Agenda 05/28/2024 Item #16B16 (Attach Engineering Deposit Acknowledgement letter with FPL related to the prposed relcation of transmission facilities associated with the Pine Ridge Corridor Improvements project)05/28/2024
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to approve the Chairman’s execution of the attached Engineering Deposit
Acknowledgement letter with Florida Power and Light (“FPL”) to engage FPL’s professional engineering
design services related to the proposed relocation of transmission facilities associated with the Pine Ridge
Road Corridor Improvements Project and authorize payment to FPL in the amount of $428,720 upon the
receipt of FPL’s invoice. (Project 60201)
OBJECTIVE: To approve an Engineering Deposit Acknowledgement letter with FPL (including the payment of a
$428,720 Engineering Deposit) to engage FPL to begin a professional preliminary engineering design feasibility
study to evaluate the compatibility of the County’s proposed jughandle intersection at Pine Ridge Road and
Livingston Road with FPL’s transmission facilities.
CONSIDERATIONS: On November 14, 2023, (Agenda Item 16B2), the Board, approved a recommendation to
pursue the jughandle intersection alternative at Pine Ridge Road and Livingston Road. The jughandle was
recommended because costs inclusive of the activities required with FPL were less than the anticipated right -of-
way impacts for either the continuous flow intersection or the single point urban interchange. While the various
intersection types are projected to increase the efficiency of the intersection, the difference in operational
improvements from the various alternatives was not significant.
The jughandle design passes through the existing FPL easement and requires a relocation of FPL’s transmission
facilities. Plans for the proposed design were sent to FPL for review and comment. To fully evaluate the County’s
design and determine the compatibility that will meet the County and FPL’s needs and requirements, the FPL
design team must do a more extensive design analysis. Those costs were assumed in the analysis previously
provided to the Board.
In similar situations in other jurisdictions, FPL entered into an Engineering Deposit Acknowledgement letter
agreement that set forth an Engineering Deposit Estimate to enable FPL to begin the detailed design and estimating
process, including a feasibility analysis. (see attached FPL letter agreements with Sarasota County, Lee County, and
Manatee County). As part of FPL’s proposed Engineering Deposit Acknowledgement letter with the County, FPL
agrees that upon the receipt of an Engineering Deposit in the amount of $428,720 it will continue to evaluate the
County’s request to relocate the FPL transmission structure(s) at this location (the feasibility study), and provide a
detailed design estimate for the potential overhead relocation. If an agreeable solution for the relocation cannot be
found after completing the feasibility study, the remainder of the funds will be refunded to the County. If a feasible
solution for the jughandle design is achieved, the unused portion of the engineering deposit will be retained by FPL
and deducted from the final construction cost for relocation.
Approval of this expenditure is critical to continue the jughandle design with the existing and anticipated future
FPL facilities in this easement. Staff is requesting that the Board authorize the Chairman to sign FPL’s attached
March 12, 2024, Engineering Deposit Acknowledgement letter. Upon FPL’s receipt of the signed Engineering
Deposit Acknowledgement letter, FPL will provide the County with an invoice in the required Engineering Deposit
amount with payment instructions (payable either by check or by wire transfer). Should the County ultimately
decide to proceed with the work, it will enter into a Relocation Agreement for the work with FPL.
This item is consistent with the Collier County strategic plan objective to design and maintain an effective
transportation system to reduce traffic congestion and improve the mobility of our residents and visitors.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $428,720 are available within Pine Ridge Livingston Project (60201).
Source of funds are Road Impact Fees.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This recommendation is consistent with the Long-Range Transportation
Plan and Objective 1 of the Transportation Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan to maintain the
major roadway system at an acceptable Level of Service.
16.B.16
Packet Pg. 1168
05/28/2024
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved as to form and legality and requires majority vote for Board
approval. -SRT
RECOMMENDATION: Recommendation to approve the Chairman’s execution of the attached Engineering
Deposit Acknowledgement letter with Florida Power and Light (“FPL”) to engage FPL’s professional engineering
design services related to the proposed relocation of transmission facilities associated with the Pine Ridge Road
Corridor Improvements Project, and authorize payment to FPL in the amount of $428,720 upon the receipt of FPL’s
invoice. (Project 60201)
Prepared By: Dennis F. McCoy, P.E., Project Manager III, Transportation Engineering Division, Transportation
Management Services Department
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Complete_with_DocuSign_BALLPARK_ESTIMATE_LET- Manatee County (PDF)
2. Feasibility Study Fee Relocation Request Letter - Orange RIver Flood Signed (PDF)
3. FPL Estimate Letter_BCC Approved 7-12-22- Sarasota (PDF)
4. Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (PDF)
5. FPL Acknowledgement Letter 03.12.24 (PDF)
16.B.16
Packet Pg. 1169
05/28/2024
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 16.B.16
Doc ID: 28698
Item Summary: Recommendation to approve the Chairman’s execution of the attached Engineering Deposit
Acknowledgement letter with Florida Power and Light (“FPL”) to engage FPL’s professional engineering design
services related to the proposed relocation of transmission facilities associated with the Pine Ridge Road Corridor
Improvements Project, and authorize payment to FPL in the amount of $428,720 upon the receipt of FPL’s invoice.
(Project 60201)
Meeting Date: 05/28/2024
Prepared by:
Title: Project Manager – Transportation Engineering
Name: Dennis McCoy
04/24/2024 9:04 AM
Submitted by:
Title: Division Director - Transportation Eng – Transportation Engineering
Name: Jay Ahmad
04/24/2024 9:04 AM
Approved By:
Review:
Unknown Anthony Khawaja TMSD Reviewer Completed 04/24/2024 9:14 AM
Transportation Management Services Department Jeanne Marcella Transportation Management Services
Department Completed 04/24/2024 9:51 AM
Transportation Engineering Marlene Messam TMSD Reviewer Completed 04/24/2024 10:00 AM
Transportation Engineering Lisa Taylor TMSD Reviewer Completed 04/25/2024 7:06 AM
Procurement Services Francheska Correa Level 1 Purchasing Gatekeeper Completed 04/25/2024 8:18 AM
Transportation Management Operations Support Tara Castillo TMSD Reviewer Completed
04/29/2024 2:49 PM
Road Maintenance Ellen Sheffey TMSD Reviewer Completed 04/29/2024 3:36 PM
Transportation Management Services Department Trinity Scott Transportation Completed
05/01/2024 11:10 AM
Procurement Services Sandra Srnka Procurement Director Review Completed 05/03/2024 9:07 AM
County Attorney's Office Scott Teach Level 2 Attorney Review Completed 05/06/2024 10:04 AM
County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Completed 05/06/2024 10:13 AM
Office of Management and Budget Debra Windsor Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Completed 05/06/2024 10:23 AM
Community & Human Services Maggie Lopez OMB Reviewer Completed 05/06/2024 2:13 PM
County Manager's Office Ed Finn Level 4 County Manager Review Completed 05/22/2024 4:11 PM
Board of County Commissioners Geoffrey Willig Meeting Pending 05/28/2024 9:00 AM
16.B.16
Packet Pg. 1170
Florida Power & Light Company
700 Universe Boulevard, TS4/JW, Juno Beach, FL 33408
November, 11th 2022
Mr. Eric Shroyer
Senior Project Manager
Manatee County Public Works
1022 26th Avenue East
Bradenton, FL 34206-3926
RE: Proposed Relocation of Transmission Facilities for Manatee County Project #6045662 44th Avenue East – West of I-75 to Lakewood Ranch Blvd. Transmission Line(s): Johnson-Manatee Plant/Johnson-Ringling 230kV Pole #140N2, 140N2A, 140N2B & 140N3 Manatee Plant – Ringling #2 (Parrish – Ringling) 230kV Pole #A140N2 & A140N3 Manatee Plant – Ringling #3 230kV Pole #B140N3 & B140N2 Dear Mr. Shroyer,
We have evaluated your request to relocate the referenced FPL transmission structure(s). The non-
binding Preliminary Estimate to accommodate this potential overhead relocation is $3,892,400.
