MPO Agenda 11/14/2025COLLIER COUNTY
Metropolitan Planning Organization
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples, FL 34112
November 14, 2025
9:30 AM
Commissioner Dan Kowal, Chair
Council Member Tony Pernas, Vice-Chair
Commissioner Burt L. Saunders
Commissioner Chris Hall
Commissioner Rick LoCastro
Commissioner William L. McDaniel, Jr.
Council Member Bonita Schwan
Council Member Berne Barton
Council Member Linda Penniman
This meeting of the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is open to the public and citizen
input is encouraged. Any person wishing to speak on any scheduled item may do so upon recognition of
the Chairperson. Any person desiring to have an item placed on the agenda shall make a request in
writing with a description and summary of the item, to the MPO Director or MPO Chairman 14 days
prior to the date of the next scheduled meeting of the MPO. Any person who decides to appeal a
decision of this Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto, and therefore may need
to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceeding is made, which record includes the testimony and
evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act,
any person requiring special accommodations to participate in this meeting should contact the Collier
Metropolitan Planning Organization 72 hours prior to the meeting by calling (239) 252-5814. The
MPO’s planning process is conducted in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and
Related Statutes. Any person or beneficiary who believes that within the MPO’s planning process they
have been discriminated against because or race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, disability, or
familial status may file a complaint with the Collier MPO Title VI Coordinator Ms. Suzanne Miceli
(239) 252-5814 or by email at: Suzanne.Miceli@colliercountyfl.gov, or in writing to the Collier MPO,
attention: Ms. Miceli, at 2885 South Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL 34104.
1. Call to Order
Page 1 of 397
2. Roll Call
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Approval of the Agenda, Previous Minutes, and Consent Items
4.A. October 10, 2025, Meeting Minutes (2025-4688)
5. Public Comments for Items not on the Agenda
6. Agency Updates
6.A. FDOT
6.B. MPO
7. Committee Chair Reports
7.A. Citizens Advisory Committee Chair Report (2025-4689)
7.B. Technical Advisory Committee Chair Report (2025-4690)
7.C. Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Chair Report (2025-4702)
8. Regular Board Action (Roll Call Required)
8.A. Approve an Amendment to the FY 2026-2030 Transportation Improvement Program – two
new transit projects for operating assistance and capital to purchase vehicles/equipment and
add the Railroad & Utilities phases to two existing roadway projects (2025-4691)
9. Regular Board Action (No Roll Call)
9.A. Review and Comment on Draft 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan (2025-4701)
9.B. Recommendation to Provide Additional Staff Direction Regarding the MPO Executive
Director Recruitment Process (2025-4697)
10. Presentations (May Require Board Action)
10.A. Center for Urban Transportation Research Report and Presentation on Collier and Lee MPO
Consolidation Feasibility Study (2025-4693)
10.B. FDOT FY 2027-2031 Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program (2025-4694)
11. Distribution Items
12. Member Comments
13. Next Meeting Date
13.A. Next Meeting Date: Thursday, December 11, 2025 (off-cycle for LRTP adoption) | Board of
County Commissioners Chambers, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34112 (2025-4695)
14. Adjourn
Page 2 of 397
Page 3 of 397
1
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples, FL 34112
October 10, 2025 | 9:30 a.m.
MEETING MINUTES
**HYBRID REMOTE – IN-PERSON AND VIRTUALLY VIA ZOOM
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Kowal called the meeting to order at approximately 9:30 a.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Ms. Miceli called roll and confirmed a quorum was present in the room.
Members Present (in BCC Chambers)
Commissioner Dan Kowal, Chair
Council Member Tony Pernas, Vice-Chair
Commissioner Burt L. Saunders
Commissioner Chris Hall
Commissioner Rick LoCastro
Commissioner William L. McDaniel, Jr.,
Council Member Linda Penniman
Council Member Berne Barton
Council Member Bonita Schwan
Members Absent
None
MPO Staff
Anne McLaughlin, Executive Director
Sean Kingston, Planner III
Dusty Hansen, Planner II
Suzanne Miceli, Operations Support Specialist II
FDOT
Wayne Gaither, Director, District 1 Southwest Area Office
Marcellus Evans, District 1 Community Liaison
Jason Heironimus, Public Information Officer
Page 4 of 397
2
Others Present
Scott Teach, Esq., Deputy County Attorney
Trinity Scott, Collier County Transportation Mgmt. Services Department Head
Lorraine Lantz, Collier County Transportation Planning, Planning Manager
Omar De Leon, Collier Area Transit, Transit Manager,
Sonal Dodia, Jacobs Engineering
Carmen Monroy, for Stantec Consulting
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chair Kowal led the Pledge of Allegiance.
4. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA, PREVIOUS MINUTES AND CONSENT ITEMS
4.A. Approval of September 12, 2025 Meeting Minutes.
4.B. Approve Administrative Change Order 1 for TY Lin International for the
Comprehensive Safety Action Plan
4.C. Approve Amendment 7 to Public Transit Grant Agreement G1V40
4.D. Approve Amendments 4 and 5 to Public Transit Grant Agreement G2594
Commissioner Saunders moved to approve the agenda, previous minutes and consent items and
Council Member Penniman seconded. Passed unanimously.
5. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
6. AGENCY UPDATES
6.A. FDOT
Mr. Evans said several public meetings were scheduled. For the US-41 project, from north of Old
US 41 to south of Gulf Park Drive, an in-person open house was set for Monday, October 21st at the
Courtyard by Marriott Naples, followed by a virtual meeting on Wednesday, October 23rd, via Zoom. The
Livingston Trail Extension PD&E Study, covering the area from Radio Road to the Collier County Line,
was scheduled for Tuesday, November 19th, from 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. on GoToWebinar. The Old 41
PD&E Study hearing was announced as a hybrid meeting to be held on Thursday, November 20th, from
5:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. Additional details were available on the Southwest Florida Roads website. Mr.
Evans also provided an update on the I-75/951 interchange, noting that the widening for the southbound I-
75 had begun and the project remained on schedule and was progressing as planned.
Page 5 of 397
3
Commissioner Hall asked if there was a status update on a median project near US 41 and Gulf
Park.
Mr. Gaither said he would look into it and follow up with Commissioner Hall.
6.B. MPO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Ms. McLaughlin mentioned that the County’s ITS project for vehicle count stations came in under
budget due to improved technology, allowing for the installation of approximately 12 additional stations at
no extra cost. She reminded attendees that the posting for her position was scheduled to close on Thursday,
October 16th, and application updates would be provided at the next meeting. She also noted that the
artwork displayed at the back of the room was hers; part of her retirement plans to pursue art, and expressed
appreciation for the County’s support in allowing use of space.
7. CHAIR REPORTS
7.A. CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CAC)
7.A.1. Citizens Advisory Committee Chair Report
The report was presented in writing.
7.B. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC)
7.B.1. Technical Advisory Committee Chair Report
The report was presented in writing.
7.C. BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN COMMITTEE (BPAC)
7.C.1. Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee Chair Report
The report was presented in writing.
7.D. CONGESTION MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (CMC)
7.D.1. Congestion Management Committee Chair Report
The report was presented in writing.
8. REGULAR BOARD ACTION (ROLL CALL REQUIRED)
None.
Page 6 of 397
4
9. REGULAR BOARD ACTION (NO ROLL CALL)
9.A. Review, Comment on, and Accept the Transit Development Plan, Major Update, for
2026-2035
Ms. Hansen said that transit agencies receiving Transit State Block Grant Funds, such as Collier
Area Transit (CAT), are required to update their Transit Development Plan (TDP) every five years, with
the next major update due to FDOT by March 2026. The MPO, in partnership with CAT, retained Stantec
Consulting to assist with the plan’s development. Staff requested Board members review and comment on
the draft TDP, noting that minor feedback from committees and planning agencies is being incorporated,
with a summary of those revisions provided in the agenda packet. Since the MPO funded the TDP, staff
asked the Board to accept the draft so it can proceed to a public comment period and ultimately be presented
to the Collier Board of County Commissioners (BCC) for approval in December.
Ms. Monroy provided a presentation (which can be viewed in the October 10, 2025 MPO Agenda),
noting it had been reviewed by various committees, with comments from those groups, the Board, and
FDOT to be incorporated into the final version. Stantec’s analysis highlighted significant travel between
Lee and Collier counties. Key recommendations included maintaining and enhancing the current system,
expanding service to meet community needs, and introducing new routes in underserved areas. The system
shows high vehicle utilization, lower-than-average operating costs (but costs are rising), rising ridership,
and a 33% increase in paratransit trips, reflecting both population growth and an aging demographic.
Commissioner McDaniel questioned the rationale behind designating University of Florida/IFAS
as a route name, since the route identified in the Regional Transit Service and Fare Study suggested
connecting transfer station to transfer station and requested that it be addressed in the final proposed TDP
to be presented to Collier BCC in December..
A group discussion followed, regarding the potential impact of micromobility and microtransit on
CAT’s system, especially in bridging first-mile/last-mile gaps. Council Member Penniman asked about
bus capacity and whether smaller buses could be used when a large capacity is not needed. Mr. De Leon
responded that in regard to bus capacity and fleet sizing, vehicle sizes for routes are selected based on
evaluation of peak ridership data, operational efficiency, and durability. CAT continually monitors bus
capacity on routes to ensure that the appropriate vehicles are assigned to routes. Ms. Monroy added that
peer comparisons showed CAT has high vehicle utilization despite a smaller fleet, largely due to its
concentration in dense urban areas.
Chair Kowal moved to accept the Transit Development Plan, Major Update, for 2026-2035 and
Vice-Chair Pernas seconded. Passed unanimously.
9.B. Accept the 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan Evaluation Matrix/Project Needs
List Ranking and Cost Feasible Projects List
Ms. McLaughlin said that the purpose of the agenda item was to request acceptance of the 2050
Long-Range Transportation Plan Evaluation Matrix and the Cost Feasible Project List. She noted that these
Page 7 of 397
5
materials had been presented at the previous meeting and had since received endorsements from both the
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC). No changes had been
made to the documents since the Board last reviewed them. The full draft of the plan would be brought
forward for Board review in November.
Commissioner McDaniel moved to accept the 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan Evaluation
Matrix/Project Needs List Ranking and Cost Feasible Projects List and Commissioner Saunders seconded.
Passed unanimously.
9.C. Approve the Comprehensive Safety Action Plan and Resolution 2025-12
Ms. McLaughlin said staff was requesting Board approval of the Comprehensive Safety Action
Plan (CSAP) and its accompanying resolution, reaffirming a commitment to Target Zero in alignment with
FDOT. The plan was developed with consultant TY Lin with extensive public input and guidance from the
Steering Committee. Funded by a $200,000 grant from the federal Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A)
program along with $40,000 in matching funds from Collier County and $10,000 in MPO local funds, the
plan focuses on reducing fatalities and serious injuries and will be incorporated into the 2050 Long Range
Transportation Plan. It has received endorsements from the TAC and CAC.Minor language updates would
be made to address comments made by FDOT before submission to the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA).
Commissioner McDaniel moved to approve the Comprehensive Safety Action Plan and Resolution
2025-12, and Council Member Schwan seconded. Passed unanimously.
9.D. Approve the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
Mr. Kingston said that the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP), presented to the Board in
September, is updated every five years as part of the Long-Range Transportation Plan, to fulfill a key
multimodal component of the plan. The BPMP was developed with Capital Consulting Solutions in
collaboration with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC), over a period of two years,
with substantial public input and detailed analysis. It includes chapters on existing conditions, crash and
safety data, design guidelines, and implementation strategies, with a strong emphasis on safety and
alignment with the Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (CSAP). Following the last Board meeting, the draft
plan was endorsed by the BPAC, TAC, and CAC, with minor revisions. The plan was also presented to the
Congestion Management Committee.
Council Member Schwan moved to approve the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, and Council
Member Penniman seconded. Passed unanimously.
10. PRESENTATIONS (MAY REQUIRE BOARD ACTION)
None.
11. DISTRIBUTION ITEMS
Page 8 of 397
6
11.A. Administrative Modification #1 to the FY 2026-2030 Transportation Improvement
Program Adding Updated Transit Safety Targets
Item distributed.
11.B. Collier MPO 2025 Annual Report
Item distributed.
11.B. Administrative Modification 1 to Collier MPO’s Third Amended FY 24/25-25/26
Unified Planning Work Program
Item distributed.
12. MEMBER COMMENTS
Commissioner Hall asked whether the Board would be interested in pursuing a resolution to
designate as commemorative a portion of roadway as Charlie Kirk Memorial Highway, noting that Lake
County had already done so. He explained that the process is simple and would not require address
changes, with signage placed at the beginning of the selected route. He suggested a segment starting at
Immokalee Road or U.S. 41, extending to Collier Boulevard, and emphasized that the proposal was
optional, and he was attempting to gauge interest. He added that Ms. Scott would be able to explain the
procedural steps if needed.
Ms. Scott said that Commissioner Hall’s proposal involves designating a Commemorative
Memorial Highway, which does not require changing road names or addresses. If the roadway is State
maintained, such as U.S. 41, the process would require action by the State Legislature along with a
supporting resolution from the local agency. For County maintained roads, the designation could be made
through a BCC resolution. The designation would be marked with cultural signs placed at each end of the
corridor.
A group discussion followed, regarding the possibility of naming a roadway in honor of an
individual, referencing potential legislation in Tallahassee that would allow state colleges to name streets.
U.S. 41 requires legislative action, while county-maintained roads could be designated through a
resolution by the Collier BCC. It was agreed that such a designation on a County road fall under the
County’s authority, not the MPO, and that an acknowledgment from the MPO Board would be sufficient
to move the idea forward at a BCC meeting.
Commissioner McDaniel asked for an update on the lighting improvements at the intersection of
Oil Well Road and SR 29, emphasizing the growing traffic and safety concerns in the area. He noted that
increased activity, including new mining operations and traffic shifts from Ave Maria, make it critical to
prioritize safety improvements, highlighting the long-overdue need for improvements. He also mentioned
the need for the widening of SR 29 from Immokalee south to I-75.
Page 9 of 397
7
Mr. Gaither confirmed that a lighting justification report for the intersection of SR 29 and Oil
Well Rd has been completed. Funding may be programmed for 2027, but he would verify and follow up.
A signal study was underway, and while a roundabout was considered, Right-of-Way limitations and
nearby utilities and canal constraints are causing challenges. There had been discussions with County staff
regarding new development and assessing future roadway safety improvement possibilities. More
information could be provided at the next Board meeting. Regarding the widening of SR 29, plans exist
but are not yet in the Work Program. Current safety measures include rumble strips, solar-powered flashing
stop signs, and caution lights, with both State and County efforts believed to have reached their current
limits until the ROW issues can be addressed.
Commissioner McDaniel responded that he wants efforts to be accelerated to complete the long-
overdue lighting improvements, stressing that studies and safety goals mean little without action,
especially after two fatalities occurred there last year. He emphasized that funding delays are unacceptable
for such a critical safety need and urged identifying costs and exploring ways to advance the project. He
also highlighted the urgency brought on by regional growth, wildlife corridor investments, high panther
fatality rates near Immokalee, and water conveyance challenges from the Okaloacoochee Slough, calling
for the area to be treated as a top priority.
