesa needs to be built.  There needs to be zoning in the County  We need to good plans for guiding the development of the future road network.  Build the East Arterial to get trucks out of downtown. ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO A - 7 Adopted on April 15, 2010 A P P E N D I X A A  US 64 needs improvement.  Build the Northern Route as another connection from Farmington to Aztec. Transit Improvements  Build a passenger train connection to Albuquerque and to Santa Fe.  More transit options are needed to serve the growing population.  Red Apple Transit needs more lines and frequency of services.  There is a need for the external bus routes to run more often. Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements  Aztec should look into the ‘rails to trails’ program. Any opportunity to save the remaining railroad ROW should be acted on for trail development.  Build an off-road bike/pedestrian trail along the river north of NM 516 in Aztec.  Need more recreational paths in Bloomfield and a trail connection from Bloomfield to Aztec. Other Comments Received During the MTP update process, citizens provided several comments to the MPO for consideration:  I would like to see riverside bicycle path east to west bypassing all traffic lights. Maybe something in the same sense around 20th and 30th street. Denver's got a great commute to get around by bicycle paths without being directly in traffic. High traffic areas would probably lead to the hospital, Walmart, schools, the mall, and to work. Nonstop traffic by bicycle to work would be ideal for me.  Butler Ave. drastically needs to be expanded. You can hardly make a left turn onto it in the morning or afternoon any more. Traffic backs up from Apache St. to nearly Navajo street due to the bottleneck and timing of lights at Apache and Butler, and likewise Butler and 20th St. and 30th and Butler. This road should have been widened to 5 lanes 15 years ago, but the city took no action when they could have been purchasing property for rights of way when property was cheap. Now it is all way overpriced and will take eminent domain declarations to acquire the needed property for right of ways, which the city will have no choice but to do because it is getting worse by the day. You can hardly make a left hand turn on to Butler now between the hours of 6:30am and 9:00pm. Also find a route for a new major North/South arterial and make it wide enough. ---PAGE BREAK--- A - 8 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 A P P E N D I X A A  There are too many roads that merge from 4 or 5 lanes to 2 lanes such as Butler and also 30th St. The section of 30th St. between Hutton Ave. and College Blvd is ridiculous and was a big waste of money when redone a couple of years ago. That section will also have to employ eminent domain declarations in order to improve and is only getting worse by the day also. This is another road that should have been widened 15 year ago also when property was relatively cheap. Get rid of the bike lanes on roads for motor vehicles. It is a lot of wasted space and bicyclists pay no user fees to use that space like motor vehicle users do through fuel taxes.  When the city resurfaces roads, realign the manholes before you repave. The system used now of paving and then realigning the manholes only destroys the new pavement and they are never level with the new road, and the asphalt used is of poor quality which results in those sections creating potholes the first time it snows or rains. For that matter get rid of some of the hundreds of manholes that now exist if possible. Also please spend our tax money on roads and sewers and infrastructure needed for the common good which is government’s purpose, and not on providing entertainment for citizens such as parks, ball fields, performance centers and the like. Priorities need to be set straight.  How about a pedestrian walkway/bridge at the mall to walk from Walmart/Sams Club to the mall without having to drive back and forth several times a day. I notice this a lot on the weekends (I live in the area) that the same people drive back and forth to drop off family members for the movies while some of them go shopping at Walmart at the same time.  