The scope of the work to accomplish this relocation includes installation and removal of
approximately twelve (12) transmission structures, pile anchors, and conductor in the area of the
proposed roundabout. (“Scope of Work”). This estimate is not an offer from FPL to perform the
requested work and should not be construed or used as such for detailed planning purposes. It is
provided only to assist your decision-making, and will remain valid for 90 days from the date of
this letter.
This non-binding Preliminary Estimate is based on our previous experience with similar
relocations. However, due to the complex nature and variables associated with this type of work,
the Preliminary Estimate may not accurately represent the actual costs the applicant would be
obligated to pay FPL to relocate these facilities. By way of example, this Preliminary Estimate
does not include the cost to relocate any distribution facilities, facilities belonging to another utility
or potential third-party costs associated with the relocation, such as survey work; acquisition and
recording of easements; clearing easements of trees and obstructions which are calculated on a
case by case basis as part of the overall cost of the relocation. Additionally, this Preliminary
Estimate is based upon favorable field conditions, which include your cooperation and the
cooperation of any impacted third parties to eliminate conflicts.
If you decide to request detailed estimate on the above ‘ballpark’ estimate, the deposit amount
required is $269,620 enabling us to commence the detailed design and estimating process. If,
based on this non-binding Preliminary Estimate, you would like to obtain a more comprehensive
and detailed estimate (“Detailed Estimate”) of the potential costs we will require that you execute
DocuSign Envelope ID: 517B98ED-9594-4487-ABAF-2EB38126DF7C
16.B.16.a
Packet Pg. 1171 Attachment: Complete_with_DocuSign_BALLPARK_ESTIMATE_LET- Manatee County (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor
Craig Ledbetter
Page 2
Florida Power & Light Company
700 Universe Boulevard, TS4/JW, Juno Beach, FL 33408
the acknowledgement below and return an executed copy of this letter either as a PDF by e-mail
to my attention at craig.ledbetter@fpl.com or at: Florida Power & Light Company, Transmission
Projects Department, 700 Universe Blvd., TS4/JW Juno Beach, Florida 33408. We will provide
you an invoice for the required deposit amount with payment instructions (payable either by check
or by wire transfer). Payment should not be sent to the address listed above, instead payment must
be sent to the address listed in the invoice I will provide you upon receipt of the executed
Preliminary Estimate acknowledgement. FPL will not begin work on the Detailed Estimate until
both executed acknowledgement and the non-refundable deposit are received.
The non-refundable Deposit Amount is required due to the complexity and time required to create
a Detailed Estimate for such a project, and will be applied towards the estimated amount owed to
FPL for the project, should you decide to proceed with the work, and enter into a Relocation
Agreement for that work with FPL, within 90 days of the date the detailed estimate is provided.
After 90 days the Detailed Estimate will no longer be valid and would be subject to change in the
event of a work scope change.
Payment in full and execution of a Relocation Agreement will be required prior to commencement
of construction. Time of construction can vary depending upon easement execution, permitting,
resource availability, material delivery and line clearances. Such projects are scheduled after full
payment is made and a Relocation Agreement is executed.
Please feel free to contact me on (561) 803-7942, should you have any questions or need additional
information.
Sincerely,
Craig Ledbetter, P.E. Relocation Coordinator / Engineer I
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
On this ___ day of ____, 20__, we acknowledge and agree to the conditions set forth above, and by our inclusion of a check for the non-refundable Deposit Amount request that FPL prepare a Detailed Estimate for the above referenced Scope of Work.
By:
Title:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 517B98ED-9594-4487-ABAF-2EB38126DF7C
County Engineer, Deputy Directory - Public Works
Dec 222
Scott May, P.E.
16.B.16.a
Packet Pg. 1172 Attachment: Complete_with_DocuSign_BALLPARK_ESTIMATE_LET- Manatee County (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor
DocuSign Envelope ID: 517B98ED-9594-4487-ABAF-2EB38126DF7C16.B.16.aPacket Pg. 1173Attachment: Complete_with_DocuSign_BALLPARK_ESTIMATE_LET- Manatee County (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor
Florida Power & Light Company
700 Universe Boulevard, TS4/JW, Juno Beach, FL 33408
November 29th, 2023
Mr. Ryan Riordan
Project Manager – Natural Resources
Lee County Gov.
1500 Monroe St. 3rd Floor
Fort Myers, FL 33901
RE: Proposed Study for Orange River Flood Mitigation Transmission Line: Ft Myers Plant – Tice Radial 138kv and Ft Myers Plant – Winkler 138kV, Poles 94M18 & 94M19 Dear Mr. Riodan:
We have received your request for the Orange River Flood Mitigation project near the referenced
FPL transmission line(s), for the purpose of a ditch excavation near poles 94M18 & 94M19
(“Scope of Work”). Initially based on our relocation process, FPL provided a Preliminary Estimate
to accommodate your project, which includes an engineering deposit to assign an engineer of
records for the project. However, it’s our understanding, your office is seeking avenues to adjust
your design to minimize impact to our facilities. Our company values your effort, but at this point
we consider the need to perform a feasibility study to evaluate your request and determine if a
relocation is necessary. The cost of the feasibility study is $20,000, which is a non-refundable
(“Feasibility Study Fee”). Once we receive the non-refundable Feasibility Study Fee, we will
proceed to evaluate your request to study the referenced FPL transmission structure(s), and if
determined to be necessary, provide you with our determination on the new non-binding
preliminary estimate (“Preliminary Estimate”) for this potential overhead relocation. Please be
advised that both the Feasibility Study Fee and Preliminary Estimate are not an offer from FPL to
perform the any relocation work and should not be construed or used as such for detailed planning
purposes. It is provided only as an accommodation in an effort to assist your decision-making on
the excavation request.
This non-binding Preliminary Estimate will be based on the feasibility study and on our previous
experience with similar relocations. However, due to the complex nature and variables associated
with this type of work, the feasibility study is required and the Preliminary Estimate may not
accurately represent the actual costs the applicant would be obligated to pay FPL to relocate these
facilities. By way of example, the Preliminary Estimate will not include the cost to relocate any
distribution facilities, facilities belonging to another utility or potential third-party costs associated
with the relocation, such as survey work; acquisition and recording of easements; clearing
easements of trees and obstructions which are calculated on a case by case basis as part of the
overall cost of the relocation. Additionally, the Preliminary Estimate will be based upon favorable
field conditions, which include your cooperation and the cooperation of any impacted third parties
to eliminate conflicts.