Council Member, Schwan said Marco Island was officially designated a Florida Trail Town on
Wednesday, October 8, 2025, following ten months of work and a site visit by the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection’s Greenways and Trails Council. Everglades City had previously received the
same designation. The Council reviewed Marco Island’s bike paths, lanes, kayaking spots, and walking
trails. She noted that Trail Towns see strong local use and that 70-91% of users are local residents; and
they generate millions of dollars in economic impact.
Chair Kowal asked the Board to take a moment of silence to remember Commissioner Michael
Greenwell, who passed away the previous afternoon. He noted that Commissioner Greenwell was a
member of the neighboring Lee MPO, and had participated in joint sessions with the Collier MPO Board
in the past.
There was a moment of silence.
13. NEXT MEETING DATE
13.A. November 14, 2025 | 9:30 a.m. Board of County Commissioners Chambers, 3299 Tamiami
Trail East, Naples, FL 34112.
14. ADJOURN
There being no further business, Chair Kowal adjourned the meeting at approximately 10:18 a.m.
Page 10 of 397
11/14/2025
Item # 7.A
ID# 2025-4689
Executive Summary
Citizens Advisory Committee Chair Report
OBJECTIVE: For the MPO Board to receive a report from the Chair of the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC)
related to recent committee actions and recommendations.
CONSIDERATIONS: Staff prepared the attached written report. The CAC Chair may provide a verbal report
providing additional information regarding recent committee activities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: Committee recommendations are reported in the Executive Summary for
each action item and may be elaborated upon by the Chair in his/her report to the Board.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: N/A
PREPARED BY: Dusty Hansen, Planner II
ATTACHMENTS:
1. CAC Chair Report 10-27-25
Page 11 of 397
CAC Members: Karen Homiak, Chair (P); Fred Sasser, Vice-Chair (P); Harry Henkel (P); Neal Gelfand (P);
Dennis DiDonna (P); Josh Rincon (P); Misty Phillips (P); Michelle Arnold (P); Becky Irwin (P); Kevin Dohm
(P); Vacancy-City of Naples; Vacancy – District 5; Vacancy - District 3. (P: present; N: not present)
Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) Chair Report
The Collier MPO held its regularly scheduled, in-person, CAC meeting on October 27, 2025; a quorum
was achieved.
Agency Reports
• Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)
Marcellus Evans reported that there would be a public hearing on the Old U.S. 41 PD&E study
project on November 20th from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m.
• MPO Director
Ms. McLaughlin had nothing to report other than what was on the agenda.
Committee Actions
• Endorsed an Amendment to the FY2026-30 Transportation Improvement Program – two new
transit projects for operating assistance and capital to purchase vehicles/equipment and add the
Railroad & Utilities phases to two existing roadway projects, passing unanimously.
• Reviewed and commented on Draft Chapters 4, 6 and 7 of the 2050 Long Range Transportation
Plan.
• Reviewed and commented on FDOT’s Draft Tentative Work Program for FY2027-31.
Reports and Presentations
• FDOT Presentation on Livingston - FPL Trail Extension from Radio Rd to Collier County Line
PD&E Study.
• Report on Collier and Lee MPO Consolidation Feasibility Study.
Distribution Items
• Administrative Modification 1 to Collier MPO’s Third Amended FY 24/25-25/26 Unified Planning
Work Program.
• Administrative Modification #2 to FY26-30 Transportation Improvement Program.
The next regularly scheduled meeting will be held on November 24, 2025, at 2:00 PM.
Page 12 of 397
11/14/2025
Item # 7.B
ID# 2025-4690
Executive Summary
Technical Advisory Committee Chair Report
OBJECTIVE: For the MPO Board to receive a report from the Chair of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
related to recent committee actions and recommendations.
CONSIDERATIONS: Staff prepared the attached written report. The TAC Chair may provide a verbal report providing
additional information regarding recent committee activities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: Committee recommendations are reported in the Executive Summary for
each action item and may be elaborated upon by the Chair in his/her report to the Board.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: N/A
PREPARED BY: Dusty Hansen, Planner II
ATTACHMENTS:
1. TAC Chair Report 10-27-25
Page 13 of 397
TAC Members: Alison Bickett, Chair (P); Don Scott, Vice-Chair (P); Bert Miller (P); Kathy Eastley (P); Omar
De Leon (N); Ute Vandersluis (P); Justin Martin (N); Daniel Smith (N); Dave Rivera (N); John Lambcke (P);
Bryant Garrett (N); Vacancy – Everglades City; Vacancy – Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council;
Vacancy - Non-voting Member Representing a Local Environmental Agency. (P: present; N: not
present)
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Chair Report
The Collier MPO held its regularly scheduled, in-person, TAC meeting on October 27, 2025; a quorum
was achieved.
Agency Reports
• Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)
Marcellus Evans reported that there would be a public hearing on the Old U.S. 41 PD&E study
project on November 20th from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m.
• MPO Director
Ms. McLaughlin had nothing to report other than what was on the agenda.
Committee Actions
• Endorsed an Amendment to the FY2026-30 Transportation Improvement Program – two new
transit projects for operating assistance and capital to purchase vehicles/equipment and add the
Railroad & Utilities phases to two existing roadway projects, passing unanimously.
• Reviewed and commented on Draft Chapters 4, 6 and 7 of the 2050 Long Range Transportation
Plan.
• Reviewed and commented on FDOT’s Draft Tentative Work Program for FY2027-31.
Reports and Presentations
• FDOT Presentation on Livingston - FPL Trail Extension from Radio Rd to Collier County Line
PD&E Study.
• Report on Collier and Lee MPO Consolidation Feasibility Study.
Distribution Items
• Administrative Modification 1 to Collier MPO’s Third Amended FY 24/25-25/26 Unified Planning
Work Program.
• Administrative Modification #2 to FY26-30 Transportation Improvement Program.
The next regularly scheduled meeting will be held on November 24, 2025, at 9:30 AM.
Page 14 of 397
11/14/2025
Item # 7.C
ID# 2025-4702
Executive Summary
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Chair Report
OBJECTIVE: For the MPO Board to receive a report from the Chair of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Committee (BPAC) related to recent committee actions and recommendations.
CONSIDERATIONS: Staff prepared the attached written report. The BPAC Chair may provide a verbal report
providing additional information regarding recent committee activities.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: Committee recommendations are reported in the Executive Summary for
each action item and may be elaborated upon by the Chair in his/her report to the Board.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: N/A
PREPARED BY: Sean Kingston, AICP, PMP, CFM, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS:
1. BPAC Chair Report 10-21-25
Page 15 of 397
BPAC Members: Anthony Matonti, Chair (P); Michelle Sproviero, Vice-Chair (N); Joe Bonness (N); Alan
Musico (P); Dayna Fendrick (P); Robert Phelan (N); Patty Huff (P); Kevin Dohm (P); Robert Vigorito (N);
David Sutton (P); Tory Homes (P); Dave Costello (P) (P: present; N: not present)
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory (BPAC) Committee Chair Report
The BPAC held its regularly scheduled in-person meeting on October 21, 2025; a quorum was achieved.
Public Comment
• None.
Agency Reports
• Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)
o Tanya Merkle of FDOT announced that the Department is not anticipating SUN Trail
applications this cycle due to constrained funding and that many projects are currently in the
Project Development and Environment (PD&E) phase being funded.
• MPO Director
o Sean Kingston, Principal Planner, said that with the adoption of the Bicycle and Pedestrian
Master Plan (BPMP) at the October MPO Board meeting and anticipated approval of the Long
Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) at the same in December, a discussion at a following BPAC
will be held on how to utilize the funding identified in the LRTP for their calls for projects.
Committee Action
• None.
Reports and Presentations
• Linda Hess of WGI and Adam Rose of FDOT fielded questions from the committee after
delivering a presentation on the Livingston Florida Power and Light Trail Extension PD&E Study
from Radio Road to the Collier County/Lee County border which can be viewed in the BPAC
meeting materials.
• Sean Kingston gave a presentation from the October 15th, 2025 FDOT webinar slides, Collier to
Polk Trail Master Plan – What’s Next for the Collier to Polk Trail? The recorded webinar and its
presentation slides will be available at the project website,
https://floridaheartlandregionaltrail.com/.
• Anne McLaughlin, MPO Executive Director, reviewed the list of the summary of changes of the
Fiscal Year 2027-2031 Draft Tentative Work Program and provided the Committee with her
analysis.
Distribution Items
• The approved BPMP was included.
The next meeting is scheduled for November 18, 2025. It will be held at a different location, at the
Collier County Government Center Building D, Risk Management Training Room.
Page 16 of 397
11/14/2025
Item # 8.A
ID# 2025-4691
Executive Summary
Approve an Amendment to the FY 2026-2030 Transportation Improvement Program – two new transit projects for
operating assistance and capital to purchase vehicles/equipment and add the Railroad & Utilities phases to two existing
roadway projects
OBJECTIVE: For the MPO Board to approve an amendment to the FY 2026-2030 Collier MPO Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) and authorizing resolution to add two new transit projects and a new phase to two existing
roadway projects.
CONSIDERATIONS: The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) has requested the Collier MPO to amend its
FY 2026-2030 TIP for the following projects:
• 441512-1: Add the RRU phase to a resurfacing project at US 41 from N of Old US 41 to S of Gulf Park Dr.
• 446451-1: Add the RRU phase to an intersection improvement project at US 41 and Golden Gate Pkwy.
• 457348-2: Add a new transit project to purchase vehicles/equipment for rural bus and facilities.
• 410120-2: Add a new transit project for operating assistance.
Attachment 1 contains Resolution 2025-11, including Exhibits 1 and 2.
The MPO is following the TIP amendment public involvement process outlined in the MPO’s Public Participation Plan
in that this Amendment has been:
• Posted for review by the TAC and CAC;
• Public comment period announced on the MPO website; and
• Distributed via e-mail to applicable list-serve(s).
The comment period began on October 20, 2025, and ends with the MPO Board meeting on November 14, 2025.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: The Technical and Citizens Advisory Committees voted to endorse the
Amendment at their meetings on October 27, 2025.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve the Amendment and Authorizing Resolution 2025-11.
PREPARED BY: Sean Kingston, AICP, PMP, CFM, Planner III
ATTACHMENTS:
1. MPO Resolution 2025-11, including Exhibits 1 and 2
Page 17 of 397
Page 18 of 397
Page 19 of 397
Page 20 of 397
Page 21 of 397
Page 22 of 397
Page 23 of 397
Page 24 of 397
Page 25 of 397
Page 26 of 397
11/14/2025
Item # 9.A
ID# 2025-4701
Executive Summary
Review and Comment on Draft 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan
OBJECTIVE: For the Board to review and comment on the draft 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP).
CONSIDERATIONS: Jacobs Engineering has submitted a complete draft of the 2050 LRTP. (Attachment 1) The
Board has previously reviewed and accepted draft chapters 1, 2, 3 and 5 of the LRTP. The Executive Summary, Table
of Contents and chapter 7 (Implementation) are new. The Needs Plan (chapter 4) and Cost Feasible Plan (chapter 6)
have been expanded to include material drawn from the recently approved Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, Transit
Development Plan, and Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, as well as the FDOT District 1 Freight Plan, airport master
plans, and the MPO’s Congestion Management Process.
Following the Board’s review, the next steps are to submit the complete Final Draft of the 2050 LRTP (including the
appendices and technical compendium) to the TAC and CAC for endorsement on November 24th, followed by MPO
Board approval on December 11, 2025.
Jacobs will give the presentation shown in Attachment 2.
The Draft 2050 LRTP, Appendices and Technical Compendium are available for public review on the MPO’s website
at: https://colliermpo.org/lrtp/ Hard copies are available upon request.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: The TAC and CAC endorsed draft Chapters 4, 6 and 7 on October 27,
2025. A concern raised during the TAC meeting regarding maintaining planning consistency between the 2050 LRTP
Cost Feasible Plan and future iterations of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) involving discretionary grant
funding requires further discussion at this point in time.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: For the Board to review and comment on the draft 2050 LRTP.
PREPARED BY: Anne McLaughlin, Executive Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft 2050 LRTP
2. Presentation
Page 27 of 397
2050 Long Range
Transportation Plan
APPROVED BY THE COLLIER MPO BOARD • DECEMBER XX, 2025
DECEMBER 2025
DRAFT
Page 28 of 397
Prepared for
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization
2885 South Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
Phone: 239-252-5814
Email:collier.mpo@collier.gov
Prepared by
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.
5811 Pelican Bay Blvd., Suite 305
Naples, Florida 34108
Phone: 239.431.9231
www.jacobs.com
Scan the QR Code to go to the
Collier MPO web site
Anne McLaughlin
MPO Executive Director
Phone: 239-252-5884
Email:Anne.McLaughlin@collier.gov
Photography Credits
Bill Gramer, Nathan Lunsford
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.