I have noticed that bicycle travel is very dangerous here compared to where I came from. After being forced into the curb by a family on their way to or from church, I got rid of my road bike. I always thought that if the city could work with the ditch companies to cover the ditches and put a bike path on top of them it would have many benefits. The ditches would be covered so they would pose less of a drowning potential for the kids. It would move the bike paths away from the roads and highways which would make it safer and more peaceful for the riders. The ditch companies would benefit with less maintenance and controlling unauthorized use of the ditch water.  Consider a Monorail in the median of the highways in the tri-city area and even extending it out to Shiprock. I notice that most of the airports and any highly complex facilities use them. I don’t know if the easement problems of using space above the medians and the mixture of road traffic and monorail traffic would be an overwhelming problem. It is my personal opinion that in this highly rural area just making roads more accessible to bicycles is going to make more people convert from vehicle traffic to some other form of transportation. But high tech, fast moving, comfortable transportation could be the answer. I think there are a growing number of people who would drive a short distance, park and ride mass transportation if available, even in an area like ours.  I have long thought it would be great to work towards a bicycle/pedestrian trail that follows the wash that runs from Piedra Vista HS, under pinion hills blvd, through Beckland Hills park, through Kiwanis Park, and eventually reaching the proposed river trail system. Such a system could be used to access PVHS, San Juan College, as well as the Glade ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO A - 9 Adopted on April 15, 2010 A P P E N D I X A A Run mountain biking trails with the proposed river system. Even linking Kiwanis Park to the Glade Run (Road Apple) trail system would be pretty cool in my opinion.  I do agree that Farmington should extend Pinon Hills Blvd. across the Animas to County Rd 3900. The two-lane road called Highline Rd should be built from CR 350 to US 550. However, I do not think that the Bloomfield Highway 64 should be widened to 6 lanes. If the other roads are built it will take much of the traffic off of 64 from Crouch Mesa and direct it to Main. The current situation takes traffic from Crouch Mesa and routes it the long way to Main. Instead, add bus routes to that section from Farmington to Bloomfield to ease the amount of traffic on the highway ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO B - 1 Public Discussion Plan Appen A p p e n d i x B future road projects f u t u r e r o a d p r o j e c t s Federal law requires the MTP to satisfy financial constraints such that all proposed projects can be reasonably funded, and undergo extensive public review. The 2035 MTP included a priority process to identify a list of transportation improvement projects that best meet the needs of our region as a whole. Tier One  Total Cost: $140,400,000  Tier 1 is the plan that is constrained by reasonably expected revenues. These are the roadway priority projects for the MPO. Tier Two  Total Cost: $181,700,000  Tier 2 is a vision plan for new revenues that include an additional 2.5% inflation rate. Tier Three  Total Cost: $19,500,000  Tier 3 includes road projects that have been identified as needs for the regional transportation network, but that do not have any identified funding sources. Although these roadways remain unfunded it is pertinent that future corridors are identified and right-of-ways are preserved. b b ---PAGE BREAK--- B - 2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 A p p e n d i x B b b ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO B - 3 Adopted on April 15, 2010 A p p e n d i x B b b TIER 1 PRIORITIES Map # Facility Name Termini Project Description Functional Class Entities Regional Significance Other Comments Length (feet) Est. Project Cost 17 US 64 Farmingto n to Bloomfiel d 1.5 mi. east of Browning Pkwy to Bloomfield City Limit Widen to 6 lanes; implement access management; install traffic signals Principal Arterial