16.B.16.b
Packet Pg. 1174 Attachment: Feasibility Study Fee Relocation Request Letter - Orange RIver Flood Signed (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor
Ryan Riordan – Lee County Gov.
November 29th, 2023
Page 2
Florida Power & Light Company
700 Universe Boulevard, TS4/JW, Juno Beach, FL 33408
If you decide to request a detailed estimate based on the Preliminary Estimate, a deposit in the
amount of 20% of the Preliminary Estimate will be required at that time, enabling us to commence
the detailed design and estimating process. If, you would like us to proceed with the feasibility
study in order to enable us to provide you an evaluation of your design and if necessary, a non-
binding Preliminary Estimate, or in the future obtain a more comprehensive and detailed estimate
(“Detailed Estimate”) of the potential costs of the requested relocation, we will require that you
pay us the non-refundable Feasibility Study Fee and execute the acknowledgement below. Please
return an executed copy of this letter either as a PDF by e-mail to my attention at
Craig.Ledbetter@FPL.com or at: Florida Power & Light Company, Transmission Projects
Department, 700 Universe Blvd., TS4/JW Juno Beach, Florida 33408. We will then provide you
an invoice for the required Feasibility Study Fee amount with payment instructions (payable either
by check or by wire transfer). Payment should not be sent to the address listed above, instead
payment must be sent to the address listed in the invoice I will provide you. FPL will not begin
work on the feasibility study, Preliminary Estimate or Detailed Estimate until both executed
acknowledgement and the non-refundable Feasibility Study Fee are received.
The non-refundable Feasibility Study Fee is required due to the complexity and time required to
evaluate and approve the design for such a project and will be applied towards the Preliminary
Estimated amount owed to FPL for the project, should you decide to proceed with the work, and
enter into a relocation agreement for that work with FPL.
Should you elect to proceed with the relocation, payment in full and execution of a relocation
agreement will be required prior to commencement of construction. Time of construction can vary
depending upon easement execution, permitting, resource availability, material delivery and line
clearances. Such projects are scheduled after full payment is made and a relocation agreement is
executed.
Please feel free to contact me at (561) 803-7942 should you have any questions or need additional
information.
Sincerely,
Craig B. Ledbetter, P.E. Senior Engineer / Relocation Coordinator ACKNOWLEDGEMENT On this ___ day of ____, 20__, we acknowledge and agree to the conditions set forth above, and by our inclusion of a check for the non-refundable Feasibility Study Fee request that FPL prepare a Preliminary Estimate for the above referenced Scope of Work.
By:
Title:
21 2 24
Ryan Riordan
Project Manager
16.B.16.b
Packet Pg. 1175 Attachment: Feasibility Study Fee Relocation Request Letter - Orange RIver Flood Signed (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor
16.B.16.cPacket Pg. 1176Attachment: FPL Estimate Letter_BCC Approved 7-12-22- Sarasota (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
16.B.16.cPacket Pg. 1177Attachment: FPL Estimate Letter_BCC Approved 7-12-22- Sarasota (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 1
Technical Memorandum
Pine Ridge Road Corridor Improvements
Date: October 20, 2023 Jacobs
5811 Pelican Bay Boulevard
Suite 305
Naples, FL 34108
Contact: Bill Gramer, PE, AICP
Email: Bill.Gramer@Jacobs.com
Mobile: 239.860.4922
www.jacobs.com
Project
Name:
Pine Ridge Rd. Corridor Improvements –
Design Services Phase 1
Contract No.: 21-7831
Work Order
No.:
4500218847
Client: Collier County
Prepared by: Jacobs
1. Background
The Collier County Pine Ridge Road Corridor Congestion Study1 (2018) evaluated
existing and future (2040) traffic conditions within the Pine Ridge Road corridor (from
Livingston Road to Napa Boulevard) and evaluated potential intersection improvements
that would relieve congestion and improve Level of Service (LOS).
The Study evaluated numerous conventional and alternative innovative intersection
designs along the Pine Ridge Road corridor. The Board of County Commissioners
approved the Study which approved the following intersection recommendations:
Pine Ridge Road / Livingston Road - Continuous Flow Intersection (CFI)
Pine Ridge Road / Whippoorwill Lane - Restricted Crossing U-Turn (R-CUT)
Pine Ridge Road / I-75 Interchange - Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI)
The County subsequently entered into a Professional Services Agreement for Pine Ridge
Road Corridor Improvements – Design Services Phase 1 (Contract #21-7831) with Jacobs
to incorporate the Study’s recommended corridor design improvements. As part of the
project, Jacobs modeled the corridor and individual intersections with updated existing
traffic data and 2045 traffic volume projections.
During initial workshop meetings, Jacobs, County, and Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT) staff identified potential operational and access management
issues with two of the proposed intersections:
Pine Ridge Road / Livingston Road CFI: due to ingress/egress constraints along
Livingston Road at the Meridian Plaza entrance
Pine Ridge Road / Whippoorwill Lane R-CUT: due to operational conflicts with the
nearby I-75 DDI
1 https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/government/transportation-management-services/capital-project-
planning-impact-fees-and-program-management/transportation-planning-section/planning-studies
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1178 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 2
Jacobs was directed to perform an expedited and focused review of the corridor design
improvements based on the new traffic model. The review considered operational
efficiency, construction costs and schedule, Right-of-Way (ROW) impacts, potential
business damages, access management, drainage and utility impacts.
The following alternatives are summarized in this Technical Memorandum:
Pine Ridge Road / Livingston Road Intersection
o Continuous Flow Intersection (CFI)
o Jughandle (JH)
o Single Point Urban Interchange (SPUI), also referred to as an overpass
Pine Ridge Road / Whippoorwill Lane Intersection
o Restricted Crossing U-Turn (R-CUT)
o Conventional Intersection
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1179 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum Jacobs 32.Pine Ridge Road / Livingston Road Intersection - Continuous Flow Intersection2.1 Concepts16.B.16.dPacket Pg. 1180Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road
Technical Memorandum Jacobs 416.B.16.dPacket Pg. 1181Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 5
2.2 CFI Traffic Modeling
2.2.1 2045 AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Delay – CFI
The analysis was completed for the year 2045 with a 1.5% growth rate chosen due to
the level of existing build-out in the area. The CFI was projected to perform slightly
better overall in the 2045 PM peak hour than the AM peak hour as tabulated below in
Figure 1.
Figure 1: 2045 AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Delay Comparison - CFI
Movement AM Volume
Percent of
Total AM
Volume
CFI AM
Delay
(seconds)
Overall CFI
AM Delay
(seconds) PM Volume
Percent of
Total PM
Volume
CFI PM
Delay
(seconds)
Overall CFI
PM Delay
(seconds)
EBL 194 2.3% 186.2 334 3.7% 119.3
EBT 1337 15.8% 25.1 2500 27.6% 72.0
EBR 138 1.6% 0.3 376 4.2% 2.0
WBL 452 5.3% 153.1 326 3.6% 185.0
WBT 2842 33.5% 41.6 1594 17.6% 38.1
WBR 431 5.1% 52.2 397 4.4% 58.8
NBL 397 4.7% 103.6 376 4.2% 83.8
NBT 801 9.5% 79.2 1087 12.0% 146.4
NBR 287 3.4% 31.4 487 5.4% 60.3
SBL 296 3.5% 140.7 615 6.8% 169.0
SBT 1169 13.8% 173.5 633 7.0% 65.3
SBR 128 1.5% 0.9 327 3.6% 1.4
Note: Delays for individual movements were obtained from Synchro version 11.