Adam Ahmad
Capital Consulting Solutions LLC
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization Board Members
Commissioner
Rick LoCastro
District 1
Commissioner
Chris Hall
District 2
Commissioner
Burt Saunders
District 3
Commissioner
Dan Kowal
District 4
Commissioner
William McDaniel
District 5
Council Member
Linda Penniman
City of Naples
Council Member
Berne Barton
City of Naples
Council Member
Bonita Schwan
City of Marco Island
Council Member
Tony Pernas
Everglades City
Page 29 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan i Contents
Contents
Introduction
1-1 What Is the MPO? ........... 1-1
1-2 What Is the Long Range
Transportation
Plan? ............................... 1-7
1-3 Federal and State Planning
Requirements ................ 1-13
1-4 Regional Transportation
Planning ........................ 1-15
Plan Process
2-1 Plan Process .................... 2-1
2-2 County Overview ............. 2-3
2-3 Forecasting Growth ......... 2-7
2-4 Public and Stakeholder
Participation .................. 2-16
2050 LRTP Planning Context and
Decision-Making Framework
3-1 Long Range Vision for Collier
County Transportation .... 3-1
3-2 2050 LRTP Goals ............. 3-5
3-3 Applying Priorities to
Decision-Making ........... 3-13
2050 Needs Plan
4-1 Needs Plan
Overview ......................... 4-1
4-2 Roadway Needs ............... 4-5
4-3 Bicycle and
Pedestrian Needs .......... 4-44
4-4 Transit Needs ................ 4-52
4-5 Air Transportation
Needs ............................ 4-63
1 2 3 4
Executive
Summary
Disclaimer
The Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan has been financed in part through grants from the Federal
Highway Administration, the Federal Transit Administration and the U.S. Department of Transportation, under the
Metropolitan Planning Program, Sections 134 and 135 of Title 23, U.S. Code. The contents of this report do not
necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Page 30 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan ii ContentsContentsContentsContents
Financial Resources
5-1 Overview ......................... 5-1
5-2 Roadway and Transit
Revenue Projections ...... 5-2
5-3 Roadway and Transit
Federal/State Funding .... 5-2
5-4 Local Revenue Projections
and Sources .................... 5-6
5-5 Summary of Reasonable
Available Funding for 2050
LRTP Roadway Projects ... 5-7
5-6 Bicycle and Pedestrian
Funding ........................... 5-7
5-5 Airport Funding ............... 5-9
Cost Feasible Plan
6-1 Roadway Cost Feasible
Projects ............................ 6-1
6-2 Bicycle and Pedestrian
Projects .......................... 6-28
6-3 Transit Cost Feasible
Projects .......................... 6-28
6-4 Freight Network
Projects .......................... 6-35
6-5 Airport Transportation
Projects .......................... 6-35
Implementation
7-1 Implementation
Framework ...................... 7-1
7-2 System Performance
Report ............................. 7-1
7-3 Planning Programs .......... 7-3
References
8-1 References ...................... 8-1
75 86
Appendices (Provided Under Separate Cover)
Appendix A: Federal and State LRTP Requirements
Appendix B: Collier County Traffic Analysis Zones
Appendix C: Evaluation Criteria Map Series
Appendix D: Roadway Needs Evaluation Matrix
Appendix E: Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Needs
Appendix F: System Performance Report
Page 31 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan iii Contents
Tables
Table 2-1 Summary of 2019 and 2050 SE Data ............................. 2-9
Table 2-2 Summary of Public and Stakeholder Outreach ........... 2-17
Table 3-1 2050 LRTP Evaluation Criteria and
Performance Measures ............................................... 3-14
Table 4-1 2028 Existing Plus Committed (E+C) Roadway
Projects .......................................................................... 4-7
Table 4-2 East of CR 951 Bridge Reevaluation Study Bridges ...... 4-14
Table 4-3 Top 10 HIN Tier I Intersections .................................... 4-21
Table 4-4 Top 10 HIN Tier I Urban Roadway Segments ............... 4-22
Table 4-5 Top 10 HIN Tier I Rural Roadway Segments ................ 4-23
Table 4-6 Collier County Congested Corridors ............................ 4-27
Table 4-7 Resilience Needs in Collier County (Unfunded) ........... 4-34
Table 4-8 2050 LRTP Roadway Needs ......................................... 4-35
Table 4-9 Transit Ridership and Growth Rates with No
Improvements, 2026–2035 ......................................... 4-56
Table 4-10 Transit Needs Evaluation Measures ............................ 4-57
Table 4-11 Transit Needs Summary ............................................... 4-59
Table 5-1 2050 LRTP Revenue Projections Summary .................... 5-4
Table 5-2 Federal and State Revenue Projections (YOE) .............. 5-5
Table 5-3 Airport Capital Revenue Projections ............................. 5-9
Table 6-1 Collier MPO FY2026–FY2030 TIP Summary .................... 6-3
Table 6-2 Collier MPO 2050 LRTP SIS Cost Feasible Plan Projects .. 6-8
Table 6-3 Collier MPO 2045 LRTP Cost Feasible Plan
Projects – FDOT Other Roads Projects and Local
Roadway Projects ........................................................ 6-11
Table 6-4 Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Cost Feasible Plan Projects –
Partially Funded Projects (FY2031–FY2050) ................ 6-15
Table 6-5 Potential Infrastructure Improvements
(Countermeasures) to Improve Roadway Safety in Collier
County .......................................................................... 6-20
Table 6-6 SU Box Fund and TA Fund Allocation by
Planning Period ............................................................ 6-22
Table 6-7 Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Revenue Sources
(FY 2031–FY 2050) ....................................................... 6-23
Table 6-8 Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Project Costs
(FY2031–FY2050) ......................................................... 6-24
Table 6-9 Total Revenue and Costs for LRTP Projects
(FY2031–FY2050) .......................................................... 6-25
Table 6-10 Total Revenue and Costs for Collier MPO’s TIP
(FY2026–FY2030) ......................................................... 6-25
Table 6-11 Anticipated Operations and Maintenance Costs of State-
Maintained Roadway Infrastructure............................ 6-26
Table 6-12 Summary of Funded vs. Unfunded Roadway Projects. 6-27
Table 6-13 2050 LRTP Unfunded Roadway Needs Projects ........... 6-29
Table 6-14 2050 Transit Cost Feasible Summary ........................... 6-34
Table 7-1 Collier MPO Adopted Performance Measures and
Targets ........................................................................... 7-2
Table 7-2 LRTP Goals and Federal Planning Factors ...................... 7-4
Page 32 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan iv Contents
Figures
Figure 1-1 Collier MPO Board ......................................................... 1-1
Figure 1-2 Collier MPO Jurisdiction ................................................ 1-2
Figure 1-3 Technical Advisory Committee ...................................... 1-3
Figure 1-4 Citizens Advisory Committee ......................................... 1-4
Figure 1-5 Congestion Management Committee ........................... 1-5
Figure 1-6 Local Coordinating Board for the Transportation
Disadvantaged ............................................................... 1-6
Figure 1-7 2050 LRTP Development and Guidance ........................ 1-9
Figure 1-8 2021 FTA and FHWA Planning Emphasis Areas ........... 1-11
Figure 1-9 Daily Collier County Work Travel Patterns .................. 1-15
Figure 1-10 Collier MPO Documentation Responsibilities .............. 1-16
Figure 2-1 Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Key Process Steps .................... 2-1
Figure 2-2 Plan Process ................................................................... 2-2
Figure 2-3 Collier County Planning Communities, Points of Interest,
and Unincorporated Communities ................................ 2-6
Figure 2-4 Population Growth Areas ............................................ 2-10
Figure 2-5 Employment Growth Areas ......................................... 2-11
Figure 2-6 Housing Growth Areas ................................................. 2-12
Figure 2-7 School Enrollment Growth Areas ................................ 2-13
Figure 2 8 Hotel/Motel Room Growth Areas ............................... 2-14
Figure 2 9 FDOT-Approved Travel Demand Models ..................... 2-15
Figure 2 10 Visioning and Needs Survey Responses by Planning
Community .................................................................. 2-20
Figure 2 11 Top Transportation Priorities in Collier County ........... 2-21
Figure 3-1 Federal Planning Factors ............................................... 3-1
Figure 3-2 Future Population Growth and Housing ........................ 3-3
Figure 3-3 LRTP Development Framework ..................................... 3-6
Figure 4-1 FDOT Context Classifications ......................................... 4-4
Figure 4-2 2050 Existing Plus Committed (E+C) Roadway
Project Map ................................................................... 4-9
Figure 4-3 2045 E+C Travel Network Roadway
Deficiencies Map .......................................................... 4-10
Figure 4-4 District One Freight Mobility Corridors ....................... 4-17
Figure 4-5 District One Freight Activity Centers ........................... 4-18
Figure 4-6 District One Warehouses, Distribution Centers, & Third
Party Logistics Companies Clusters .............................. 4-18
Figure 4-7 Freight Network and Activity Centers .......................... 4-19
Figure 4-8 Statewide Truck Parking Supply Locations .................. 4-21
Figure 4-9 All Modes High-Injury Network ................................... 4-24
Figure 4-10 Congestion Management Process Eight-Step
Framework ................................................................... 4-25
Figure 4-11 Collier County Congested Corridors Map .................... 4-26
Figure 4-12 Lee County/Collier Regional Roadway Network .......... 4-28
Figure 4-13 ITS & Access Management Roadway Projects ............. 4-31
Figure 4-14 CAV Program Focus Areas ............................................ 4-32
Figure 4-15 Resiliency Planning Considerations ............................. 4-33
Figure 4-16 2050 Needs Plan Roadway Projects Map .................... 4-43
Figure 4-17 Marco Island Bike Path Master Plan Priority Projects . 4-48
Figure 4-18 Everglades City BPMP Priority Projects ....................... 4-50
Figure 4-19 SUN Trail Alignments Planning Status ......................... 4-51
Figure 4-20 Transit Network Service Needs .................................... 4-62
Figure 4-21 Advanced Air Mobility Timeline ................................... 4-64
Figure 5-1 Planning Periods Summary (Revenue Bands) ................ 5-1
Figure 6-1 Collier MPO 2045 LRTP SIS Cost Feasible Plan
Projects ........................................................................ 6-10
Figure 6-2 FDOT Other Roads and Local Roadway Projects
Cost Feasible Plan Projects Map – Plan Period 2
(FY2031–FY2035) ......................................................... 6-12
Figure 6-3 FDOT Other Roads and Local Roadway Projects Cost
Feasible Plan Projects Map – Plan Period 3
(FY2036–FY2040) ......................................................... 6-13
Page 33 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan ii Contents
Figure 6-4 FDOT Other Roads and Local Roadway Projects Cost
Feasible Plan Projects Map – Plan Period 4
(FY2041–FY2050) ......................................................... 6-14
Figure 6-5 FDOT Other Roads and Local Roadway Projects Cost
Feasible Plan Projects Map – Partially Funded
(FY2031–FY2050) ......................................................... 6-16
Figure 6-6 Total Costs by Project Phase for FDOT’s SIS Funded
Projects 2031–2050 ..................................................... 6-17
Figure 6-7 Total Costs by Project Phase for FDOT Other Roads and
Local Roads Funded Projects (2031–2050) .................. 6-17
Figure 6-8 Total Costs by Funding Source 2031–2050 .................. 6-17
Figure 6-9 SU Fund Allocation Through FY 2013-FY 2025 ............. 6-22
Figure 6-10 Freight Hotspot Locations ............................................ 6-35
Figure 7-1 LRTP Goals and Federal Planning Factors ...................... 7-4
Figure 7-2 Collier MPO Plans and Programs Timeline .................... 7-5
Page 34 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan iv Contents
Abbreviations and Acronyms
AADT Average Annual Daily Traffic
AAM Advanced Air Mobility
ACES Automated, Connected, Electric, and Shared
ACS American Community Survey
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
AHAC Affordable Housing Advisory Committee
AUIR Annual Update and Inventory Report
BCC Board of County Commissioners
BEBR Bureau of Economic and Business Research
(University of Florida)
BIL Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
BPAC Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
BPMP Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan
CAC Citizens Advisory Committee
CAP Climate Adaptation Plan
CAT Collier Area Transit
CAV Connected and Automated Vehicle
CCGMP Collier County Growth Management Plan
CDP Census designated place
CIGM Collier Interactive Growth Model
CIE Capital Improvement Element
CMC Congestion Management Committee
CMP Congestion Management Process
CRA Community Redevelopment Agency
CTIS Connected Traveler Information System
CUTS Coordinated Urban Transportation Studies
D1RPM District 1 Regional Planning Model (FDOT)
DDI diverging diamond interchange
E+C Existing Plus Committed
EB eastbound
ETDM Efficient Transportation Decision Making
FAC Freight Activity Center
FAST Fixing America’s Surface Transportation
FDOT Florida Department of Transportation
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FMPP Florida Metropolitan Planning Partnership
FMTP Freight Mobility and Trade Plan
FPN Financial Project Number
FTA Federal Transit Administration
HIN high-injury network
IIJA Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
ILC Intermodal Logistics Center
ITS Intelligent Transportation System
LCB Local Coordinating Board for the Transportation
Disadvantaged
LOS level of service
LRTP Long Range Transportation Plan
MFF Moving Florida Forward Infrastructure Initiative
MOD Mobility-On-Demand
MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization
NB northbound
NHS National Highway System
PD&E Project Delivery and Environment
PIP Public Involvement Plan
PM performance measure
PPP Public Participation Plan
PPPP Pilot Passenger Rail Priorities Program
PTAC Public Transit Advisory Committee
RAP Resilience Action Plan
ROW right-of-way
SAP Safety Action Plan
SE socioeconomic
SLR sea level rise
SIS Strategic Intermodal System
SPR System Performance Report
SR State Road
SS4A Safe Streets and Roads for All
TA Transportation Alternative
Page 35 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan vi Contents
TAC Technical Advisory Committee
TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone
T-BEST Transit Boardings Estimation and Simulation Tool
TCMA Transportation Concurrency Management Area
TDP Transit Development Plan
TIP Transportation Improvement Program
TMA Transportation Management Area
TOC Traffic Operations/Management Center
TRIP Transportation Regional Incentive Program
TSM&O Transportation Systems Management and
Operations
TSPR Transportation System Performance Report
ULB Useful Life Benchmark
UPWP Unified Planning Work Program
V/C volume-to-capacity
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VRM vehicle revenue mile(s)
YOE year of expenditure
Page 36 of 397
ES
Executive Summary
Page 37 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan ES-1 Executive Summary
Executive Summary
The Executive Summary is pending.
Page 38 of 397
1
Introduction
Page 39 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-1 Chapter 1 Introduction
1.Introduction
1.1 What Is the MPO?
The Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
was created in 1982 following Title 23 of United States
Code Section 134 (23 USC §134), Metropolitan
Transportation Planning. The federal requirements
provide that each urbanized area with a population
exceeding 50,000 establish an MPO. Federal law requires
that MPOs be governed by a board composed of local
elected officials, governmental transportation
representatives for all modes of transportation, and
appropriate state officials.
The Collier MPO is governed by a board of nine voting
members and one non‐voting advisor from the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT), as shown on
Figure 1‐1.
The Collier MPO’s jurisdiction includes Collier County
(hereafter, “the County”) and the cities of Naples, Marco
Island, and Everglades City (refer to Figure 1-2).
The MPO uses federal, state, and local funds to carry out a
Continuing,Cooperative, and Comprehensive (3-C) long-
range planning process that establishes a Countywide
vision for the transportation system. The Long Range
Transportation Plan (LRTP) is a central part of achieving
this vision. MPOs are required to develop and update their
LRTPs every 5 years to ensure that the future transport-
ation system is efficient, fosters mobility and access for
people and goods, and enhances the overall quality of life
for the community.
To carry out its functions, the MPO Board is assisted by
several transportation planning committees in addition to
its professional staff. These committees consist of the
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), Citizens Advisory
Committee (CAC), Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Committee (BPAC), Congestion Management Committee
(CMC), and the Local Coordinating Board for the
Transportation Disadvantaged (LCB).
Figure 1-1. Collier MPO Board
Page 40 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-2 Chapter 1 Introduction
Figure 1-2.Collier MPO Jurisdiction
Source: Collier MPO Transportation Improvement Program FY2024-FY2028 (Collier MPO 2023)
Page 41 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-3 Chapter 1 Introduction
Technical Advisory Committee:The TAC consists of tech-
nically qualified representatives of agencies within the
Collier County Metropolitan Planning Area. TAC members
are responsible for planning, maintaining, operating,
developing, and improving the transportation system
throughout the County and its associated municipalities.
They review transportation plans and programs from a
technical perspective. The TAC has 13 voting members
and 1 non-voting member for a local environmental
agency. Per the by-laws for the TAC of the Collier MPO, a
representative from a local environmental agency shall
be a non-voting member (refer to Figure 1-3).
Citizens Advisory Committee:The CAC consists of
citizens who represent a cross section of the geographic
areas and citizens who represent disabled and minority
populations. CAC members are recruited to represent
areas including the cities of Naples, Marco Island, and
Everglades City and the county commission districts of
the County’s unincorporated areas.
The CAC makes recommendations to the MPO Board
from the citizen’s perspective on proposed LRTPs, indi-
vidual projects, priorities for state and federal funding,
and other transportation issues. The CAC has 13 voting
members, including four at-large members (refer to
Figure 1-4).