Farmington Bloomfield County Major east-west arterial; developing economic corridor Phase 1 complete; Phase 2 has committed funding; Phase 3 partial funding programmed for 2012 & 2013 36960 $65,000,000 9 Piñon Hills East/ CR 3900 NM 516 to CR 390 Construct new bridge and 4 lane road Proposed Principal & Minor Arterials Farmington County Direct connection for Crouch Mesa area to East Main; improves out-of- direction travel Projected to reduce traffic on Browning & CR 350 river crossings 13650 $26,500,000 15 East Arterial (South) US 550 to NM 173 Construct new 2 lane road (preserve ROW for 2 additional lanes) Proposed Principal Arterial Aztec Direct heavy truck traffic away from downtown; create bike/ped friendly environment Funding has been secured for Phase 1A & 1B 14784 $18,700,000 14 Highline Road CR 3950 to US 550 Construct new 2 lane road Proposed Principal Arterial All New east-west arterial to support regional network Will distribute traffic to/from Crouch Mesa; connects PHB Ext. to East Arterial 27880 $15,000,000 N8 Piñon Hills Blvd Extension to CR 350 Connector Corridor to be determine d Construct a facility to connect Piñon Hills Blvd Extension to Highline Rd Proposed Minor Arterial County Complete an east- west segment for improved traffic distribution 8980 $4,200,000 16 East Arterial (North) NM 173 to US 550 Construct new 2 lane road (preserve ROW for 2 additional lanes) Proposed Principal Arterial Aztec Direct heavy truck traffic away from downtown Continues relief route for heavy truck traffic and pass- through travel 19025 $11,000,000 Estimated Tier 1 Total: $140,400,000 ---PAGE BREAK--- B - 4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 A p p e n d i x B b b TIER 2 PROJECTS Map # Facility Name Termini Project Description Functional Class Entities Regional Significance Other Comments Length (feet) Est. Project Cost 7 Wildflower Pkwy Approx. Yarrow to CR 3900 Upgrade road - add curb/gutter, sidewalk, bike lanes Minor Arterial Farmington County Distributes Crouch Mesa traffic to US 64, CR 350, and Browning Pkwy Will become an essential link to the PHB extension 4760 $2,500,000 12 Lt Plant Rd NM 516 to approximat ely Aztec City Limits Upgrade road to Minor Arterial; curb/gutter, sidewalks Collector Aztec Major north-south connection serving a fast developing part of Aztec Projected to have future congestion issues 5000 $3,000,000 2 Piñon Hills Blvd Sports Complex to Butler Widen to 4 lanes Principal Arterial Farmington Limited access arterial through Farmington Projected to have future congestion issues 18510 $8,600,000 4 Butler 38th St to Piñon Hills Blvd Widen to 4 lanes Minor Arterial Farmington Major north-south arterial through Farmington Projected to have future congestion issues 6105 $3,200,000 10 NM 516 Piñon Hills to Lt Plant Rd Widen to 6 lanes; implement access management; install traffic signals Principal Arterial Farmington Aztec County Major east-west arterial; developing economic corridor Initial Studies by NMDOT have been conducted 43930 $55,000,000 N3 New Road east of Foothills NM 516 to Northern Route Construct 2 lane road Proposed Collector Farmington Alternate terminus for proposed Northern Route Becomes an option for a western terminus to the Northern Route 15950 $6,300,000 1 US 64 NM 170 to Murray Widen to 6 lanes Principal Arterial Farmington Major east-west arterial serving a fast developing part of Farmington Projected to have future congestion issues 10450 $3,000,000 N1 Northern Route East Farmington to US 550 Construct new 2 lane road from Farmington to Aztec Proposed Minor Arterial Farmington , Aztec, County New limited access, high mobility corridor An alternative corridor to NM 516 may be needed 61600 $70,000,000 11 NM 516/US 550 Lt Plant Rd to NM 173 Widen to 6 lanes and add accel/decel lanes Principal Arterial Aztec Critical regional corridor Initial Studies by NMDOT have been conducted 10454 $30,000,000 Estimated Tier 2 Total: $181,700,000 ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO B - 5 Adopted on April 15, 2010 A p p e n d i x B b b TIER 3 PROJECTS Map # Facility Name Termini Project Description Functional Class Entities Regional Significance Other Comments Length (feet) Est. Project Cost N5 CR 5030 CR 350 to US 550 Construct