Overall intersection delays were determined through calculating the weighted average based on the delays for each movement relative to the
volumes for each movement.
Pine Ridge Corridor Intersection Delay Comparison
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
75.3 80.7
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1182 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 6
2.3 CFI Access Management
2.3.1 Ingress into Meridian Plaza
To accommodate the left turn crossover for the CFI, the existing access into Meridian
Plaza had to be redesigned. A movement of concern was the northbound right turn
access into Meridian Plaza. Jacobs evaluated two possibilities for access to Meridian
Plaza from Livingston Road:
1.The first option, shown in Concept 4, eliminates the existing right-in access from
Livingston Road and allows right-in access for westbound right turn movements
from Pine Ridge Road. Any vehicles driving northbound on Livingston Road are
required to make a U-turn north at the new Germain Honda access U-turn lane
and utilize the new signalized left-turn access into Meridian Plaza. Although
Meridian Plaza would lose their northbound right access, Meridian Plaza would
gain a southbound left turn access which does not currently exist.
The County asked Jacobs to evaluate the removal of the right-in access off
Livingston Road into Meridian Plaza from the Pine Ridge Road right turn lane due
to costs and potential backup caused by Meridian Plaza right turns affecting Pine
Ridge Road right turn movement onto Livingston Road.
2.As a result, Concept 5 was developed as an alternate solution for northbound
traffic access into Meridian Plaza. Concept 5 utilizes a loop access road for
northbound right turning movements into Meridian Plaza. This access road would
be a one-way, single lane road for northbound use only. Old Livingston Road will
require partial reconstruction to allow the loop access road to be constructed.
Note: ROW acquisition is required for Concept 5.
Concept 5 would require ROW acquisition (Parcel No. 38450080008 - 7061
Livingston Woods Ln) for the access road and the reconstruction of Old Livingston
Road. The northern lot immediately adjacent to this parcel is vacant and is owned
by the same entity. Concept 5 results in additional utility impacts, drainage
impacts, additional impervious area, privacy wall impacts, and tree line impacts
between Livingston Woods Lane and Meridian Plaza that will need to be
mitigated as a result of this concept.
2.3.2 Westbound Left out of Marquesa Plaza
Marquesa Plaza currently has left-in, right-in, and right-out access on both Pine Ridge
Road and Livingston Road. In both CFI concepts, it is recommended that the access from
Livingston Road be changed to a signalized intersection to allow for northbound,
southbound, and westbound access to and from Marquesa Plaza at this intersection. A
signalized intersection is preferred by North Collier Fire District. Additionally, the recent
connection of Marquesa Plaza Road and Thrive Drive also supports a signalized
intersection at this location.
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1183 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 7
2.3.3 Northbound Left into Germain Honda
In both CFI concepts, the existing northbound left access into Germain Honda will be
removed due to the southbound displaced left turns (for the CFI); however, both
concepts feature a dedicated U-turn lane north of the displaced left turn lanes to
accommodate access into Germain Honda.
2.3.4 Lock Up Self Storage
Lock Up Self Storage is an existing self-storage facility located on the west side of
Livingston Road just southwest of Marquesa Plaza. The facilities currently have a left-in,
right-in, and right-out access onto an access road from Livingston Road, directly across
from the Marquesa loop road. Note: The existing access road is in a County owned
parcel.
In all concepts (CFI, JH, and SPUI), the County access road will be removed for the
expansion of the pond and for the proposed PUED booster pump station. As such, Lock
Up Self Storage’s northernmost access will be removed.
Lock Up Self Storage also has a right-in, right-out access to Livingston Road
approximately 650 feet south of the aforementioned County access road.
The removal of the northernmost access road will require an existing internal access
road to be widened (less than 200 feet) due to portions of the road being restricted to
one way travel.
The right-in/right-out access from Livingston Road at the southernmost access point will
remain. The need for a northbound directional left turn to the southernmost access road
will be evaluated further.
2.4 Right of Way Impacts
In both CFI concepts, minor ROW takes are required from Meridian Plaza, Marquesa
Plaza, Germain Honda and Lock Up Self Storage.
In both CFI concepts, no parking impacts to either Meridian Plaza or Germain Honda are
anticipated.
2.5 Drainage Impacts
In both CFI concepts, impacts to the Livingston pond at the southwest quadrant of the
intersection will be significant due to the east bound right turn lane from Pine Ridge
Road. The impacts will be partially offset by the expansion of the pond further south and
the removal of the County access road to Lock Up Self Storage. Additional pond
modifications (scalloping the pond in-between FPL distribution poles) will be required to
replace lost pond treatment and attenuation areas due to the Pine Ridge Road
eastbound right turn lane to Livingston Road.
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1184 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 8
2.6 Livingston Woods Lane Ordinance No. 06-01
2.6.1 Background
Livingston Woods Lane is a local access road for the Livingston Woods Estates homes.
Livingston Woods Lane is currently zoned under the estates (E) classification.
Meridian Plaza is a mixed-use plaza on the northeast quadrant at the intersection of
Livingston Road and Pine Ridge Road. It currently supports restaurants, medical office
space including numerous pediatric orthopedic centers, and other miscellaneous uses. It
is currently zoned under the Cambridge Square Commercial Planned Use Development
(CPUD).
2.6.2 Ordinance Overview
Ordinance No. 06-01, approved on January 10, 2006, outlines the usage of Cambridge
Square and Meridian Plaza2. Of importance to the future Pine Ridge and Livingston
intersection improvements are the sections on access management as outlined in
Section 3.2, “Access to the subject parcel will be from Pine Ridge Road and Livingston
Road. A loop road is depicted on the CPUD Master Plan to facilitate access through the
subject property between Pine Ridge and Livingston Roads.”
Section 10.1.B further elaborates, “Within… the subject property a loop road shall
be provided and constructed through the property to provide access from Pine
Ridge Road to Livingston Road in order to reduce traffic at the intersection. The loop
road shall be dedicated as a public easement at the time of platting or SDP
approval, as the case may be.”
Section 10.1.I states, “… shall the existence of a point of ingress, a point of egress or
a median opening, nor the lack thereof, be the basis for any future cause of action
for damages against the County by the developer, its successor in title, or assignee.”
Section 10.1.L states, “If a traffic signal, or other traffic control device, sign or
[pavement] marking improvement within a public right-of-way or easement is
determined to be necessary by Collier County, the cost of such improvement shall
be borne by the developer and shall be paid to Collier County before the issuance of
the first CO.” Relevance to be discussed with County if modifications are required.
Additionally, the ordinance outlines in Section 4.17.C.2 a tree line and a privacy wall
to be constructed on the north side of Meridian Plaza following but more stringent
than Type “D” buffer standards according to Section 4.06.02 of the Land
Development Code (LDC).