Figure 1-3.Technical Advisory Committee
Page 42 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-4 Chapter 1 Introduction
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee: The BPAC
consists of 12 at-large voting members who represent a
wide cross section of the Collier Metropolitan Area
residents and neighborhoods, bicycle and pedestrian
safety professionals, transit riders, local bicycle and
pedestrian advocacy groups, organizations that en-
courage active transportation from a community health
perspective, and advocates for persons with disabilities
and other transportation-disadvantaged populations. The
BPAC provides citizen input into the deliberations on
bicycle- and pedestrian-related issues within the com-
munity and advises the MPO Board on developing a
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. The BPAC is also
involved in recommending priorities for bicycle and
pedestrian projects and program implementation.
Congestion Management Committee:The CMC serves
the MPO in an advisory capacity on technical matters
relating to the MPO’s Congestion Management System
and the regional Intelligent Transportation System (ITS)
architecture. The committee is responsible for creating
and amending the Congestion Management Process
(CMP) and for prioritizing candidate congestion
management projects to be funded with federal and state
funding. As shown on Figure 1-5, the CMC has 10 voting
members including eight members appointed by
agencies/jurisdictional departments, and two members
appointed by the BPAC and CAC.
Figure 1-4.Citizens Advisory Committee
Page 43 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-5 Chapter 1 Introduction
Figure 1-5.Congestion Management Committee
Local Coordinating Board for the Transportation
Disadvantaged:The LCB helps the MPO identify local
service needs and provide information, advice, and
direction to the Community Transportation Coordinator
on the coordination of services to be provided to the
transportation disadvantaged pursuant to Chapter
427.0157, Florida Statutes (F.S.). The LCB also reviews
the amount and quality of transit service being provided
to the County’s transportation-disadvantaged population.
The LCB has 18 voting members and includes
representatives from various state and local agencies as
well as citizen representatives (refer to Figure 1-6). An
elected official is appointed by the MPO Board to serve as
chairperson. The Collier LCB meets each quarter and
holds at least one public hearing a year. The purpose of
the hearings is to provide input to the LCB on unmet
transportation needs and any other areas relating to local
transportation disadvantaged services.
Page 44 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-6 Chapter 1 Introduction
Figure 1-6.Local Coordinating Board for the Transportation Disadvantaged
Page 45 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-7 Chapter 1 Introduction
1.2 What Is the Long Range
Transportation Plan?
The MPO is required to complete an LRTP to receive
federal transportation funds. The LRTP must be multi-
modal and should include, at a minimum, highway and
transit infrastructure improvements. The Collier MPO
LRTP includes highway (incorporating freight) and transit
modes, and by reference, non‐motorized modes. The
LRTP covers a broad range of issues including environ-
mental impact, economic development, mobility, safety,
security, and quality of life.
To comply with federal requirements, the LRTP is
produced or updated every 5 years and must maintain a
minimum time horizon of 20 years. The previous 2045
LRTP update was adopted on December 11, 2020 (Collier
MPO 2020a). The Collier MPO 2050 LRTP update began
in March 2024. As described in Chapter 3, the Collier MPO
2050 LRTP was developed to ensure consistency with all
applicable state and federal requirements guiding the
LRTP process.
The primary purpose of the 2050 LRTP update is to help
citizens, businesses, and elected officials collaborate on
developing a multimodal and sustainable transportation
system that addresses projected growth over the next
20 years. The 2050 LRTP update identifies needed
transportation network improvements and provides a
long‐term investment framework to address current and
future transportation challenges.
During the 2050 LRTP development, the MPO engaged
its advisory committees, particularly the TAC and CAC,
who reviewed and commented on every aspect of the
LRTP. The CMC, BPAC, and the LCB also helped guide the
LRTP development by providing expertise on their com-
mittee’s corresponding transportation plan.Figure 1-7
presents the MPO committees and the transportation
plans within their responsibility.
Page 46 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-8 Chapter 1 Introduction
As shown on Figure 1‐7, the CMC contributed to the
Congestion Management Process (Collier MPO 2022a)
and Safe Streets and Roads for All Comprehensive Safety
Action Plan (SS4A) (Collier MPO 2025c), which address
congestion and safety; the BPAC contributed to the
Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP) (Collier MPO
2025b), which is incorporated into the bicycle and
pedestrian section of the LRTP; and Collier County’s
Public Transit Advisory Committee (PTAC) contributed to
the Ten-Year Transit Development Plan 2026-2035
(TDP)Major Update (Collier MPO 2025f), which is
incorporated in the transit section of the LRTP.
Funding for each of these plans is described in the Unified
Planning Work Program (UPWP),which is a planning
document that describes the MPO’s budget, planning
activities, studies, and technical support that are expected
to be undertaken within a 2-year period.
It is important to note that the Transportation System
Performance Report (TSPR) is not being updated for
FY2023-FY2024, as it was removed from the UPWP by
the MPO Board, and TSPR funds were instead reallocated
to support the LRTP.
Further, the MPO’s informal Adviser Network of com-
munity, business, and environmental groups and
individual representatives provided essential public input
through a series of small group and one-on-one inter-
views. Additional public input was gained by conducting
outreach to traditionally underserved communities,
public meetings, and surveys.
While not part of the Collier MPO Board advisory
committees, the PTAC as well as the Collier County
Affordable Housing Advisory Committee (AHAC) provide
input to the LRTP through advisory to Collier Area Transit
(CAT) and the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners (BCC), respectively.
The AHAC reviews policies, procedures, ordinances, land
development regulations, and adopted local government
comprehensive plans. Committee members also provide
recommendations to the Collier County BCC for actions
and initiatives that facilitate affordable housing within the
County.
Page 47 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-9 Chapter 1 Introduction
Figure 1-7. 2050 LRTP Development and Guidance
Page 48 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-10 Chapter 1 Introduction
1.3 Federal and State Planning
Requirements
1.3.1 Federal
The FDOT MPO Program Management Handbook (FDOT
2023e) outlines the federal requirements for the LRTP.
Federal regulations (23 C.F.R. 450.306(a) and (b)) require
the LRTP to provide for consideration of projects and
strategies that will:
Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan
area, especially by enabling global competitiveness,
productivity, and efficiency
Increase the safety and security of the transportation
system for motorized and non-motorized users
Increase the accessibility and mobility options
available to people and for freight
Protect and enhance the environment, promote
energy conservation, and improve quality of life
Enhance the integration and connectivity of the
transportation system, across and between modes, for
people and freight
Promote efficient system management and operation
Emphasize the preservation of the existing
transportation system
Improve the resiliency and reliability of the
transportation system and reduce or mitigate
stormwater impacts of surface transportation
Enhance travel and tourism
Additionally, in November 2021, the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), also known as the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), was signed into law.
The IIJA was enacted as a reauthorization of the Fixing
America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, which
expired in 2021 following a yearlong extension of the
original expiration in 2020. The law provides a total of
$973 billion of federal funding from FY2022 to FY2026.
This includes more than $550 billion for highways,
highway safety programs, transit programs, and other
transportation programs. The IIJA continues the
Metropolitan Planning Program under §11201; 23 U.S.C.
134, which establishes a 3C framework for making
transportation investment decisions in metropolitan
areas. Program oversight is a joint Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) responsibility. Under the IIJA, the
FTA and FHWA issued the 2021 Planning Emphasis Areas
required for long-range transportation planning as
presented on Figure 1-8.
Page 49 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-11 Chapter 1 Introduction
Figure 1-8. 2021 FTA and FHWA Planning Emphasis
Areas
Source: USDOT (2021)
Additionally, under 23 USC § 150, Congress established
national goals to ensure the most efficient investment of
federal transportation funds by increasing accountability
and transparency, and providing for better investment
decisions that focus on the following key outcomes.
Safety - To achieve a significant reduction in traffic
fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads
Infrastructure Condition - To maintain the highway
infrastructure asset system in a state of good repair
Congestion Reduction - To achieve a significant
reduction in congestion on the National Highway
System (NHS)
System Reliability - To improve the efficiency of the
surface transportation system
Freight Movement and Economic Vitality - To
improve the national freight network, strengthen the
ability of rural communities to access national and
international trade markets, and support regional
economic development
Environmental Sustainability - To enhance the
performance of the transportation system while
protecting and enhancing the natural environment
Reduced Project Delivery Delays - To reduce project
costs, promote jobs and the economy, and expedite
the movement of people and goods by accelerating
project completion through eliminating delays in the
project development and delivery process, including
reducing regulatory burdens and improving agencies'
work practices
Page 50 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-12 Chapter 1 Introduction
For the County and its municipalities to be eligible for
federal and state funds, the MPO must adopt and
maintain a transportation plan covering at least 20 years
(the LRTP), and a 5-year Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP), which is a fiscally constrained, multimodal
program of transportation projects within the Collier
Metropolitan Planning Area. The TIP is updated each year
and includes highway, bridge, bicycle, and pedestrian
facilities; transit; congestion management; road and
bridge maintenance; transportation planning; and
transportation-disadvantaged projects. Both the LRTP
and the TIP are required by federal and state law.
The TIP identifies, prioritizes, and allocates funding for
transportation projects. Projects in the TIP are included in
the existing‐plus‐committed (E+C) component of the
MPO’s LRTP. Development of the TIP is a continuous
process involving agency staff and public involvement.
The adopted TIP and potential TIP project priorities must
be consistent with the LRTP.
MPOs are governed by federal law (23 USC §134), with
regulations included in Title 23 of the Code of Federal
Regulations Part 450 (23 CFR 450). When MPOs were
mandated in 1962, federal laws required metropolitan
transportation plans and programs be developed through
a 3-C planning process. The law intended for MPOs to
serve as a forum for collaborative transportation decision-
making. Further, planning is to be conducted continually
using a cooperative process with state and local officials
and public transportation agencies operating within the
MPO’s boundaries.
Because the Collier MPO serves a population of more
than 200,000 people, it meets the federal definition of a
Transportation Management Area (TMA) and, therefore,
must meet additional federal conditions including the
establishment of a CMP. The CMP identifies challenges
and solutions to reduce congestion and improve traffic
flow along arterial roadways. The CMP is also used as a
tool to help identify projects in the TIP and LRTP. As
stated previously, the Collier MPO CMC is responsible for
creating and amending the CMP.
The LRTP must include a financial plan to identify reliable
and reasonable funding and estimated allocations
needed for its implementation. The cost of projects listed
in the LRTP must balance financially with the revenues
from funding sources forecasted to be reasonably
available over the 20-year LRTP duration. Chapter 3
provides a more detailed account of federal and state
financial requirements for the LRTP implementation.
The Public Participation Plan (PPP) provides a framework
to the public involvement process regarding the MPO
planning-related activities. The PPP describes the MPO’s
strategies and techniques to inform and engage the
public in transportation planning issues to maximize
public involvement and effectiveness. PPPs are living
documents that should be updated once every 5 years,
preferably prior to the LRTP update initiation. In addition
to the PPP, each MPO should develop an LRTP-specific
PPP or Public Involvement Plan (PIP). The PIP builds from
the content and assumptions within the approved PPP
and provides additional information, such as specific
stakeholders to be engaged, a summary of proposed
engagement activities throughout the LRTP development,
and an engagement process milestone schedule. A PIP
Page 51 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-13 Chapter 1 Introduction
was developed for the 2050 LRTP update and is further
discussed in Chapter 3.
In January 2018, the FHWA and the FTA issued the
Federal Strategies for Implementing Requirements for
LRTP Updates for the Florida MPOs to the FDOT and the
MPOs in Florida (FHWA and FTA 2018). The guidance,
commonly referred to as FHWA’s Expectations Letter,
outlines the agencies’ expectations for LRTP update
development to help MPOs meet the federal planning
requirements. In July 2020, FDOT issued a notice that
FHWA expected MPOs to also address previous FHWA
Expectation Letters from December 4, 2008 (FHWA’s
Strategies for Implementing Requirements for LRTP
Update for the Florida MPOs) and November 2012
(Federal Strategies for Implementing Requirements for
LRTP Update for the Florida MPOs).
The Collier MPO 2050 LRTP update’s adherence to 2018,
2012, and 2008 FHWA Expectations Letters is
summarized in Appendix A.
1.3.2 State
The FDOT Office of Policy Planning develops Planning
Emphasis Areas on a 2-year cycle in coordination with
MPO UPWP development. The emphasis areas set
planning priorities, and MPOs are encouraged to address
these topics as they develop their planning programs.
These Planning Emphasis Areas also align with the
planning priorities of the IIJA.
The 2022 FDOT Florida Planning Emphasis Areas are:
Safety. FDOT updated the Florida State Highway
Safety Plan in 2021, which provides a comprehensive
framework for reducing serious injuries and fatalities
on all public roads. In addition, FDOT adopted FHWA’s
Safe System Approach that recognizes that people
make mistakes and that the transportation network
should be designed to ensure that if crashes occur,
they do not result in fatalities or serious injuries.
FHWA’s Safety Performance Management Rule
requires states and MPOs to adopt and implement
safety performance targets and integrate performance
management into each MPO’s LRTP. MPOs are
required to show how their LRTP support progress in
prioritizing safety and meeting the state target of zero
traffic fatalities and serious injuries.
Equity.The US Department of Transportation
Justice40 Initiative aims to deliver 40% of the benefits
of federal investments to disadvantaged communities.
The 2045 Florida Transportation Plan (FTP)(2020)
established the goal of transportation choices that
improve equity and accessibility, to guide policies
toward prioritizing strategies and investments that
improve equitable access for residents. MPOs should
prioritize projects that advance access to opportunities
for more affordable transportation services and
provide information access for underserved
communities of all ages and abilities.
Resilience. FDOT adopted a resiliency policy in 2020
that aligns with federal definitions and guidance and
includes economic prosperity and improved quality
Page 52 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-14 Chapter 1 Introduction
for communities and the environment. The policy
defines resilience as the ability of the transportation
system to adapt to changing conditions and prepare
for, withstand, and recover from disruptions. MPOs
can address resilience within their planning processes
by leveraging work of state-level agencies such as
FDOT and the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection as well as resilience plans from regional
and local agencies. Resilience has a prominent role in
the MPO’s LRTP and TIP updates. Emphasis should be
placed on coordination with agency partners that are
responsible for natural disaster risk reduction or those
developing local resilience planning initiatives.
Another key aspect is considering the additional costs
associated with reducing vulnerability of the existing
transportation infrastructure to inform a more realistic
and cost-effective planning document.
Emerging Mobility The 2045 FTP broadened the
definition of infrastructure to include enabling
technologies and provides key strategies that support
the deployment of Autonomous, Connected, Electric,
and Shared (ACES) vehicles as well as new mobility
options including ridesharing, micro-mobility, and
emerging air and space technologies. This expanded
infrastructure may lead to great improvements in
safety, transportation choices, and quality of life for
Floridians, visitors, and the Florida economy. However,
increased deployment of emerging mobility vehicles
creates challenges for MPOs because of the
substantial speculation and uncertainty about the
potential impacts that large-scale deployment of
emerging technologies could create. MPOs are
continuing to learn how best to address the
challenges and opportunities with emerging mobility.