new 2 lane road Proposed Collector County Distribute Crouch Mesa traffic to US 550 and CR 350 29460 $12,000,000 N6 Newby Ln/ CR 5075 US 64 to CR 5030 Upgrade road to Collector Proposed Collector Bloomfield Distribute traffic in west Bloomfield 10500 $4,200,000 5 Browning US 64 to Southside River Road Widen to 6 lanes Principal Arterial Farmington Connects to retail districts along East Main; river crossing Might not be needed if PHB bridge is built 9504 $3,300,000 Estimated Tier 3 Total: $19,500,000 Estimated Total of All Projects: $341,600,000 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO C - 1 Adopted on April 15, 2010 Appen A p p e n d i x c Bicycle/pedestrian B i c y c l e / p e d e s t r i a n projects p r o j e c t s Over 30 regional bicycle/pedestrian projects have been identified to create a regional network. During the MTP process, the regional projects were ranked to determine priorities. Projects were grouped into ranges to meet financial constraints. Many of the short range projects are expected to be funded through federal funds, such as the Safety program and the Surface Transportation Program, and local contributions. Grants and other sources will provide other funding opportunities. Projects in the mid and long ranges are unfunded requests and will assist in further achievement of the regional bicycle/pedestrian network. These projects are included for informational purposes in the event that future revenues exceed projected estimates. The Farmington MPO is committed to identifying funding for projects in all parts of the MPO region. Estimated cost for all regional projects is approximately $10,802,000. Please note that costs for property acquisition or for right-of-way are not factored into the cost. The tables below correspond to Map 6-1 – Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements by Range. c c ---PAGE BREAK--- C - 2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 A p p e n d i x C c c Tier 1 Regional Bicycle/Pedestrian Priority List Map Num City or Area Road/Facility Name From Road/ Place To Road/ Place Type of Facility Location Type Surface Connects to Length Est. Cost Ranked Score 8 F Butler to San Juan College along Sunrise Butler San Juan College Multimodal Multi- Use Path Concrete Residential, college, transit 4700 $137,000 20.6 38 B East Blanco Blvd US 550 N (1st St) US 64 Bike lanes and sidewalks On road Concrete Residential, school 14200 $831,000 20.1 43 F San Juan and East Main San Juan/ Butler E Main/ Piñon Hills Wide sidewalk/ path Multi- Use Path Hard Residential, retail 24500 $712,000 18.6 14A F Pinon Hills Blvd 30th Sports Complex Bike lane (westbound) On road Hard Park 3500 $143,000 18.6 11 C Wildflower Parkway Approx. at Yarrow CR 350 Multimodal Multi- Use Path Hard Residential 19500 $566,000 18.5 37 C CR 350 US 64 NM 516 Bike lanes On road Existing Residential, retail 39700 $1,622,000 18.4 21 B,F,C Path parallel to US 64 Andrea/US 64 Ruth Ln/US 64 Multimodal Multi- Use Path Hard Retail 42000 $1,220,000 18.2 19 A,B Connect from Animas River trail to Bloomfield Hartman Park (Aztec) Blanco/Ruth Ln (Bloomfield) Multimodal Multi- Use Path Hard Residential, school, park 37300 $1,084,000 17.8 49 A Oliver- McWilliams Trail 50 acre open space Ruins Road trail junction Multimodal On- and off-road Hard Residential, school, park 8600' on- road & 4600' off-road $986,000 17.3 45 A Ruins Road Trail Chaco/NM 516 Trail Junction Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines Aztec Ruins, residential 4600 $42,000 17.3 F = Farmington, A = Aztec B = Bloomfield, C = San Juan County Estimated Cost for Short Range Projects: (based on cost of materials times length) $7,343,000 ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO C - 3 Adopted on April 15, 2010 A p p e n d i x C c c Mid-Range Bicycle/Pedestrian Project List Map Num City or Area Road/Facility Name From Road/ Place To Road/ Place Type of Facility Location Type Surface Connects to Length Est. Cost Ranked Score 25 C Kirtland path Troy King/ Twin Peaks CR 6675/ CR 6100 Bike rt on Twin Pks & CR 6500; Multi-use path on CR 6400 & CR 6100 On road, multi-use path Hard Residential, school 14100 $410,000 17.2 14B F, C Twin Peaks Rd from NM 170 to Troy King Road NM 170 Troy King