As such, the loop access road and reconstructed Old Livingston Road in Concept 5 would
likely need to adhere to the tree line/privacy wall buffer consistent with section 4.06.03
of the LDC.
Note: The possibility of utilizing Old Livingston Road and/or Livingston Woods Lane for
access to Meridian Plaza was considered and deemed non-feasible.
2 https://app.collierclerk.com/LFBMR/DocView.aspx?id=19518&dbid=0&repo=BMRPROD
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1185 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 9
2.7 Cost Estimate
The cost estimates were prepared at a conceptual design level.
The costs estimate for the Continuous Flow Intersection (CFI) Concept 4 and Concept 5
are tabulated below in Table 1and Table 2 respectively.
Table 1. Preliminary Cost Estimate ‐ Continuous Flow Intersection (CFI) ‐ Concept 4
(No Loop Access Road)
Item Estimated Cost
Roadway/Drainage/Lighting $13,619,778
Signals (with Interconnect) $3,400,000
Structures $2,003,000
Utilities $2,000,000
Mobilization 10% $2,102,278
Contingency 15% $3,153,417
Total Construction Cost1 $26,278,472
1Excludes ROW, Design, Permitting, CEI and Mitigation Costs.
Table 2. Preliminary Cost Estimate ‐ Continuous Flow Intersection (CFI) ‐ Concept 5
(With Loop Access Road)
Item Estimated Cost
Roadway/Drainage/Lighting $13,619,778
Signals (with Interconnect) $3,400,000
Structures $2,003,000
Utilities $2,000,000
Meridian Plaza Access Road $3,500,000
Mobilization 10% $2,452,278
Contingency 15% $3,678,417
Total Construction Cost1 $30,653,472
1Excludes ROW Except for Loop Access Road Home Purchase, Design, Permitting, CEI and Mitigation Costs.
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1186 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 10
2.7.1 Cost Comparison to Nearby Similar Projects
A partial CFI (similar in design to the proposed CFI for Pine Ridge Road & Livingston
Road) in Lee County is currently under design at Metro Parkway (SR-739) & Daniels
Parkway with an estimated ROW cost at $23 million and construction cost at $27
million3. This project features higher than average ROW costs due the anticipated
acquisition of an approximately 12,000 square foot business, and numerous parking
spaces along the project area4. In total, 24 parcels would be impacted for a total ROW
required at 3.3 acres with two anticipated business relocations.
3 https://www.swflroads.com/project/431334-2
4 https://www.swflroads.com/project-files/248/Proposed%20RW%20-%20Revised.pdf
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1187 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum Jacobs 113.Pine Ridge Road / Livingston Road Intersection - Jughandle3.1 Concept16.B.16.dPacket Pg. 1188Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 12
3.2 Traffic Modeling
3.2.1 2045 AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Delay – JH
The analysis was completed for the year 2045 with a 1.5% growth rate chosen due to
the level of existing build-out in the area. The Jughandle was projected to perform
better overall in the AM peak hour than the PM peak hour as tabulated below in Figure 2.
Figure 2: 2045 AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Delay Comparison - JH
Note: The Jughandle design was modeled with the SBL trips distributed evenly through
the Pine Ridge & Livingston intersection (with 50% counted as EBT trips and 50%
counted as SBT trips) in order to not skew the model results in the Synchro Software by
counting the SBL trips twice.
Movement
AM
Volume
Percent of
Total AM
Volume
Jughandle
AM Delay
(seconds)
Overall
Jughandle
AM Delay
(seconds)
PM
Volume
Percent of
Total PM
Volume
Jughandle
PM Delay
(seconds)
Overall
Jughandle
PM Delay
(seconds)
EBL 194 2.3% 124.8 334 3.7% 94.0
EBT 1337 15.8% 44.4 2500 27.6% 87.0
EBR 138 1.6% 5.9 376 4.2% 14.2
WBL 452 5.3% 78.4 326 3.6% 196.9
WBT 2842 33.5% 51.6 1594 17.6% 23.7
WBR 431 5.1% 7.2 397 4.4% 11.6
NBL 397 4.7% 87.8 376 4.2% 123.5
NBT 801 9.5% 71.2 1087 12.0% 113.8
NBR 287 3.4% 26.5 487 5.4% 42.0
SBL 296 3.5% 163.3 615 6.8% 198.4
SBT 1169 13.8% 113.3 633 7.0% 76.6
SBR 128 1.5% 17.1 327 3.6% 40.1
Note: Delays for individual movements were obtained from Synchro version 11.
Pine Ridge Corridor Intersection Delay Comparison
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
65.2 81.2
Overall intersection delays were determined through calculating the weighted average based on the delays for each movement relative to the
volumes for each movement.
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1189 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 13
3.3 Access Management
3.3.1 Meridian Plaza Access
Currently, Meridian Plaza maintains a right-in, right-out onto Livingston Road and Pine
Ridge Road, which will remain under this concept. Changes to the median on Livingston
Road could be made to allow for a southbound left turn access which is not currently
available today – to be further evaluated by County and Jacobs. Unlike the CFI concepts,
however, this turn movement will remain unsignalized.
3.3.2 Westbound Left out of Marquesa Plaza
Marquesa Plaza currently has left-in, right-in, and right-out access on both Pine Ridge
Road and Livingston Road. In the Jughandle Concept, it is recommended that the access
from Livingston Road be changed to a signalized intersection to allow for northbound,
southbound, and westbound access to and from Marquesa Plaza at this intersection. A
signalized intersection is preferred by North Collier Fire District. Additionally, the recent
connection of Marquesa Plaza Road and Thrive Drive also supports a signalized
intersection at this location.
3.3.3 Northbound Left into Germain Honda
In the Jughandle concept, the existing northbound left access to Germain Honda may be
relocated to the north (dedicated U-turn lane north of the existing left turn lane) if the
County elects to provide a southbound left into Meridian Plaza.
Note: Both northbound and southbound lefts can be accommodated by widening
Livingston Road. Further evaluation will be required.
3.3.4 Lock Up Self Storage
Lock Up Self Storage is an existing self-storage facility located on the west side of
Livingston Road just southwest of Marquesa Plaza. The facilities currently have a left-in,
right-in, and right-out access onto an access road from Livingston Road, directly across
from the Marquesa loop road. Note: The existing access road is in a County owned
parcel.
In all concepts (CFI, JH, and SPUI), the County access road will be removed for the
expansion of the pond and for the proposed PUED booster pump station. As such, Lock
Up Self Storage’s northernmost access will be removed.
Lock Up Self Storage also has a right-in, right-out access to Livingston Road
approximately 650 feet south of the aforementioned County access road.
The removal of the northernmost access road will require an existing internal access
road to be widened (less than 200 feet) due to portions of the road being restricted to
one way travel.
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1190 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 14
The right-in/right-out access from Livingston Road at the southernmost access point will
remain. The need for a northbound directional left turn to the southernmost access road
will be evaluated further.
3.4 Right of Way Impacts
The Jughandle has no ROW impacts to Germain Honda or Meridian Plaza. A minor ROW
impact at Marquesa Plaza and a minor ROW impact at Lock Up Self Storage are
anticipated for the signalized intersection at Livingston Road.