In addition to the FDOT Planning Emphasis Areas, the
FDOT MPO Program Management Handbook (2024)
includes state requirements for LRTP development.With
the intent to encourage and promote the safe and
efficient management, operation, and development of
surface transportation systems, the Florida legislature
enacted Section 339.175(6)(b), F.S. (1984), which
requires the LRTP to provide for consideration of projects
and strategies that will:
Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan
area, especially by enabling global competitiveness,
productivity, and efficiency
Increase the safety and security of the transportation
system for motorized and non-motorized users
Increase the accessibility and mobility options
available to people and for freight
Protect and enhance the environment, promote
energy conservation, and improve quality of life
Enhance the integration and connectivity of the
transportation system—across and between modes—
for people and freight
Promote efficient system management and operation
Emphasize the preservation of the existing
transportation system
Improve the resilience of transportation infrastructure
Page 53 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-15 Chapter 1 Introduction
In addition to adhering to these requirements, other
statutory requirements set forth by the state of Florida
regarding LRTP development are presented in
Appendix A.
Additionally, FDOT’s FTP is updated every 5 years. The
FTP is the single overarching plan guiding Florida’s trans-
portation future and is a collaborative effort of state,
regional, and local transportation partners in the public
and private sectors. The FTP does not include specific
projects but rather defines goals, objectives, and strat-
egies to guide FDOT and partners in developing and
implementing policies, plans, and programs.
1.4 Regional Transportation Planning
The Collier County Metropolitan Area highways are part
of a regional network that not only connects different
parts of the County and its municipalities but also links
the County and its municipalities to neighboring counties
in the region, to the state, and to the nation. As illustrated
on Figure 1-9, business travel between Collier County and
its neighbors is significant, especially between Collier
County and Lee County. From 2016 to 2020, the U.S.
Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS)
analysis of commuting patterns reported approximately
35,600 daily inter‐county auto-oriented trips between
Collier and Lee counties.
Figure 1-9. Daily Collier County Work Travel Patterns
Source: USCB n.d.a.
The Collier MPO provides for creation of a region-wide
multimodal transportation planning process in
accordance with federal and state guidelines to ensure
the coordination of transportation planning and policy
activities in FDOT District One. According to the UPWP
(approved and adopted May 2024), the Collier MPO
performs the following regional transportation planning
activities:
Participates in the Lee County MPO and advisory
committee meetings.
Participates and coordinates in the Joint MPO Board
and Joint Advisory Committee meetings with Lee
County MPO.
Participates in quarterly joint MPO, CAT, and FDOT
transit coordination meetings.
Page 54 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 1-16 Chapter 1 Introduction
Coordinates with FDOT, Lee County MPO, other
adjoining MPOs and adjoining jurisdictions, muni-
cipalities, or agencies to ensure that regional needs
are being addressed and planning activities are
consistent. Such coordination includes, but is not
limited to, discussion of regional plans, review of the
Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) plan, evaluation
and ranking of Transportation Regional Incentive
Program (TRIP) projects, and update of joint priorities
for regional and statewide funding.
Develops, adopts, and updates regional transportation
priorities, including the Regional Transportation
Network Priorities (which includes the SIS and other
important cross-county connections and intermodal
facilities), the TRIP projects, and Regional Enhance-
ment Priorities.
Participates in the Florida Metropolitan Planning
Organization Advisory Council (MPOAC), FDOT District
One Coordinated Urban Transportation Studies
(CUTS), Florida Metropolitan Planning Partnership
(FMPP) meetings, and FDOT/FHWA quarterly
conference calls and regional quarterly meetings.
Analyzes state and federal laws and regulations for
MPOs, committees, and local government officials to
aid them in their application of regional transportation
policy strategies.
Participates in the FDOT District One Freight Mobility
and Trade Plan, freight committees, and regional
freight workshops and seminars. The Collier MPO also
coordinates with freight stakeholders.
Collier MPO has coordinated with Lee County,
Charlotte County-Punta Gorda, and Sarasota/
Manatee MPOs to submit an application for a
Southwest Florida Rail Study under the Pilot
Passenger Rail Priorities Program (PPPP).
Further, as shown on Figure 1-10, under state and
federal laws, the Collier MPO is required to produce
documents that support region-wide transportation
planning that include the LRTP, TIP, UPWP, and PPP (as
described previously in Sections 1.2 and 1.3). The MPO is
also required to conduct performance-based planning by
tracking performance measures and establishing data-
driven targets to improve those measures.These
performance measures are updated every 5 years and
included in the LRTP update.
Figure 1-10.Collier MPO Documentation Responsibilities
Page 55 of 397
2
Plan Process
Page 56 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-1 Chapter 2 Plan Process
2.Plan Process
2.1 Plan Process
This chapter describes the process to develop the Collier
MPO 2050 LRTP update and provides a comprehensive
overview of the public and stakeholder engagement
included in the planning process. The Goals and
Objectives, Needs Plan, and Cost Feasible Plan that are
outlined in this chapter are described in more detail in
Chapters 3, 4, and 6, respectively.
Updating the Collier MPO 2050 LRTP was a technical,
collaborative process that included participation by the
MPO Board members, various MPO advisory committees
(described in Chapter 1), and agencies/stakeholders, and
members of the public. As illustrated on Figure 2‐1 and
Figure 2‐2, five key steps are involved in the LRTP
development process.
The five stages of the LRTP process were built on past
planning efforts, a technical review of forecast socioeco-
nomic growth, the financial outlook of the County, and
input from County residents, stakeholders, and elected
officials. The MPO Board’s adoption of the Collier MPO
2050 LRTP acknowledged these five steps, with input
from the public, the MPO committees, and MPO Board,
resulting in a financially constrained plan of transporta-
tion improvements.
Figure 2-1.Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Key Process
Steps
Page 57 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-2 Chapter 2 Plan Process
Figure 2-2.Plan Process
Page 58 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-3 Chapter 2 Plan Process
2.2 County Overview
Collier County is the largest county in Florida by land area
at approximately 2,000 square miles. Of the 67 counties
in the state, it is the 19th most populous county with
approximately 1.8% of Florida’s population. The County
has experienced extensive growth in the last decade.
Between the years 2010 and 2020, the U.S. Census
estimates the County’s population grew 16.8%. Based on
the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2024 population estimates, the
total population of Collier County is approximately
416,000 (USCB n.d.b.).
One of the most unique attributes of Collier County is its
commitment to land conservation. Approximately 67% of
the County’s land area has a land use designation of Con-
servation, which is intended to protect natural resource
areas and vital wildlife habitats within the County (Collier
County 2023c). These conservation lands also provide
recreational opportunities and help sustain the County’s
beautiful natural environment.
Collier County contains three unique municipalities – the
Cities of Naples, Marco Island, and Everglades City. These
incorporated cities are largely built out with adopted
Comprehensive Plans and zoning regulations in place to
guide decision-making for future infill and redevelop-
ment within their jurisdictional boundaries. The cities are
generally characterized by traditional, interconnected
grids of local and collector streets, with short blocks and
walkable residential neighborhoods interspersed with
mixed-use residential and commercial districts of various
development densities.
Source: 2023 American Community Survey Estimates (USCB n.d.c.)
Page 59 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-4 Chapter 2 Plan Process
2.2.1 City of Naples
The City of Naples has accommodated substantial
development over the years, blending residential areas
with commercial hubs and natural preserves. The City is
known for its
upscale waterfront
properties,
beaches, golf
communities, and
vibrant downtown.
The City is the
largest in
residential
population of the
three municipalities within the County. In the 2020
Census, the population was reported to be 19,115
residents (USCB n.d.g). The 2024 full-time residential
population was estimated at 22,000 with a potential
seasonal population of more than 33,500 in the winter
months (City of Naples 2023). Naples is also the largest
city in Collier County in terms of land area. The City has a
council-manager form of government that is comprised
of a mayor and six council members, all of whom are
elected City-wide on a non-partisan basis.
2.2.2 City of Marco Island
The City of Marco Island is located on the largest barrier
island of the chain of islands off the southwest Florida
coast known as the Ten Thousand Islands. Marco Island
has a council-manager form of government with seven
council members.
Based on 2024 population estimates, the City has
approximately 16,500 residents. The City estimates the
potential seasonal population as approximately 40,000 in
the winter months. According to the City website, more
than 1,700 vacant lots remain on the island and new
homes are constructed at a rate of 200 to 300 a year (City
of Marco Island n.d.).
2.2.3 Everglades City
Everglades City is the smallest in population and land size
of the three municipalities in Collier County. According to
the 2020 U.S. Census, the year-round population esti-
mate of the City is 352 residents (USCB n.d.d.). The City is
comprised of a mayor and five council members, all of
whom are elected City-wide on a non-partisan basis.
Everglades City is
surrounded by seven
national and state parks
including the Everglades
National Park Gulf Coast
Visitor Center, which is
located within the city
limits. It has a strong
ecotourism industry,
estimating
approximately 1.3
million visitors annually
(City of Everglades City 2020). In January 2019, the City
was designated as an official Trail Town by Florida’s Office
of Greenways and Trails.
Page 60 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-5 Chapter 2 Plan Process
2.2.4 Immokalee
Immokalee is an unincorporated community and Census-
designated place (CDP) in northeastern Collier County.
Based on the 2020 US Census, the total population of
Immokalee was 24,557, with an employment rate of
63.1% (USCB n.d.e.). The median household income is
$46,143. The Immokalee CDP has a rich and diverse
community, with 77.5% of its population speaking a
language other than English at home, and the most
common language being Spanish.
2.2.5 Seminole Tribe of Florida
The Seminole Tribe of Florida maintains reservation land
in Immokalee, offering essential community resources,
including residential areas, cultural centers, and the
Seminole Hotel and Casino. Governed by a structured,
two-tier system, the Tribe operates under a tribal council
and a board of directors. The Tribal Council is the chief
governing body, composed of a chairman, a vice-
chairman and council representatives from each
reservation.
2.2.6 Miccosukee Tribe of Florida
The Miccosukee Tribe maintains property and traditional
villages throughout Collier County as well as reservation
lands at the Broward County/Collier County border. The
Tribe is governed by a tribal council, which oversees
legislative and executive functions, and various
departments that handle community services, law
enforcement, and economic development.
2.2.7 Planning Communities
As presented on Figure 2-3, three municipalities and 12
planning communities lie within the County (Collier
County n.d.a.). With the absence of a designated urban
service area or an urban growth boundary, the Collier
County Growth Management Plan (CCGMP) (Collier
County 2023c) includes two primary designations within
the Future Land Use Map: Urban and Rural/Agricultural.
In addition to the Urban and Rural/Agricultural designa-
tions, the Future Land Use Element also identifies Estates
and Conservation designations in some areas of the
County. All lands within the County geography fall into
one of these four categories, which helps shape the
pattern of urban development and land use controls.
Eight of the planning communities have land use
designations of Urban as follows:
North Naples
Central Naples
East Naples
South Naples
Golden Gate
Marco
Urban Estates
Immokalee
The remaining four are designated as Rural/Agricultural,
Estates, or Conservation:
Royal Fakapalm
Big Cypress
Rural Estates
Corkscrew
Page 61 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-6 Chapter 2 Plan Process
Figure 2-3.Collier County Planning Communities, Points of Interest, and Unincorporated Communities
Source: Collier County Planning Communities Map (Collier County n.d.a.)
Page 62 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-7 Chapter 2 Plan Process
While growth is expected to continue in urban planning
communities, many of them are approaching build-out,
causing development to spread to rural planning com-
munities. The Urban designation promotes a diversity of
urban development and a wide variety of land uses within
the designation and is configured to guide concentrated
population growth and intensive land development away
from areas of great sensitivity and toward areas more
favorable to development.
The Rural/Agricultural designation does not prevent
development but instead limits the range of land uses
within the designation lands. Collier County uses a zoning
technique known as the Transfer of Development Rights,
which permanently protects land with conversation value
by redirecting development to a more suitable area
planned to accommodate growth and development. The
Collier County Future Land Use Element (Collier County
2023c) states that the Transfer of Development Rights
are primarily applicable to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use
District and Rural Lands Stewardship Area as a key
component of the County’s overall strategy to direct
incompatible land uses away from important natural
resources, including large, connected wetland systems
and habitat that supports federal- and state-listed
species.
The Estates designation includes areas that are already
divided into semi-rural residential parcels. Expansion of
the Estates designation areas is discouraged (Collier
County 2023c).
The Conservation designation aims to conserve and
maintain the natural resources within Collier County
including environmental, recreational, and economical
benefits. Any proposals for development within
Conservation areas must be reviewed rigorously (Collier
County 2023c).
2.3 Forecasting Growth
A major element of the Collier MPO 2050 LRTP
development was to determine the travel demand within
the MPO boundary. Travel demand estimation is a critical
part of long-range transportation planning because it
helps inform the capacity of the transportation system to
meet future needs. By quantifying the extent and
locations of anticipated population and employment
growth areas, the demand for travel in 2050 can be
estimated using regional travel demand models. Travel
demand models test various transportation
improvements to determine how well they meet future
demands and use base-year and future-year
socioeconomic (SE) data (associated with each LRTP
update cycle). For the Collier MPO 2050 LRTP update, the
base year was 2019 and the forecast year was 2050.
2.3.1 Forecasting Methodology
Travel demand models are driven in part by the inter-
action of land use activities and socioeconomic
characteristics of the transportation network. SE data,
such as population, households, employment, and
schools, that are located in each Traffic Analysis Zone
(TAZ), are inputs to the travel demand model. A TAZ is a
small geographic unit used in travel demand models to
create trip generation rates for all land uses within the
TAZ, and thus cumulatively for the entire region. The
Page 63 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-8 Chapter 2 Plan Process
Collier MPO 2050 LRTP update includes 729 TAZs for
Collier County, as presented in Appendix B.
2.3.1.1 Base Year (2019)
Prior to beginning the 2050 LRTP update, FDOT validated
and calibrated the District 1 Regional Planning Model
(D1RPM) travel model for the base year 2019 using
actual traffic counts and 2019 SE data for each TAZ.
Normally, the base year for an LRTP update in 2050
would be the year 2020. However, to avoid the outlier
effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the future year
(2050) traffic demand, FDOT selected 2019 for the base
year of the model rather than 2020. The pandemic
drastically altered travel behavior—reducing traffic
volumes because of lockdowns, remote work, and
economic disruptions. By selecting 2019, FDOT ensures
that the model is built on more typical traffic patterns,
providing a stable foundation for long-term planning.
Metro Forecasting Models, under contract to Collier
County beginning in March 2022, developed the 2019 SE
data by TAZ beginning with the 2020 Census data and
removed dwelling units and associated population and
employment data after 2019 to accurately reflect the
2019 base year conditions. Additionally, FDOT made
minor adjustments to the data, particularly regarding
employment, as part of the model validation process to
ensure planning consistency districtwide. Therefore, the
2019 SE data described in this document are based on
the 2019 SE data from the FDOT D1RPM Development
Landing Page (FDOT 2024e).
2.3.1.2 Forecast Year (2050)
Estimating the horizon year (2050) SE data was primarily
completed through the Collier Interactive Growth Model
(CIGM). The CIGM is a proprietary land use model that
identifies when and where growth is most likely to occur
over time. The forecasting method used to develop this
model considers decades of historic Census data and the
land buildout potential to produce a growth curve that is
unique to the study area. The CIGM then uses a series of
algorithms to anticipate residential development and
distribute it to where it is most likely to occur over time.