Rd Bike lanes On road Hard Residential, park 6575 $269,000 17.1 55 A, B Hike/Mtn Bike trail Wilderness Park (west of Ruth) S. Rio Grande (Aztec) Multimodal (mtn bike/ hike) Off-road Crusher fines 40800 $98,000 16.9 65 F, C Animas River/E. Main Gateway Park Farmington Lake Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines Parks 42300 $102,000 16.6 22 F, C PHB Extension/ CR 3900 CR 390/ CR3900 PHB/ E Main Multimodal Multi- use Path Hard Residential, retail 26000 $755,000 16.5 46 A Riverside Trail North end of River trail Aztec Ruins via River Trl Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines River 1200 $300,000 16.3 66 F Lions Wilderness Trail Lions Wild Pk Fmtn Lake Trail Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines 15800 $38,000 16.2 71 F, C La Plata River Sports Complex Jackson Lake Junction Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines Park 22400 $54,000 16.1 72 F La Plata River Westland Park Sports Complex Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines Parks 6700 $16,000 15.8 F = Farmington, A = Aztec B = Bloomfield, C = San Juan County Estimated Cost for Short Range Projects: (based on cost of materials times length) $2,042,000 ---PAGE BREAK--- C - 4 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 A p p e n d i x C c c Long Range Bicycle/Pedestrian Project List Map Num City or Area Road/Facility Name From Road/ Place To Road/ Place Type of Facility Location Type Surface Connects to Length Est. Cost Ranked Score 51 A Riverside Trl B Existing river trail Existing Riverside Pk loop trail Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines Downtown, park 800 $52,000 15.8 18 A, F Animas River Trail South of Farmington Lk Hartman Park (Aztec) Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines Residential, park 34000 $82,000 15.7 27 C Old Aztec Hwy & CR 3050 NM 516/ CR 3520 NM 516/ CR 3050 Bike route On road Existing Residential 35000 $0 15.2 24 C CR 3000 Browning Pkwy US 550 Bike route On road Existing Residential 63200 $0 15.2 79 F, C San Juan River San Juan/ Animas River River Bend Park Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines Parks 11300 $27,000 15.0 28 A. C Light Plant Rd NM 516 MPO boundary Bike route On road Existing Residential, school 30600 $0 14.6 20 B, C CR 5030 CR 350 US 550 Multimodal Multi- use Path Hard 30600 $889,000 14.5 63 F, C Glade Road PHB/Glade Rd Farm Lake Trail Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines 20400 $49,000 14.3 73 F, C San Juan River San Juan/ Animas River CR 5500 Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines 44000 $106,000 14.3 41 A,F,C Farmington- Aztec route Farmington Lake US 550/ NM 173 Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines 44500 $107,000 13.9 64 F, C Farmington Lake Trail Jackson Lake Junction Farmington Lake Multimodal Off-road Crusher fines 43700 $105,000 13.6 26 C La Plata Rd (NM 170) US 64 North end MPO boundary Bike route On road Existing Residential, parks 63400 $0 13.5 23 B, C CR 5500 (West Hammond) US 64 US 550 Bike Route (Bike lanes) On road Existing Residential 39700 $0 13.3 42 B CR 4935 (Arroyo) Arroyo/ E. Blanco CR 4900 (Arizona)/ US 550 Bike route On road Existing Residential 16200 $0 12.5 F = Farmington, A = Aztec B = Bloomfield, C = San Juan County Estimated Cost for Short Range Projects: (based on cost of materials times length) $1,417,000 ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO D - 1 Adopted on April 15, 2010 Appendix D A p p e n d i x D ACRONYM LIST A C R O N Y M L I S T AADT Annual average daily traffic ADA Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act BLM United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management BPE Bicycle, Pedestrian and Equestrian BPAG Bicycle Pedestrian Group CIP Capital Improvement Plan CFR Code of Federal Regulations CTSP Comprehensive Transportation Safety Plan CMAQ Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality DOT United States Department of Transportation EJ Environmental justice EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMPO Farmington Metropolitan Planning Organization FTA Federal Transit Administration FY Fiscal year ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (preceded TEA-21) ITS Intelligent transportation