The Jughandle would require a roadway easement from Knickerbocker Properties Inc
(Parcel No. 00256480005). The required easement for the Jughandle is also
incumbered by a Florida Power & Light (FPL) utility easement for FPL’s main
transmission poles. These transmission poles will be impacted from the Jughandle.
3.5 Drainage Impacts
In the Jughandle concept, impacts to the Livingston pond at the southwest quadrant of
the intersection will be minimized if a bridge is utilized for the Jughandle. The impacts
will be partially offset by the expansion of the pond further south and the removal of the
County access road to Lock Up Self Storage. Additional pond modifications (scalloping
the pond in-between FPL distribution poles) will be required to replace lost pond
treatment and attenuation areas.
3.6 Coordination to Date
3.6.1 North Collier Fire District
During the previous Pine Ridge Road Corridor Study, the North Collier Fire District had
concerns with the Jughandle alternative due to the additional signalized intersection
west of the Pine Ridge Road and Livingston Road intersection and their access through
the Jughandle. As a result, the County requested that Jacobs meet with the North Collier
Fire District to discuss any concerns.
On July 10th, 2023, Jacobs staff Bill Gramer and Nathan Lunsford met with the North
Collier Fire District at 6495 Taylor Road, Naples Fl 34109. In attendance from the
County were Dennis McCoy and Lorraine Lantz. The Assistant Chief Kris Thomas,
Assistant Chief James Hammond, Deputy Chief Michael Jimenez, and Battalion Chief
Sean Lintz attended the meeting representing North Collier Fire District.
Jacobs began the meeting by summarizing the 2018 Pine Ridge Road Corridor Study and
discussed the previous concerns brought forward by the Fire District mentioned in the
Study. The attendees from the North Collier Fire District were unaware of the study, nor
knew about the concerns voiced during the study. Jacobs explained the operations of
the Jughandle and discussed all possible points of conflict. The Fire District fully
understood the changes and implications of the Jughandle design and had no concerns
that would warrant the outright dismissal of the Jughandle design.
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1191 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 15
North Collier Fire District requested/preferred a signal at Marquesa Plaza and Livingston
Road intersection stating that without the signal at Marquesa Plaza and Livingston Road,
the additional traffic eastbound on Pine Ridge Road making the U-turn movement in
front of Fire Station #46 would cause further delay for the Station, which already
experiences significant issues with access across Pine Ridge Road.
3.6.2 FPL Coordination
On July 30, 2023 Jacobs staff Bill Gramer and Nathan Lunsford presented to Craig
Ledbetter, Senior Engineer at FPL, and Nicholas Stewart, with FPL, the conceptual design
of the Jughandle and its impacts to the FPL Transmission poles. Attending from the
County were Dennis McCoy. FPL understood the impacts of the Jughandle and agreed
with the feasibility of relocating the poles. They brought to Jacobs’ attention the
concerns of line galloping (sway in the lines), skews in the alignment, and potential
needed vertical adjustments of the transmission lines.
On August 8, 2023, Jacobs sent the refined Jughandle design (as illustrated below in
Figure 3) which minimized impacts to the FPL Transmission Poles/Wires.
On August 23, 2023, Craig responded with a “Ballpark Estimate Letter” for the estimated
costs of the impact to the FPL Transmission Poles. The letter assumed a “worst-case”
scenario of the 3 impacted poles (Figure 3) requiring the adjustment of 16 total poles
north and south of the affected poles due to swaying, tie-back etc. Jacobs utilized that
data to develop a “likely-scenario” estimate which assumes only 3 poles will be
impacted/replaced.
On October 17, 2023, Jacobs staff coordinated with Craig Ledbetter and Roberto Cruz to
further refine the cost estimates and FPL’s requirements and scheduling needs.
Under the current conceptual design, 3 FPL transmission poles (Alico-Collier 138kV
(143M3); Alico-Collier / Collier-Terry 230kV (266M1); Collier-Terry 138kV / Collier-
Orange River 230kV (A266M1)) will be removed and replaced with 3 poles that require
no guy-wires.
The current concept avoids the western most pole, removes and relocates the existing
dual pole system (2 poles), and removes and replaces the eastern most pole with a
transmission pole that requires no guy-wires in the same location (see Figure 3 on the
following page).
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1192 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 16
Figure 3: FPL Transmission Pole Relocation Concept
3.7 Cost Estimate
The cost estimates were prepared at a conceptual design level.
The cost estimate for the Jughandle (JH) are tabulated below in Table 3.
Table 3. Preliminary Cost Estimate ‐ Jughandle (JH)
Item Estimated Cost
Roadway/Drainage/Lighting $7,015,778
Signals (with Interconnect) $3,400,000
Structures $4,063,500
Utilities $4,100,000
Mobilization 10% $1,857,928
Contingency 15% $2,786,892
Total Construction Cost1 $23,224,097
1Excludes ROW, Design, Permitting, CEI and Mitigation Costs.
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1193 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum Jacobs 174.Pine Ridge Road / Livingston Road Intersection - Single Point Urban Interchange4.1 Concept16.B.16.dPacket Pg. 1194Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 18
4.2 Traffic Modeling
4.2.1 SPUI Variation Comparison – 2045 Peak Hour Delay (PM)
Based on comments from County personnel, 4 variations of the SPUI and its delays were
modeled in the year 2045 with a 1.5% growth rate chosen due to the level of existing
build-out in the area. All 4 variations included an at grade northbound and southbound
through lane. The four variations are tabulated below in Figure 4.
1. Standard (2 left turn lanes and 1 right turn lane at all approaches)
2. Dual Northbound Right (NBR)
3. Triple Southbound Left (SBL)
4. Dual Northbound Right (NBR) and Triple Southbound Left (SBL)
Figure 4: 2045 SPUI Delay Comparison - 4 Variations
The triple SBL (Variation 3) was not projected to provide as much benefit as the dual
NBR (Variation 2). Additionally, a dual NBR and triple SBL combination (Variation 4)
would have extensive ROW impacts and was deemed non-feasible.
As a result, the dual NBR (Variation 2) was selected as the optimal SPUI design for
further modeling.
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1195 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 19
4.2.2 2045 AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Delay – SPUI
The analysis was completed for the dual northbound right turn SPUI (Variation 2) for the
year 2045 with a 1.5% growth rate chosen due to the level of existing build-out in the
area. The SPUI was projected to perform better in the AM peak hour than the PM peak
hour as tabulated below in Figure 5.