When estimating future growth, the CCGMP requires that
the County’s Capital Improvement Plan be based on the
University of Florida’s Bureau of Economic and Business
Research (BEBR) data mid-range (or medium) population
projection (Policy 4.9, Future Land Use Element). Because
of this planning requirement, the CIGM SE growth projec-
tions were adjusted such that the total population did not
exceed BEBR medium population estimates. Because
BEBR data are not available at the TAZ level, the CIGM
projections were used to obtain population estimates for
each TAZ.
Page 64 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-9 Chapter 2 Plan Process
2.3.2 Summary of Socioeconomic Data
Table 2-1 summarizes and compares the 2019 and 2050
SE data. Total residential
population is forecasted to
increase 38.8% by 2050 to
524,087 (Figure 2-4). Total
employment is forecasted to
increase by 19.2% (Figure 2-5).
The number of single-family
and multi-family dwelling units
are anticipated to grow by 42.9% and 21.7%, respectively
(Figure 2-6). Additionally, total school enrollment and
number of hotel/motel rooms are expected to increase by
87.9% and 32.6%, respectively (Figures 2-7 and 2-8).
The most substantial increases in housing and
employment are primarily located in the following areas:
Rural Land Stewardship Area
Rural Mixed Fringe District
The Collier 2050 LRTP 2019 and 2050 Socioeconomic
Data Technical Memorandum (prepared under separate
cover) presents further details on the development of the
SE data and forecasting.
Table 2-1.Summary of 2019 and 2050 SE Data
Socioeconomic
Data
Estimated
2019 SE Dataa
Forecasted
2050 SE Dataa
Growth
Total Residential
Population
377,646 524,087 38.8%
Total Employees 149,122 177,773 19.2%
Total Housing 226,095 298,530 32.0%
Total School
Enrollment
(including colleges)
57,864 108,707 87.9%
Total Hotel/Motel
Rooms
7,877 10,445 32.6%
a Source: FDOT D1RPM Development Landing Page Accessed February 3, 2025
Page 65 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-10 Chapter 2 Plan Process
Figure 2-4.Population Growth Areas
Page 66 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-11 Chapter 2 Plan Process
Figure 2-5.Employment Growth Areas
Page 67 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-12 Chapter 2 Plan Process
Figure 2-6.Housing Growth Areas
Page 68 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-13 Chapter 2 Plan Process
Figure 2-7.School Enrollment Growth Areas
Page 69 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-14 Chapter 2 Plan Process
Figure 2-8.Hotel/Motel Room Growth Areas
Page 70 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-15 Chapter 2 Plan Process
2.3.3 Travel Model Development Process
FDOT requires regional and local transportation planning
agencies to use an FDOT-approved travel demand model
(if available) for their planning area.Travel models simu-
late responses people make about how to travel, given
various possible network configurations and capacities of
highways and transit service.Figure 2-9 presents the
approved FDOT travel demand models in Florida. Be-
cause Collier County is located within FDOT District 1, the
D1RPM was used for the Collier MPO 2050 LRTP update.
The D1RPM covers all of District One’s 12 counties:
Charlotte, Collier, DeSoto, Glades, Hardee, Hendry,
Highlands, Lee, Manatee, Okeechobee, Polk, and Sarasota
as well as a small portion of Osceola County near
Interstate 4.
To be consistent with the base year, the model was
validated to approximate 2019 conditions. The 2050
forecast data that had been distributed to each TAZ were
then used as inputs to estimate travel demand and
potential project performance to meet that demand in
2050.The Collier MPO provided FDOT with the SE data
for 2019 and 2050 as inputs for the D1RPM model, and
FDOT provided all travel model runs during the Collier
MPO 2050 LRTP update.
2.3.3.1 Existing Plus Committed Network
Future-year roadway configurations, or alternative
scenario travel networks, were developed by modeling
the Existing Plus Committed (E+C) travel network using
2050 SE data to estimate future deficiencies. The E+C
network includes all new road or capacity projects that
have been implemented since 2019 (existing), plus all
projects that have construction funded through FY2028
(committed). Once potential deficiencies were under-
stood, the new projects were identified as alternative
network scenarios for input to the model. In addition to
advisory meetings with the TAC and CAC, the MPO held
several coordination meetings with FDOT and Collier
County staff throughout the model development process
to ensure planning consistency.
Figure 2-9.FDOT-Approved Travel Demand Models
Source: FDOT Regional Model Downloads (FDOT n.d.e.)
Page 71 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-16 Chapter 2 Plan Process
2.3.3.2 Alternative Network Scenarios
The following six alternative network scenarios were
modeled and evaluated for the Collier MPO 2050 LRTP
update.
Alternative 1: Needs Plan (financially unconstrained)
Alternative 2: Connectivity Run (financially uncon-
strained)
Alternative 3: Cost Feasible Refinement I (financially
constrained)
Alternative 4: Cost Feasible Refinement II (financially
constrained)
Alternative 5: Transit Run (financially unconstrained)
Alternative 6 (Final): Cost Feasible Plan (financially
constrained)
Alternatives 1, 2, and 5 are financially unconstrained,
allowing consideration of roadway and transit
improvements without budget limitations. These model
alternatives assess potential improvements and their
impacts without financial restrictions. Alternatives 3, 4,
and 6 apply financial constraints to refine the list of cost-
feasible projects, ensuring the model run prioritizes
realistic and budget-conscious solutions.
The 2050 LRTP Scenario Network Modeling Technical
Memorandum (provided under separate cover) provides
additional details on the development and modeling of
the six alternatives. Each of these six alternative network
scenarios ultimately contributes to the development of
the final Needs Plan and Cost Feasible Plan.
2.4 Public and Stakeholder
Participation
The major steps defined in the public participation
process are consistent with the major milestones in the
LRTP development process. Public outreach techniques
during the Collier MPO 2050 LRTP update included
newsletters, website updates, social media, surveys,
interactive maps, and pop-up outreach events. The 2050
LRTP Public and Stakeholder Involvement Summary
(provided under separate cover) presents a detailed
summary of the public outreach efforts and results.Table
2-2 presents a summary of the public and stakeholder
outreach throughout the 2050 LRTP update.
2.4.1 Public Involvement Plan
The LRTP update process began with developing the
Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Public Involvement Plan (PIP)
(provided under separate cover), which was presented to
the TAC/CAC and MPO Board on August 26 and
September 13, 2024, respectively. The PIP identifies
outreach efforts and techniques that give officials,
agencies, local government, interested parties, and the
public an opportunity to participate in the planning
process. The PIP also identifies methods to measure the
effectiveness of outreach. Advisory meetings with the TAC
and CAC were established during the early phases of the
Collier MPO 2050 LRTP update. The advisory meetings
provided valuable feedback during the development of
the E+C Network alternatives for network scenario
planning, Needs Plan development, and the Cost Feasible
Plan development.
Page 72 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-17 Chapter 2 Plan Process
Table 2-2.Summary of Public and Stakeholder Outreach
Event Details Group Date
Presentation of LRTP Overview, Vision, Goals & Objectives, and Evaluation
Framework
TAC/CAC 8/26/2024
MPO Board 9/13/2024
Provided update on E+C Network and D1RPM Alternatives TAC/CAC 9/23/2024
Presentation of LRTP Overview, Vision, Goals & Objectives, and Evaluation
Framework Miccosukee Tribe 10/16/2024
Presentation of LRTP Overview, Vision, Goals & Objectives, and Evaluation
Framework Seminole Tribe 10/17/2024
Provided update on E+C Deficiency Analysis, Alternative 1, and Draft Roadway
Needs List
TAC/CAC 11/25/2024
MPO Board 12/13/2024
Presentation of LRTP Overview, Vision, Goals & Objectives, and Needs Immokalee CRA/MSTU 12/11/2024
Presentation of LRTP Overview, Vision, Goals & Objectives, and Needs Bayshore/Gateway Triangle CRA 1/9/2025
Provided update on the results of Alternatives 1 & 2, Other Needs, and Stakeholder
Coordination TAC/CAC 1/27/2025
Presentation of LRTP Overview, Vision, Goals & Objectives, and Needs City of Marco Island 2/18/2025
Community Outreach Event Number 1: Provided draft Roadway Needs List and
Surveys at the Golden Gate Farmers Market Members of the Public 2/22/2025
Presentation of LRTP Overview, Vision, Goals & Objectives, and Needs City of Everglades City 2/4/2025
Requested feedback on LRTP Draft Roadway Needs National Park Service 2/20/2025
Requested feedback on LRTP Draft Roadway Needs U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2/20/2025
Requested feedback on LRTP Draft Roadway Needs National Estuarine Research Reserve –
Rookery Bay and Cape Romano 2/20/2025
Requested feedback on LRTP Draft Roadway Needs
Florida State Forests –Florida
Department of Agricultural and
Consumer Sciences
2/20/2025
Requested feedback on LRTP Draft Roadway Needs Delnor-Wiggins Pass State Park 2/20/2025
Requested feedback on LRTP Draft Roadway Needs South Florida Water Management
District 2/20/2025
Page 73 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-18 Chapter 2 Plan Process
Table 2-2.Summary of Public and Stakeholder Outreach
Event Details Group Date
Requested feedback on LRTP Draft Roadway Needs National Audubon Society –Corkscrew
Swamp Sanctuary 2/20/2025
Requested feedback on LRTP Draft Roadway Needs Conservancy of Southwest Florida 2/20/2025
Requested feedback on LRTP Draft Roadway Needs from Freight Representatives
(via email)
Troyer Brothers
2/20/25
FDOT
Oakes Farms
CCLP Citrus
Lipman Produce
Bowman
Seminole Tribe
Garguilo Farms
Requested feedback on LRTP Draft Roadway Needs Regional,State and Federal Land
Management Agencies 2/20/2025
Requested feedback on LRTP Draft Roadway Needs Florida Panthers Wildlife Refuge 2/21/2025
Presentation of Visioning & Needs survey results, SE Data, and Draft Roadway
Needs
TAC/CAC 2/24/2025
MPO Board 3/14/2025
Community Outreach Event Number 2: Provided draft Roadway Needs List and
Surveys at the Immokalee Cattle Drive & Jamboree Members of the Public 3/8/2025
Provided draft Roadway Needs List and Surveys at the Airport Road Widening
Project Public Meeting Members of the Public 3/27/2025
Presentation of Visioning & Needs survey results, SE Data, and Draft Roadway
Needs Miccosukee Tribe 4/2/2025
Presentation of Visioning & Needs survey results, SE Data, and Draft Roadway
Needs Seminole Tribe 4/8/2025
Presentation of Visioning & Needs survey results, SE Data, and Draft Roadway
Needs
East of 951 Ad Hoc Advisory
Committee 4/15/2025
Presentation of Final Roadway Needs Projects, Alternatives 3, 4, & 5 Results, Draft
Chapter 5 and Financial Resources Tech Memo, and Draft Cost Feasible Projects
TAC/CAC 8/25/2025
MPO Board 9/12/2025
Page 74 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-19 Chapter 2 Plan Process
Table 2-2.Summary of Public and Stakeholder Outreach
Event Details Group Date
Community Outreach Event Number 3: Provided draft Cost Feasible Projects and
Comment Forms at the Golden Gate Farmers Market Members of the Public 10/4/2025
Community Outreach Event Number 4: Provided draft Cost Feasible Projects and
Comment Forms at the Immokalee Pioneer Pumpkin Palooza Members of the Public 10/11/2025
Virtual Public Meeting (hosted by Collier MPO) LRTP overview, process, and draft
Cost Feasible Projects Members of the Public 10/29/2025
Presentation of Draft LRTP TAC/CAC 10/27/2025
MPO Board 11/14/2025
Presentation of Final Draft LRTP for Committee Endorsement and Board Approval TAC/CAC 11/24/2025
MPO Board 12/11/2025
Page 75 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-20 Chapter 2 Plan Process
2.4.2 Visioning and Needs Survey
At the outset of the 2050 LRTP update, the MPO released
a survey to understand the current and long-term needs
of Collier area residents. This Visioning and Needs Public
Survey was posted on the Collier MPO website and on the
County’s social media pages and open from August 15,
2024 through January 1, 2025. The survey was available
in English, Spanish, and Haitian-Creole language options.
A total of 275 responses were received, with the majority
coming from the City of Marco Island, North Naples, and
Rural Estates (refer to Figure 2-10).
Results of the survey indicated strong support for
prioritizing safety improvements as well resiliency and
stormwater mitigation. For a detailed summary of survey
responses, refer to the 2050 LRTP Public and Stakeholder
Involvement Summary (provided under separate cover).
2.4.3 Draft Roadway Needs Interactive
Map and Survey
Another public outreach method included the use of
online interactive maps to collect input on the Draft
Roadway and Cost Feasible projects. The Draft Roadway
Needs Interactive Map was available to the public
between March 11, 2025 and June 30, 2025. It provided
an online map viewer of the proposed roadway needs
projects with descriptions. Users could view the projects,
add likes or dislikes, and input ideas related to any
roadway projects within the County. The Interactive Needs
Map also included an accompanying survey and online
comment form.
A short survey accompanied the interactive map. This
survey asked respondents to identify their top priorities
for the Collier County Transportation system.Figure 2-11
presents the percentage of respondents that ranked each
of the transportation priorities as their top priority for
Collier County.
Figure 2-10.Visioning and Needs Survey Responses by
Planning Community
Page 76 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-21 Chapter 2 Plan Process
2.4.4 Draft Roadway Cost Feasible
Projects Interactive Map
An updated Interactive Draft Roadway Cost Feasible
Projects map was developed after the Needs Map. This
map operated in a similar manner; however, it included
the financially constrained draft cost feasible project list.
This map was available for public input from October 2,
2025 to November 2, 2025.
2.4.5 Community Outreach Events
To further engage the public on LRTP updates, the MPO
hosted information booths at local community events.
During these events, staff distributed surveys, newsletters,
maps, and comment forms to members of the public.
The first set of events occurred during the Roadway
Needs development phase at the Golden Gate
Community Market (February 22, 2025) and the
Immokalee Cattle Drive and Jamboree (March 8, 2025). A
map showing the Draft Roadway Needs projects was
provided along with a paper survey form, where members
of the public could provide comments and express their
opinions and suggestions related to the proposed
roadway improvements. A QR code to the interactive
Needs Map was also provided at this event.
Figure 2-11.Top Transportation Priorities in Collier County
37%
0%5%
1%
2%0%1%1%
33%
4%
16%
Improve safety for drivers, walkers, and bicyclists
Provide secure routes for evacuation and recovery
Maintain the existing roadway network
Reduce travel time for daily trips
Modernize major roadways for self-driving vehicles
Safeguard critical habitat and endangered species
Provide alternative mobility options like transit, trollies, bike routes, and trails
Reduce transit travel times
Build connections between people and jobs
Prepare roadway infrastructure for flooding, storm surge, and extreme
weather
Improve access to beaches and tourist destinations
Page 77 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 2-22 Chapter 2 Plan Process
The second set of
community events
occurred during the
Cost Feasible Plan
development phase at
the Golden Gate
Farmers Market
(October 4, 2025) and
Immokalee Pioneer
Pumpkin Palooza
(October 11, 2025). A
map of the Draft Cost
Feasible Projects was provided at these events, along with
comment forms. A QR code was also provided to give
participants access to the online interactive map.