systems LOS Level of service MPO Metropolitan planning organization D D ---PAGE BREAK--- D - 2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 A p p e n d i x D D D MTP Metropolitan Transportation Plan NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 NHS National Highway System NMDOT New Mexico Department of Transportation Northwest New Mexico Council of Governments PC Policy Committee of the Farmington MPO PPP Public Participation Plan RTD Regional Transit District SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act – A Legacy for Users SRTS Safe Routes to School STIP Statewide Transportation Improvement Program STP Surface Transportation Program TAZ Transportation analysis zone TC Technical Committee of the Farmington MPO TE Transportation Enhancements TEA-21 Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21st Century TIA Traffic impact analysis TIP Transportation Improvement Program TOD Transit – Oriented Development Title VI Title VI of the Civil Rights Act UPWP Unified Planning Work Program USDOT United States Department of Transportation UZA Urbanized area V/C Volume to capacity ratio VHT Vehicle hours traveled VMT Vehicle miles traveled ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO Index - 1 Adopted on April 15, 2010 IndE I n d E x A Access Management 1-6, 1-7, 3- 4, 4-3, 4-13, 7-4, 8-3, 10-2, 10-5, A-3, B-4 Airport 7-4 American Association of State Highway & Transportation Officials 6-7 Americans with Disabilities Act 5-12, 6-6, 6-7 B Bike Lane 1-5, 6-6, 6-8, 8-6, 10-5, A-8, B-4, C-2, C-3, C-4 Path A-8 Route 1-5, 6-6, 6-8, C-4 C Capital Improvement Program 6-9 Civic Center 5-2, 1-6 Congestion See Street 1-4, 1-8, 4-1, 4-4, 4-12, 7-4, 10-3, 10-5, A-3, B-4 Court 3-2, 3-3 D Department of Transportation 1-8, 3-3, 3-4 Development Apartment 5-2, A-6 New Construction 6-6 Residential Development 4-12 Shopping Center 6-2 Drainage 6-8, A-6 Driveway(s) A-6 ---PAGE BREAK--- Index - 2 Farmington MPO Adopted on April 15, 2010 I n d E x E Easement(s) A-8 Environmental Protection Agency 1-8, 10-3 F Federal Highway Administration 4-4 Federal Transit Administration 11-1, 11-7 G Geographic Information System 2-7 I Intelligent Transportation System 1-4, 1-8, 9-3, 10-3, 10-5 Intermodal 1-2, 1-4, 1-8, 7-1 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act 1-2 L Land Use 1-4, 1-7, 2-1, 2-2, 2-5, 2-7, 2-8, 4-2, 4-5, 4-12, 5-1, 7-5, 10-1, 10-2 Level of Service 4-4, 4-13 Loading 4-4 M Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 6-7, 6-8, 6-10 Monuments 1-10 Multimodal Equestrian 7-1, 7-5 Multimodal 7-1, 7-2, C-2, C-3, C-4 Pedestrian and Biking Facilities 6-6 Sidewalks 1-5, 1-9, 3-2, 5-12, 6-2, 6-7, 6-8, 8-6, 8-8, 11-1, B-4 N National Highway System 6-9, 11-2 New Mexico Department of Transportation 1-2, 1-10, 4-1, 4-12, 6-9, 7-2, 8-1, 8-3, 8-4, 8-5, 10-2, 10-3, 11-4, A-4 O Ozone 10-3, 10-4 P Police Department 6-2 Policy 1-2, 2-8, 8-3 Policy Committee 1-2, 3-3, 4-12 Public Meeting 3-2 Public Participation Plan 3-1R R Rail Commuter Rail 7-1, 7-5 Freight Rail 7-5 Light Rail 7-5, A-2 Reach 1-6, 1-7, 7-5, A-2 Right of Way See Street 1-8, 4-12, 4-13, 6-6, 6-7, 10-5, A-7, B-3 Road Classification Collector 4-2, 4-3, 4-4, 4-6, B-4, B-5 Minor Arterial 4-2, 4-3, 4-12, 10-1, B-3, B-4 Principal Arterial 4-2, 4-3, 6-7, 10-5, B-3, B-4, B-5 State Highway 7-1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Farmington MPO Index - 3 Adopted on April 15, 2010 I n d E x S Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act- a Legacy for Users 1-2, 1-6, 8-1, 11-1, 11-2, 11-3 State Transportation Improvement Program 4-12, 6-8, 11-4 Street Congestion 1-4, 1-8, 4-1, 4-4, 4-12, 7-4, 10-3, 10-5, A-3, B-4 Intersections 1-6, 6-7, 6-8, 8-1, 8-4, 8-5, 8-8, 11-2 Lane 1-5, 4-4, 6-7, 6-8, A-2, A-9, B-3, B-4, B-5 Right of Way 1-8, 4-12, 4-13, 6-6, 6-7, 10-5, A-7, B-3 Sight Distance 8-4 Subdivision 6-9, 6-10 Surface Transportation Program 6-9, 11-2, C-1 T Thoroughfare 4-12, 4-13, 10-2 Traffic Analysis Zone 2-5, 2-8, 5-8 Transit 1-1, 1-2, 1-4, 1-5, 1-7, 1-8, 1-9, 3-1, 3-2, 3-4, 4-12, 5-1, 5-2, 5-3, 5-4, 5-5, 5-6, 5-7, 5-8, 5-9, 5-10, 5-11, 5-12, 6-3, 6-6, 7-5, 8-6, 9-2, 9-3, 10-1, 10-2, 10-3, 11-1, 11-7, 11-8, A-2, A-3, A-5, A-6, A-7, C-2 Transportation Improvement Program 4-12, 6-2, 6-8