Figure 5: 2045 AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Delay Comparison – SPUI
Movement AM Volume
Percent of
Total AM
Volume
Overpass w/
Dual NBR AM
Delay
(seconds)
Overpass w/
Dual NBR AM
Delay
(seconds) PM Volume
Percent of
Total PM
Volume
Overpass w/
Dual NBR PM
Delay
(seconds)
Overpass w/
Dual NBR PM
Delay
(seconds)
EBL 194 2.3% 100.5 334 3.7% 67.7
EBT 1337 15.8% 37.5 2500 27.6% 125.9
EBR 138 1.6% 0.1 376 4.2% 0.1
WBL 452 5.3% 83.3 326 3.6% 117.5
WBT 2842 33.5% 81.2 1594 17.6% 23.2
WBR 431 5.1% 0.0 397 4.4% 0.3
NBL 397 4.7% 89.5 376 4.2% 86.6
NBT 801 9.5% 83.5 1087 12.0% 96.3
NBR 287 3.4% 38.1 487 5.4% 59.1
SBL 296 3.5% 88.4 615 6.8% 120.9
SBT 1169 13.8% 120.5 633 7.0% 74.2
SBR 128 1.5% 26.1 327 3.6% 52.4
Note: Delays for individual movements were obtained from Synchro version 11.
Overall intersection delays were determined through calculating the weighted average based on the delays for each movement relative to
the volumes for each movement.
64.9 77.4
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Pine Ridge Corridor Intersection Delay Comparison
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1196 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 20
4.3 Access Management
4.3.1 Meridian & Marquesa Plaza
The Study proposes a 4-lane flyover bridge with at-grade northbound and southbound
through lanes to improve access and maintain northbound right-in access to Meridian
Plaza.
Marquesa Plaza currently has left-in, right-in, and right-out access on both Pine Ridge
Road and Livingston Road. In the SPUI concept, the access from Livingston Road will be
right-in/right-out only* and access to and from Pine Ridge Road will remain unchanged.
*The southbound left in access to Marquesa Plaza will be removed due to the
bridge approach tie-down distance required. A new U-turn/left turn access is
proposed at Brynwood Preserve approximately 1,800 feet south of the Pine
Ridge Road/Livingston Road Intersection.
4.3.2 Northbound Left into Germain Honda
In the SPUI concept, the existing northbound left access into Germain Honda will be
removed due to the bridge approach tie-down distance required. A new dedicated U-
turn lane north of the bridge tie-down will accommodate access into Germain Honda.
4.3.3 Lock Up Self Storage
Lock Up Self Storage is an existing self-storage facility located on the west side of
Livingston Road just southwest of Marquesa Plaza. The facilities currently have a left-in,
right-in, and right-out access onto an access road from Livingston Road, directly across
from the Marquesa loop road. Note: The existing access road is in a County owned
parcel.
In all concepts (CFI, JH, and SPUI), the County access road will be removed for the
expansion of the pond and for the proposed PUED booster pump station. As such, Lock
Up Self Storage’s northernmost access will be removed.
Lock Up Self Storage also has a right-in, right-out access to Livingston Road
approximately 650 feet south of the aforementioned County access road.
The removal of the northernmost access road will require an existing internal access
road to be widened (less than 200 feet) due to portions of the road being restricted to
one way travel.
The right-in/right-out access from Livingston Road at the southernmost access point will
remain. The need for a northbound directional left turn to the southernmost access road
will be evaluated further.
4.4 Right of Way
The anticipated ROW needs will be extensive in the 3 business quadrants (Germain
Honda, Meridian Plaza and Marquesa Plaza) due to the wide footprint needed.
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1197 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 21
4.5 Drainage
The impacts to the Livingston pond at the southwest quadrant of the intersection will be
minimal. Any impacts that may occur may be offset by the expansion of the pond further
south with the removal of the County access road to Lock Up Self Storage and by
scalloping the pond in-between FPL distribution poles.
4.6 Cost Estimate
The cost estimates were prepared at a conceptual design level.
The cost estimate for the 4-lane overpass (SPUI) are tabulated below in Table 4.
Table 4. Preliminary Cost Estimate ‐ Single Point Urban Interchange (SPUI)
Item Estimated Cost
Roadway/Drainage/Lighting $19,725,000
Signals (with Interconnect) $4,000,000
Structures $21,016,000
Utilities $3,000,000
Mobilization 10% $4,774,100
Contingency 15% $7,161,150
Total Construction Cost1 $59,676,250
1Excludes ROW, Design, Permitting, CEI and Mitigation Costs.
4.6.1 Nearby Similar Projects
In July 2007, a 6-Lane SPUI opened at Golden Gate Parkway & Airport Pulling Road. The
construction cost $38.3 million with Golden Gate Parkway ‘flying over’ Airport Pulling
Road5. Adjusting for inflation, the same $38.3 million would be nearly $60 million.
The Immokalee Road Corridor Congestion Study6 (2021) identified a 4-lane SPUI
alternative at Livingston Road and Immokalee Road with an estimated cost of $38
million. The current cost estimate (2023) ranges from $54 - $60 million based on recent
construction cost data.
Note: The SPUI alternative will have significant ROW costs associated with the
construction.
5 https://archive.naplesnews.com/news/local/golden-gate-parkway-overpass-proving-to-be-a-time-saver-drivers-say-ep-399297355-344123182.html/
6 https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/government/transportation-management-services/capital-project-planning-impact-fees-and-program-
management/transportation-planning-section/planning-studies
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1198 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 22
5. Traffic Modeling Comparisons
5.1 2045 AM Peak Hour Traffic Delay Comparison – CFI, JH, SPUI
The analyses were completed for the year 2045 with a 1.5% growth rate chosen due to
the level of existing build-out in the area.
The Jughandle and SPUI were projected to perform better in the AM peak hour than the
CFI AM peak hour as tabulated below in Figure 6.
Figure 6: 2045 AM Peak Hour Traffic Delay Comparison – CFI, JH, SPUI
Movement AM Volume
Percent of
Total AM
Volume
CFI AM Delay
(seconds)
Overall CFI
AM Delay
(seconds)
Jughandle AM
Delay
(seconds)
Overall
Jughandle
AM Delay
(seconds)
Overpass w/
Dual NBR AM
Delay
(seconds)
Overall
Overpass w/
Dual NBR AM
Delay
(seconds)
EBL 194 2.3% 186.2 124.8 100.5
EBT 1337 15.8% 25.1 44.4 37.5
EBR 138 1.6% 0.3 5.9 0.1
WBL 452 5.3% 153.1 78.4 83.3
WBT 2842 33.5% 41.6 51.6 81.2
WBR 431 5.1% 52.2 7.2 0.0
NBL 397 4.7% 103.6 87.8 89.5
NBT 801 9.5% 79.2 71.2 83.5
NBR 287 3.4% 31.4 26.5 38.1
SBL 296 3.5% 140.7 163.3 88.4
SBT 1169 13.8% 173.5 113.3 120.5
SBR 128 1.5% 0.9 17.1 26.1
Note:
AM Peak Hour
Pine Ridge Corridor ‐ Pine Ridge & Livingston 2045 Delay Comparison
Delays for individual movements were obtained from Synchro version 11.
Overall intersection delays were determined through calculating the weighted average based on the delays for each movement relative to
the volumes for each movement.
75.3 65.2 64.9
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1199 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 23
5.2 2045 PM Peak Hour Traffic Delay Comparison – CFI, JH, SPUI
The CFI and SPUI were projected to perform better in the PM peak hour than the
Jughandle PM peak hour as tabulated below in Figure 7.
