Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Second access to Meadow Lake study urged

Julia M. Dendinger News-Bulletin Staff Writer; jdendinger@news-bulletin.com

After hearing from half a dozen very adamant Meadow Lake residents about the extension of Fence Line Road, the county commission voted 5-0 to accept the update to the Valencia County Mobility Plan.

However, the commissioners did make the recommendation that the plan now include studying the extension of Fence Line Road to create a second way in and out of Meadow Lake.

"We need a secondary escape route out of Meadow Lake," said resident Bob Gostischa. "There is another community that is worried about increased traffic and speeders. That is a law enforcement issue not a public road issue. We need, at a minimum, a second road in and out of Meadow Lake."

Pros and cons

Discussion over whether to add a study on extending Fence Line Road west to connect to La Ladera Road, which borders Peralta's east side, began during the public hearings held to update the county's mobility plan.

Since the plan has been updated, Loretta Tollefson, special projects coordinator for the Mid-Region Council of Governments, has been bringing the plan to government entities throughout the county for acceptance.

Tollefson appeared before the commission last week at its monthly public hearing to present the updated plan and receive public input on the matter. At that meeting, Meadow Lake resident Jim Lane said the road does not actually come out in Peralta.

"In your rationale, you say extending Fence Line does not provide significant relief and doesn't positively impact Peralta," Lane said. "That's kind of a double negative. There was one household in Peralta and a woman whose granddaughter lives on Valencia Road. Their major concern is safe neighborhoods; speed bumps and stop signs would accomplish that. I would urge you to put Fence Line Road back into the plan."

Tollefson pointed out that Fence Line Road was not included in the original draft for pubic review. "It was during the public meetings that the recommendation to expand was made," she said. "We did analyze the option, and it would take approximately 80 vehicles off of 263 and move them into Peralta. That's not a great impact on 263 but a large impact on Peralta, which doesn't have a lot of traffic."

Tollefson went on to say that MRCOG was very aware of the issue in Meadow Lake. To alleviate the problem of only one road in, one road out, the mobility plan includes a new roadway between Meadow Lake Road and North Rio Del Oro Loop.

"We got only one person's comments in favor of adding the expansion to the map but a number of comments to not put it on the map," she said.

Gostischa countered that the reason Tollefson got only one comment in favor of the road extension is that Meadow Lake "never had the opportunity to give input. We were not asked."

Tollefson pointed out that she came to a neighborhood association meeting last fall and set a meeting date to review the mobility plan. "Two people showed up," she said.

At the June 18 meeting, Lane brought more than 90 letters from Meadow Lake residents in favor of the extension of Fence Line Road. Sonya Montoya also brought letters of support from land developers, Realtors and builders in the Meadow Lake area.

"La Ladera is a public road for all to use," Montoya said. "They can't deny access. Everyone must be responsible for growth. Their concern is a law enforcement issue."

Valerie Solomon, who lives on Valencia Road, said she understood the concerns of the people living in Meadow Lake and respected their needs. "We are asking Peralta for speed bumps; it is a safety issue," she said. "But why is it wise to eliminate a danger from one area and pass it on to another? I think this needs to be studied more."

Peralta Mayor Bryan Olguin congratulated the Meadow Lake residents for "joining their voices together and being heard." He did acknowledge that an extension of Fence Line Road would not come directly into Peralta.

"But I'm pretty sure people aren't going to come to La Ladera and go north to come back south," he said. "They are going to come through on Valencia, Molina and Peralta. Those are residential roads and are already at capacity. I think there needs to be more research before you funnel one problem into another."

If Fence Line Road were extended west, it would connect to La Ladera in the vicinity of Jerome Road, which is south of Peralta's southern boundary. Olguin's concern is that drivers would not take La Ladera Road north to where it becomes Peralta Boulevard and then travels west to N.M. 47, but instead cut through on the smaller, two-lane roads that run east-west through the town.

The intersection of Meadow Lake Road and El Cerro Loop is just south of the possible Fence Line Road-La Ladera Road intersection.

Possible compromise

For purposes of discussion, Commissioner Ron Gentry made a motion to accept the mobility plan as presented. Chairman Pedro Rael seconded the motion.

Gentry said he agreed that only having one road in and out of Meadow Lake was an undesirable situation. "I do agree that this needs more study," he said. "The land between where Fence Line ends now and La Ladera is private. That is something that needs to be negotiated for."

He then went on to propose that instead of extending the road all the way west to La Ladera, that it be brought further west and then south to hook into Manzano Expressway where it intersects with Meadow Lake Road.

"This keeps the traffic where it is and doesn't open a new artery into the Peralta area," Gentry said. "This is something I would like to see the mobility plan steering committee study and consider."

The commission passed the resolution of acceptance of the mobility plan with the recommendation that the study of extension of Fence Line Road be added to the plan.

Tollefson said she would take the recommendation back to the steering committee. "The committee is made up of representatives of all the county governmental entities. If there is consensus, it will be added to the plan," she said.

In a telephone interview Thursday morning, Tollefson said that if the steering committee added the proposed extension study to the mobility plan, she would bring it before each governing body again. "We needed to do that with the first plan," she said.

As the plan progresses towards reality, Tollefson said more public meetings would be held. "When we start looking at the individual corridor studies, we have a whole series of public meetings. We take that information back to the steering committee, it's incorporated into that part of the plan and then we have more meetings," she said. "It is very intensive and takes time, but it is imperative that we have community input."

Other concerns

The request to extend Fence Line Road may have garnered the most discussion, but it wasn't the only part of the mobility plan residents had concerns about.

Dr. Teresa Smith de Cherif said she was concerned that the due process for the mobility plan was not as intended. "The final version is only recently on the Web site, but not everyone has Internet access," she said. "I would hope copies were available at libraries and schools."

Tollefson said Thursday that hard copies of the mobility plan were at all public libraries in the county and at the offices of each of the government agencies.

"I live on South El Cerro Loop on an eight-acre working farm. Most of my property is tree-lined," de Cherif said. "My neighbors and I would not like to see the road widened."

At last week's meeting, the doctor expressed concerns that by widening the road it could result in the removal of some homes and property, which are currently irrigating. "Removing that kind of property is precarious in this desert climate," she said. "I would like to see a full environmental impact study done before this plan goes forward."

Tollefson said that, because of the global nature of the plan, the environmental process isn't begun just because the plan identifies a roadway.

"When a project begins, and by that I mean when funds are identified for a project, then environmental studies are done at the project level," she said. "We have to go through the entire environmental process at that time. Detailed work doesn't happen until we get to a specific alignment."

For more information, Tollefson can be reached via e-mail at ltollefson@mrcog-nm.gov or by phone at 724-3611. The updated mobility plan is available online at www.mrcog-nm.gov.

E-mail this story Printer-friendly version