2.4.6 Virtual Public Meeting
The Collier MPO also held a virtual public meeting via the
Zoom platform during the Cost Feasible development
phase of the LRTP. This meeting occurred on October 29,
2025, from 5:00-6:00 PM. MPO staff provided a
presentation which gave an overview of the LRTP process
and provided the Roadway Needs and Cost Feasible
project maps. A total of ten members of the public
attended this meeting.
2.4.7 Outreach Results
As a result of the public outreach, the MPO received a
number of comments from members of the public and
various agencies. The following summarizes the results of
the outreach and any changes made to the list of needs
or cost feasible projects as a result.
2.4.7.1 Public and Agency Comments
(pending)
Throughout the LRTP process, a total of (pending
number) comments were received as a result of ongoing
coordination. Twelve of these comments were received
from members of the public and agencies via phone or
email. Additional comments were received from agencies
and stakeholders during coordination meetings listed in
Table 2-2.
2.4.7.2 Changes Made as a Result of Public
Input (pending)
Staff discusses LRTP Cost Feasible
Projects at the Golden Gate Farmers
Market on October 4, 2025.
Staff discusses LRTP Roadway Needs
Projects at the Immokalee Cattle Drive
& Jamboree on March 8, 2025.
Page 78 of 397
3
2050 LRTP Planning Context and
Decision-Making Framework
Page 79 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-1 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
3.2050 LRTP Planning Context and
Decision-Making Framework
3.1 Long Range Vision for Collier County
Transportation
The Collier MPO 2050 LRTP development process began
in early 2024 by establishing the plan’s vision statement,
goals, and objectives. The
goals and objectives help
guide the LRTP process to
meet the Collier MPO’s
vision, while considering
federal, state, and
regional priorities. The
LRTP goals and objectives
refine the Collier MPO’s
vision and are a critical
part of the planning
process because various
transportation projects’
needs are established
based on these goals and
objectives.
3.1.1 Federal Planning Factors
This 2050 LRTP update addresses federal mandates for
regional transportation planning. As noted in Chapter 1,
the guidance, commonly referred to as FHWA’s
Expectations Letter, outlines the agency’s expectations for
the development of LRTP updates to help MPOs meet the
federal planning requirements. FHWA has not issued an
Expectations Letter or any other applicable MPO LRTP
directives since 2018. Therefore, the federal planning
factors have not changed since the 2045 update. FHWA
requires MPOs to incorporate the following ten federal
planning factors in the LRTP.Figure 3-1 summarizes the
federal planning factors in 23 CFR 450.306(b).
Figure 3-1.Federal Planning Factors
“The Collier MPO 2050 Long
Range Transportation Plan
envisions the development
of an integrated, equitable,
multimodal transportation
system to facilitate the safe
and efficient movement of
people and goods while
addressing current and
future transportation
demand, environmental
sustainability, resilience,
and community character.”
Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Vision Statement
Page 80 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-2 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
3.1.2 Statewide and Metropolitan
Planning Priorities
As noted in the FDOT MPO Program Management
Handbook, Section 339.175(6)(b) of Florida Statutes
requires the LRTP to provide for consideration of projects
and strategies that will:
Support the economic vitality of the metropolitan
area, especially by enabling global competitiveness,
productivity, and efficiency
Increase the safety and security of the transportation
system for motorized and nonmotorized users
Increase accessibility and mobility options available to
people and for freight
Protect and enhance the environment, promote
energy conservation, and improve quality of life
Enhance the integration and connectivity of the
transportation system, across and between modes, for
people and freight
Promote efficient system management and operation
Emphasize the preservation of the existing
transportation system
In addition, MPOs are also required to prepare a
congestion management system for the contiguous
urbanized metropolitan area and cooperate with the
department in the development of all other
transportation management systems required by state
or federal law [s.339.175(6)(c)(1)]
3.1.3 Other Local Planning Coordination
Statewide guidance also dictates that the LRTP should
emphasize coordination with local jurisdictions that are
within the MPO (cities of Naples, Marco Island, and
Everglades City) and consistency with future land use
planning and locally adopted comprehensive plans of
those entities. The LRTP must also maintain a 20-year
planning horizon. As described in more detail in the
following text, local plans that the MPO considers to be
relevant to the LRTP include:
Collier County Growth Management Plan
Collier County Community Housing Plan
City of Naples Comprehensive Plan
City of Marco Island Comprehensive Plan
City of Everglades City Comprehensive Plan
3.1.3.1 Collier County Growth Management
Plan
The Future Land Use Element of the CCGMP (the County’s
comprehensive plan) was adopted in 1997 and most
recently amended in November 2023 extending the
planning period to 2050. The plan’s core principles of
growth include:
Protect natural resource systems and guide
development away from areas of greatest sensitivity
Coordinate land use and public facilities to develop
within Urban Designated Areas
Manage coastal development
Page 81 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-3 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
Provide adequate and affordable housing
Attain high-quality urban design
Improve efficiency and effectiveness in the land use
regulatory system
Protect private property rights
3.1.3.2 Collier County Community Housing
Plan
Under the IIJA, MPOs are encouraged to consider and
incorporate housing in their LRTP updates. These
recommendations are outlined in the FDOT Housing
Coordination Quick Guide (FDOT 2023d). Housing plays a
significant role in the transportation network, as it
dictates users’ commute times and travel patterns to
employment and activity centers.
To address the growing population and need for
affordable housing (refer to Figure 3-2), Collier County
established the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee
(AHAC), which reviews policies, procedures, ordinances,
land development regulations, and adopted local
government comprehensive plans. Committee members
also provide recommendations to the Collier County BCC
for initiatives which support the implementation of
affordable housing within the County.
The AHAC helps to inform the Collier County Community
Housing Plan (Collier County 2017) that has the central
goal of providing a diverse range of attainable and
affordable housing for all residents. Specific transporta-
tion recommendations from this plan consist of:
Figure 3-2. Future Population Growth and Housing
Source: FDOT (2023d) and University of Florida BEBR (2022)
Integrate bus routes with affordable housing locations
by identifying corridors for multi-family development,
implementing park-and-ride systems, and exploring
bus rapid transit (BRT) and express service lines
Enhance bike lane and pedestrian systems by
implementing Comprehensive Pathways Plan and
enhancing safety for vulnerable users
Create ride-sharing options for enhanced mobility in
remote areas of the County
Page 82 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-4 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
Generate revenue for transit and alternative mobility
by establishing sustainable and secure revenue
streams, implementing a recurring revenue source and
establishing uniform standards to determine the
impacts on transit from new development
Since 2018, more than 3,000 new affordable units have
been approved by the Collier County BCC to be built, with
2,108 of those located in urban areas and 1,783
allocated for the rural areas and the Census Designated
Place of Immokalee. Further, the Collier County BCC
contracted to have 82 affordable housing rental units
built on a 5-acre, county-owned Planned Unit
Development site on Santa Barbara Boulevard. The Board
also purchased and dedicated 22 acres of a county-
owned golf course (Golden Gate Golf Course) for
affordable housing including 252 affordable rental
apartments and 120 affordable senior housing units.
3.1.3.3 City of Naples Comprehensive Plan
The most populous incorporated area in the County,
Naples has a permanent population of 19,300 people.
Updates to the Naples Comprehensive Plan were
completed in 2023 to extend the planning period to
2045 and to incorporate the City Vision in the
Comprehensive Plan. The Vision includes the following
five primary initiatives to guide Naples officials and staff
in determining capital projects, budgeting, and review of
private development:
Preserve small town character and culture
Stewardship of land and protection of the
environment
Maintain extraordinary quality of life for residents
Support economic health and vitality of the
businesses and health care industry that contribute to
collective success and well-being
Sustain high performing government action,
engagement, and responsiveness
The Transportation Element of the Naples
Comprehensive Plan establishes the goal to provide an
efficient, balanced, attractive, and safe multimodal
system of transportation facilities in accordance with
recognized safety standards, various land use demands,
and environmental considerations unique to Naples.
3.1.3.4 City of Marco Island Comprehensive
Plan
Marco Island is home to a permanent population of
approximately 15,800 residents. The Marco Island
Comprehensive Plan was adopted October 4, 2021, with a
horizon year of 2040. The Future Land Use Element sets
forth eight goals, the first of which is focused on livability,
aiming to protect and enhance the City of Marco Island as
a highly livable community with an excellent quality of
life, which encompasses its tropical beaches, resorts and
recreational amenities, abundant natural resources and
sensitive coastal environments, and small-town charm.
The Transportation Element of the Marco Island
Comprehensive Plan establishes the goal to coordinate
land use and transportation plans to support a safe,
accessible, and efficient multimodal transportation
system that enhances livability and small-town character.
Page 83 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-5 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
3.1.3.5 City of Everglades City Comprehensive
Plan
Everglades City has a permanent population of
approximately 350 people. The Everglades City
Comprehensive Plan was adopted July 5, 2022, with a
horizon year of 2045. The Future Land Use Element sets
forth the goal to plan future land uses in a manner that
serves the needs of Everglades City residents and visitors,
protects and conserves natural and historic resources,
supports multimodal mobility strategies, and promotes
diversification of the City’s economic base while
protecting maritime uses.
The Transportation Element of the Everglades City
Comprehensive Plan sets forth six objectives, the first of
which is to enhance mobility options. Additionally, an
objective to coordinate with other governmental agencies
places emphasis on MPO coordination and County
Road 29 improvements.
3.2 2050 LRTP Goals
The LRTP development process builds on the 2045 LRTP
and input from the Collier MPO Board, advisory com-
mittees, planning partners, and public surveys to
establish the long-range vision statement for the MPO’s
transportation system in 2050. Further, the LRTP is a
multimodal plan that incorporates the needs and cost
feasible projects through the MPO’s other plans which are
incorporated by reference. These plans include the
Congestion Management Process, Bicycle and Pedestrian
Master Plan, Safety Action Plan, and Transit Development
Plan.
The roadway needs and cost feasible projects are partly
developed during the LRTP process through coordination
with FDOT District One and their approved regional
planning model. Because the transportation network is a
multimodal network that must consider multiple factors
including safety, congestion, and sustainability; the
roadway goals and objectives were developed to guide
the roadway projects and their influence on other
transportation modes. Each of the plans incorporated by
reference into this LRTP update have distinct goals and
objectives that were considered when developing the
roadway goals and objectives.
The LRTP goals and objectives and evaluation framework
were developed to reflect the roadway needs within
Collier County. These goals and objectives guide the LRTP
development process by creating the basis for a decision-
making framework through which projects can be
evaluated and ranked to define and document roadway
project priorities while also considering other
transportation modes. The goals of the 2050 LRTP
originated in the 2045 LRTP and were slightly modified to
better align with both the federal and FDOT planning
emphasis areas and new requirements set forth by the
IIJA. Additionally, FDOT provided guidance on Housing in
the LRTP in the Housing Coordination Quick Guide (FDOT
2023d),and these recommendations were incorporated
into the goals and related objectives.
The 2050 LRTP goals consist of:
Goal #1: Ensure Security of the Transportation System
for Users
Goal #2: Protect Environmental Resources
Page 84 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-6 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
Goal #3: Improve System Continuity and Connectivity
while Maintaining Existing Facilities
Goal #4: Reduce Roadway Congestion
Goal #5: Promote Freight Movement
Goal #6: Increase the Safety of the Transportation
System for Users
Goal #7: Promote Multimodal Solutions
Goal #8: Promote the Integrated Planning of
Transportation and Land Use
Goal #9: Promote Sustainability and Equity in
Transportation Planning and Land Use for
Disadvantaged Communities
Goal #10: Promote Agile, Resilient, and Quality
Transportation Infrastructure in Transportation
Decision-Making
Goal #11: Promote Emerging Mobility and its
Influential Role on the Multimodal Transportation
System
The Collier MPO staff presented these goals and
associated objectives for consideration by the CAC and
TAC during their regular meetings on August 26, 2024.
They were accepted to carry forward in the 2050 LRTP by
the Collier MPO Board on September 13, 2024.
Figure 3-3.LRTP Development Framework
Page 85 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-7 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
3.2.1 Priorities: Goals, Objectives, and
Evaluation Criteria
The 2050 LRTP Goals, Objectives, and Evaluation Criteria
are listed on the following pages. The goals provide a
framework for realizing the LRTP vision (Figure 3-3). The
objectives provide specific guidance on how to achieve
each goal. Evaluation criteria are used to evaluate and
compare how effectively potential transportation projects
perform relative to the goals and objectives.
This LRTP is guided by the goals and objectives, each of
which represents a specific element of how the trans-
portation system should be managed for the next
25 years. The 11 goals are intended to maintain Collier
County and its incorporated cities as livable communities
and to improve the Countywide transportation system,
keeping pace with growth and expected demand for
transportation services in the region.
The evaluation framework was developed to evaluate and
compare how well potential projects meet each of the
established goals and objectives. For the evaluation
framework, each goal was assigned a weighting factor
that placed more emphasis on certain goals that require
more focus in the Collier MPO transportation system. A
project evaluation criterion shows the advantages and
disadvantages of the proposed projects independently as
well as in relation to each other. As illustrated on
Figure 3-3, this goals-and-objectives-based type of
evaluation process is ultimately used to develop the
recommendations and prioritize transportation projects in
the Needs Assessment and Cost Feasible Plan.
To support the performance‐based process emphasized
in the IIJA, the following pages present defined goals and
objectives and the related evaluation criteria with per-
formance measures applied to evaluate each proposed
project.
Goal #1: Ensure Security of the Transportation
System for Users
The primary security issue for
Collier County residents relates to
implementation of sound emer-
gency management plans. The
primary threat to the County is
extreme weather events, parti-
cularly hurricanes and wildfires. As
a result, emphasis has been placed
on enhancing important evacuation routes.
The total weighting factor for this goal is 8%.
Objectives:
Enhance important evacuation routes
Maintain sound transportation components of the
emergency management plan for Collier County
The 2021 Collier County Comprehensive Emergency Plan
is designed to provide a framework through which Collier
County may prevent or mitigate the impacts of, prepare
for, respond to, and recover from natural, manmade, and
technological hazards that could adversely affect the
health, safety and general welfare of residents and
visitors to the County. Additionally, this plan establishes
the National Incident Management System as the
Page 86 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-8 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
standard for tasked agencies to use in responding to
emergency events. The plan identifies 23 hazards of
which 12 hazards were identified as High Risk because of
their widespread potential impact. These 12 High Risk
hazards include flood, tropical cyclones, severe storms,
wildfire, drought, extreme heat, sea level rise, winter
storms and freeze, tsunami, major transportation
incidents, pandemic outbreak, mass migration incident,
and civil infrastructure disruption. The plan further
outlines emergency situations and County agencies’
responsibilities (Collier County 2021a).
Project Evaluation Criteria:
Improves or maintains critical evacuation routes
Provides enhanced or potential new evacuation routes
where needed
Improves existing evacuation routes near high-density
populations
Goal #2: Protect Environmental Resources
Collier County is fortunate to have
wide-ranging environmental
resources including extensive
wetland resources and natural
wildlife areas that greatly enhance
the quality of life for residents and
visitors. Protection of these
resources has been highly valued
in the 2050 LRTP.