Figure 7: 2045 PM Peak Hour Traffic Delay Comparison – CFI, JH, SPUI
Movement AM Volume
Percent of
Total AM
Volume
CFI AM Delay
(seconds)
Overall CFI
AM Delay
(seconds)
Jughandle AM
Delay
(seconds)
Overall
Jughandle
AM Delay
(seconds)
Overpass w/
Dual NBR AM
Delay
(seconds)
Overall
Overpass w/
Dual NBR AM
Delay (seconds)
EBL 334 3.7% 119.3 94.0 67.7
EBT 2500 27.6% 72.0 87.0 125.9
EBR 376 4.2% 2.0 14.2 0.1
WBL 326 3.6% 185.0 196.9 117.5
WBT 1594 17.6% 38.1 23.7 23.2
WBR 397 4.4% 58.8 11.6 0.3
NBL 376 4.2% 83.8 123.5 86.6
NBT 1087 12.0% 146.4 113.8 96.3
NBR 487 5.4% 60.3 42.0 59.1
SBL 615 6.8% 169.0 198.4 120.9
SBT 633 7.0% 65.3 76.6 74.2
SBR 327 3.6% 1.4 40.1 52.4
Note:
PM Peak Hour
Pine Ridge Corridor ‐ Pine Ridge & Livingston 2045 Delay Comparison
Delays for individual movements were obtained from Synchro version 11.
Overall intersection delays were determined through calculating the weighted average based on the delays for each movement relative to
the volumes for each movement.
80.7 81.2 77.4
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1200 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 24
5.3 2022 PM Peak Hour Traffic Delay Comparison – CFI, JH, SPUI
The three innovative intersection alternatives (CFI, JH, SPUI with dual NBR) were
modeled with 2022 traffic data in the PM peak hour traffic delay and are tabulated
below in Figure 8.
Figure 8: 2022 PM Peak Hour Traffic Delay Comparison - CFI, JH, SPUI
Movement PM Volume
Percent of
Total PM
Volume
CFI PM Delay
(seconds)
Overall CFI
PM Delay
(seconds)
Jughandle PM
Delay
(seconds)
Overall
Jughandle
PM Delay
(seconds)
Overpass w/
Dual NBR PM
Delay
(seconds)
Overall
Overpass w/
Dual NBR PM
Delay (seconds)
EBL 248 3.7% 88.6 99.2 72.3
EBT 1858 27.6% 41.8 61.8 49.7
EBR 279 4.2% 1.4 11.7 0.2
WBL 242 3.6% 170.5 90.9 108.9
WBT 1185 17.6% 16.5 27.3 15.2
WBR 295 4.4% 54.1 8.6 0.3
NBL 279 4.2% 98.6 116.6 88.5
NBT 808 12.0% 68.9 74.4 84.6
NBR 362 5.4% 27.5 37.6 51.4
SBL 457 6.8% 114.4 144.6 89.1
SBT 470 7.0% 57.3 71.0 67.5
SBR 243 3.6% 1.5 36.5 43.3
Note: Delays for individual movements were obtained from Synchro version 11.
Overall intersection delays were determined through calculating the weighted average based on the delays for each movement relative to the volumes
for each movement.
Pine Ridge Corridor ‐ Pine Ridge & Livingston Existing (2022) Delay Comparison
PM Peak Hour
52.0 61.6 46.5
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1201 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 25
6. Cost Estimate Comparisons
The four cost estimates are tabulated below in Table 5.
Table 5. Preliminary Cost Estimate – CFI, JH, SPUI
Item Estimated Cost
CFI Concept 4 $26,278,472
CFI Concept 5 (With Loop Access Road) $30,653,472
Jughandle $23,224,097
SPUI $59,676,250
7. Pine Ridge Road / Livingston Road Intersection -
Conclusion & Recommendation
From an operational standpoint, all three of the alternative innovative intersections
(Continuous Flow Intersection, Jughandle, Single Point Urban Interchange) will improve
the functionality of the Pine Ridge Road/Livingston Road Intersection; however, the
preferred alternative must also consider driver ease of use, access management,
construction costs, and ROW acquisition costs.
In the 2045 PM peak hour model, all three alternatives had similar overall operational
performances. In the 2045 AM peak hour, both the SPUI and Jughandle were projected
to perform better overall than the CFI.
In addition, the Jughandle benefits include:
Lowest construction cost
Shortest construction schedule
Least disruption to motorists (traffic operations) during construction
Minimal impacts to existing utilities
Minimal ROW impacts
No anticipated business damages
Maintains safe access management
Efficient bicycle and pedestrian accommodations
Therefore, based on the additional considerations, Jacobs recommends the Jughandle
alternative as the preferred innovative intersection design choice for the Pine Ridge
Road and Livingston Road intersection.
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1202 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 26
8. Pine Ridge Road / Whippoorwill Lane Intersection –
Conclusion & Recommendation
The Collier County Pine Ridge Road Corridor Congestion Study (2018) also evaluated the
Pine Ridge Road / Whippoorwill Lane Intersection. The Study recommended a Restricted
Crossing U-Turn (R-CUT) intersection as the preferred alternative (See Figure 9 below).
Figure 9: Pine Ridge Road / Whippoorwill Lane R-CUT (from the Study)
However, post Study, FDOT’s review of the corridor traffic model raised concerns that the
proposed R-CUT would negatively impact traffic operations of the DDI due to the close
proximity of the eastern portion of the R-CUT and the I-75 Southbound off ramps.
Jacobs’ remodeling of the corridor with 2045 traffic data verified FDOT’s concerns.
Jacobs prepared various alternative geometric layouts of the R-CUT in an attempt to
minimize its impact on the DDI. However, all viable alternative configurations of the R-
CUT resulted in negative operational impacts to the DDI. As a result, conventional
improvements were deemed the most acceptable alternative.
Jacobs recommends the following conventional improvements to the intersection:
Re-align median at Kramer Drive to provide (See Figure 10 below):
o 1 southbound right turn/thru lane
o 2 southbound left turn lanes
o 4’ raised traffic barrier
o 1 northbound receiving lane
Note: 4’ raised traffic barrier requires realigned sidewalk and minimal ROW
acquisition
No changes to Whippoorwill Lane recommended due to ROW restrictions
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1203 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
Technical Memorandum
Jacobs 27
Figure 10: Kramer Drive Improvements
9. Pine Ridge Road / I-75 Interchange DDI –
Conclusion & Recommendation
The Collier County Pine Ridge Road Corridor Congestion Study (2018) also evaluated the
Pine Ridge Road / I-75 Interchange. The Study recommended a Diverging Diamond
Interchange (DDI) as the preferred alternative (See Figure 11 below). Based on Jacobs’
review, no changes to The Study’s proposed recommendations are required.
Figure 11: Pine Ridge Road / I-75 DDI (from the Study) Kramer Dr Pine Ridge Road
16.B.16.d
Packet Pg. 1204 Attachment: Livingston - Pine Ridge Technical Memorandum (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
16.B.16.ePacket Pg. 1205Attachment: FPL Acknowledgement Letter 03.12.24 (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
16.B.16.ePacket Pg. 1206Attachment: FPL Acknowledgement Letter 03.12.24 (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)
16.B.16.ePacket Pg. 1207Attachment: FPL Acknowledgement Letter 03.12.24 (28698 : FPL Agreement - Pine Ridge Road Corridor Project)