The total weighting factor for this goal is 12%.
Objectives:
Minimize encroachment by transportation projects on
wetlands and other protected natural areas
Minimize adverse impacts on threatened and
endangered species
Project Evaluation Criteria:
Minimize wetland encroachments by transportation
projects
Minimize impacts to wetland flows (maintain or
enhance existing flows to the extent feasible)
Minimize the adverse impacts on threatened and
endangered species
Preserve open space by improving infrastructure near
key destinations
Goal #3: Improve System Continuity and
Connectivity while Maintaining Existing
Facilities
Continuity and connectivity make it
easier for residents and visitors to
access the transportation system as
directly as possible. Connectivity is
a priority for all modes, and the
future network provides direct
routes and reduces travel time.
The total weighting factor for this
goal is 10%.
Page 87 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-9 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
Objectives:
Improve continuity and capacity of existing facilities
Promote connectivity by creating new transportation
links
Create a network of direct routes between and within
areas of development
Project Evaluation Criteria:
Improves existing infrastructure deficiencies
Improves connectivity with new transportation links to
address system gaps
Goal #4: Reduce Roadway Congestion
Congestion and accompanying
delay pose a serious cost to the
residents of Collier County,
reducing their access to jobs,
education, health care, shopping,
recreation, and other activities. The
2050 LRTP emphasizes reducing
congestion to help enhance the
quality of life for County residents.
The total weighting factor for this goal is 16%.
Objectives:
Reduce the number of deficient roadways (those with
a high volume-to-capacity ratio) identified in the
2050 E+C network
Reduce travel delay between residential areas and key
destinations
Project Evaluation Criteria:
Improves existing deficient facility or improves a new
or neighboring facility intended to relieve an existing
deficient facility
Improves intersections and roadways with poor levels
of service
Addresses capacity for intersections or roadways that
have poor levels of service during peak travel times
Goal #5: Promote Freight Movement
Efficient freight movement is
directly related to the economic
well‐being of a community. The
cost of moving freight is reflected
in all consumables and in local
production activities.
The total weighting factor for this
goal is 6%.
Objectives:
Enhance movement on major regional freight mobility
corridors or freight distribution routes
Improve access to freight activity centers (distribution
facilities or major commercial/industrial districts)
Project Evaluation Criteria:
Enhances operation of the facility identified as a major
freight route
Page 88 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-10 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
Goal #6: Increase the Safety of the
Transportation System for Users
Safety of the transportation
system is an important factor in
the MPO's planning and project
development process. The invest-
ment of projects that enhance
safety and emphasize complete
streets will lead to reduced
crashes and lower crash severity
for all modes of transportation.
The total weighting factor for this goal is 12%.
Objectives:
Reduce the number of fatalities, injuries, and crashes
Ensure adequate bicycle and pedestrian facilities are
incorporated into new highway and transit projects
Emphasize the need for Complete Streets projects
Implement safety-related improvements on high-
crash corridors
Project Evaluation Criteria:
Enhances safety of transportation system users
Improves facility or intersection identified as having a
high crash occurrence or a fatality
Promotes traffic calming
Reduces vehicular conflicts with bicyclists, pede-
strians, and other vulnerable road users
Improves safety and security for vulnerable users,
especially for children, seniors, and people with
disabilities
Goal #7: Promote Multimodal Solutions
The County recognizes the
importance of a multimodal
transportation network that
promotes healthful living, improve
air quality, and improve residents’
quality of life.
The total weighting factor for this
goal is 12%.
Objectives:
Improve frequency and reliability of public transit
service routes and improve access to park-and-ride
lots
Improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities
Improve air quality
Improve quality of life
Promote healthy living
Implement Complete Streets policies
Project Evaluation Criteria:
Provides for trail improvements that implement the
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
Provides multimodal improvement near affordable
housing, centers of employment, multi-family
Page 89 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-11 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
housing, health care, educational, recreational, or
cultural centers
Provides multimodal improvements for environmental
justice communities and underserved neighborhoods,
and connects these neighborhoods to centers of
employment and important destinations for transit-
dependent households
Improves transit (frequency and reliability) within
existing or future transit service areas (TSA) or within a
community redevelopment area (CRA); improves
access to park-and-ride facilities; provides for BRT.
Improves bicycle or pedestrian access to transit
Improves safety and access for people of all ages and
abilities; improves safety for people walking, biking,
and using mobility devices
Goal #8: Promote the Integrated Planning of
Transportation and Land Use
Transportation improvements can
often result in new economic
development and land use activity.
In turn, decisions related to land
use and economic development are
often the basis for transportation
system investments. The Collier
MPO strives to develop projects
that promote land use objectives of the County and its
incorporated cities.
The total weighting factor for this goal is 10%.
Objectives:
Coordinate with local governments and partner
agencies to assure transportation plans and programs
support local land use plans and a sustainable
transportation system
Assure that local growth management objectives are
reflected in transportation plans and programs
Assure that transportation plans and projects promote
economic sustainability for the County
Project Evaluation Criteria:
Improves access to regional travel by connecting to
regional or SIS facilities (interstates, airports, ports,
etc.) or adjacent counties
Improves access to tourist destinations
Supports targeted redevelopments or CRAs
(multimodal or vehicle improvements)
Identified in partner agency (city, transit, county, MPO,
etc.) plans as a priority
Improves vehicle or freight movement to an inter-
modal facility
Reduces household cost by providing for connectivity
between housing and transportation
Page 90 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-12 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
Goal #9: Promote Sustainability and Equity in
Transportation Planning and Land Use for
Disadvantaged Communities
A sustainable transportation system
allows for the basic access and
needs of the community to be met
safely. It operates fairly and
efficiently, offers a choice of
transportation modes, and
promotes equity for all users.
The total weighting factor for this
goal is 8%.
Objectives:
Improve the sustainability of communities through
increased access to affordable housing and centers of
employment and reduced automobile dependency
Ensure that transportation system improvements are
equitable and fair to all residents of the County
Engage a diverse public in the development of the
region’s transportation system
Project Evaluation Criteria:
Benefits disadvantaged communities and improves
sustainability through increased housing choices and
reduced automobile dependency
Goal #10: Promote Agile, Resilient, and Quality
Transportation Infrastructure in Transportation
Decision-Making
A resilient transportation system is
one that adapts to changing
conditions and prepares for,
withstands, and recovers from
disruptions.
The total weighting factor for this
goal is 4%.
Objectives:
Identify key climate impacts (rising sea levels,
hurricanes, and so forth)
Identify sensitive assets and thresholds for impacts
Identify, evaluate, and adopt strategies to address
identified vulnerabilities
Screen projects during planning to investing in
particularly vulnerable areas
Project Evaluation Criteria:
Promotes transportation infrastructure resilience
related to sea level rise, flooding, and storms
Promotes housing and transportation in areas that
better withstand extreme weather
Page 91 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-13 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
Goal #11: Promote Emerging Mobility and its
Influential Role on the Multimodal
Transportation System
Advances in automotive infra-
structure technology through
emerging mobility options pose
some of the biggest challenges to
transportation planning (for
example, equity among users). The
potential for disruptions to
transportations systems includes
changes to land uses and the system network itself.
However, because of the potential safety benefits, the
Collier MPO is exploring ways to incorporate these
technologies into the transportation network.
The total weighting factor for this goal is 4%.
Objectives:
Consider the development and implementation of
emerging mobility options in the multimodal
transportation system
Consider new guidance and developments during the
LRTP process
Project Evaluation Criteria:
Uses technological improvements (for example, ITS,
Transit Signal Priority, and so forth) that will foster the
development and growth of emerging mobility in the
transportation system
3.3 Applying Priorities to Decision-
Making
The 2050 LRTP development process builds upon the
2045 LRTP and input from the MPO Board, advisory
committees, planning partners, and public input to
establish the long-range vision statement for the MPO’s
transportation system in 2050. The goals and objectives
of the transportation plan are established to help realize
this vision and ultimately guide the LRTP development
process by creating a decision-making framework
through which projects can be evaluated and ranked to
define and document project priorities.
3.3.1 Evaluation Criteria for Project
Selection
Like the goals and objectives, the 2050 LRTP evaluation
criteria (refer to Table 3-1) build upon the evaluation
criteria established in the 2045 plan. Evaluation criteria
are used to evaluate and compare how well potential
transportation projects meet the goals and objectives.
The evaluation criteria under each goal are assigned
performance measures that are used to “score” each
project against the criteria. Evaluation criteria are based
on a point system in which the total score represents how
well a project meets the goal. Ultimately, this type of
evaluation is used to develop recommendations and
prioritize transportation projects. The evaluation criteria
and performance measures listed in Table 3-1
demonstrate the scoring methodology for project
evaluation and selection.
Page 92 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-14 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
Table 3-1.2050 LRTP Evaluation Criteria and Performance Measures
Goal Evaluation Criteria Performance Measures Weighting
1.Ensure Security
of the
Transportation
System for
Users
Total Weighting
Factor: 8%
1A - Improves or maintains critical evacuation
routes
Does this project enhance an existing evacuation
route (i.e., roadway widening, wider shoulders, etc.)?
Yes = 5; No = 0
3
1B - Provides enhanced or potential new
evacuation routes where needed
Does the roadway connect to an existing evacuation
route, or does it have potential to be a new
evacuation route (for example, major extension or
new project that connects to a Strategic Intermodal
System?)
Yes = 5; No = 0
3
1C - Improves existing evacuation routes near
high-density populations
Does the project improve evacuation near high-
density populations?
Yes = 5; No = 0
2
2.Protect
Environmental
Resources
Total Weighting
Factor: 12%
2A - Minimize wetland encroachments by
transportation projects
How many acres of wetland encroachment based on
National Wetlands Inventory?
No impact = 0
0–5 acres = -1
6–10 acres = -2
11–15 = -3
15–20 = -4
21 or more = -5 (max)
3
2B - Minimize impacts to wetland flows (maintain
or enhance existing flows to the extent feasible)
Proximity to protected natural areas (0.5 miles)
Within 0.5 miles of Conservation Areas/Preserves
lands?
Yes = -1
No = 0
3
2C - Minimize the adverse impacts on threatened
and endangered species
Amount of habitat encroachment based on primary
panther habitat?
No impact = 0
0–10 acres = -1
11–20 acres = -2
3
Page 93 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-15 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
Table 3-1.2050 LRTP Evaluation Criteria and Performance Measures
Goal Evaluation Criteria Performance Measures Weighting
21–30 =-3
31–40 = -4
40 or more = -5 (max)
2D –Preserve open space by improving
infrastructure near key destinations.
Proximity of transportation project to key destination.
Within 0.5 mile = 5
Within 2 miles = 3
Greater than 2 miles = 0
3
3.Improve
System
Continuity and
Connectivity
while
Maintaining
Existing
Facilities
Total Weighting
Factor: 10%
3A - Improves existing infrastructure deficiencies Does the project improve mobility in an existing
roadway facility (for example, widening, intersection
improvements, etc.)?
Yes = 5; No = 0
5
3B - Improves connectivity with new
transportation links to address system gaps
Does the project improve connectivity with a new
facility including projects that are extensions that
connect to future or existing facilities?
Yes = 5; No = 0
5
4.Reduce
Roadway
Congestion
Total Weighting
Factor: 16%
4A - Improves existing deficient facility or
improves a new or neighboring facility intended
to relieve an existing deficient facility
Does the project increase capacity or provide relief to
a parallel facility (for example, new facilities, bridges
over canals, etc.)?
Yes = 5; No = 0
8
4B - Improves intersections and roadways with
poor levels of service
Does capacity ratio decrease when compared to the
2050 E+C Alternative?
Yes = 5; No = 0
4
4C – Improves congestion at intersections and
roadways with existing peak time congestion
Does the project address capacity for intersections or
roadways that have LOS D or higher during peak
travel times?
Yes = 5; No= 0
4
Page 94 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-16 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
Table 3-1.2050 LRTP Evaluation Criteria and Performance Measures
Goal Evaluation Criteria Performance Measures Weighting
5.Promote
Freight
Movement
Total Weighting
Factor: 6%
5A - Enhances operation of the facility identified
as a major freight route
Is the roadway on a regional freight mobility corridor,
freight distribution route, or connects to a freight
activity center as outlined in the 2045 LRTP?
Yes = 5; No = 0
6
6.Increase the
Safety of
Transportation
System Users
Total Weighting
Factor: 12%
6A - Enhances safety of transportation system
users
Does project implement a recommendation from a
safety plan (for example, safe routes to school,
protected bike lanes, etc.)?
Yes = 5; No = 0
2
6B - Improves facility or intersection identified as
having a high crash occurrence or a fatality
High crash location or segment?
Yes = 5; No = 0
3
6C – Promotes traffic calming Does the project improve safety by calming traffic
(for example, gateway treatments, roundabouts,
reduced width and turning radii)? Are vehicular
speeds appropriate to context and facility type?
Yes = 5; No = 0
2
6D - Reduces vehicular conflicts with bicyclists,
pedestrians, and other vulnerable road users
High crash location or segment for bicycle and
pedestrian conflicts?
Yes = 5; No = 0
3
6E – Improves safety and security for vulnerable
users, especially for children, seniors, and people
with disabilities
Does this project improve safety (FHWA proven safety
countermeasures) near a school, senior center,
Census block groups with high populations of people
living with a disability, and Census block groups with
high populations of people over the age of 65?
Yes (within 0.5 mile) = 5; No = 0
2
Page 95 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-17 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
Table 3-1.2050 LRTP Evaluation Criteria and Performance Measures
Goal Evaluation Criteria Performance Measures Weighting
7.Promote
Multimodal
Solutions
Total Weighting
Factor: 10%
7A - Provides for trail improvements that
implement the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master
Plan
New or improved trail/greenways = 5
No new or improved trail = 0
2
7B - Provides multimodal improvement near
affordable housing, centers of employment,
multi-family housing, health care, educational,
recreational, or cultural centers
Improvement within 0.25 mile = 5
No improvement within 0.25 mile = 0
2
7C - Provides multimodal improvements for
environmental justice communities and
underserved neighborhoods, and connects these
neighborhoods to centers of employment and
important destinations for transit-dependent
households
Improvement within 0.25 mile = 5
No improvement within 0.25 mile = 0
2
7D - Improves transit (frequency and reliability)
within existing or future TSAs or within a CRA;
improves access to park-and-ride facilities;
provides for BRT
Project along an existing or planned bus route
within an existing or future TSA = 5
Project along an existing or planned bus route
inside a CRA = 5
Improves access to park-and-ride facility = 5
Provides for BRT = 5
No improvement = 0
Projects with no existing or planned bus routes = 0
2
7E - Improves bicycle or pedestrian access to
transit
Improve Access = 5
No improvement = 0
2
7F – Improves safety and access for people of all
ages and abilities; improves safety for people
walking, biking, and using mobility devices
Improvement = 5
No improvement = 0
2
8.Promote the
Integrated
8A - Improves access to regional travel by
connecting to regional or SIS facilities
Improves access = 5
Does not improve access = 0
2
Page 96 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-18 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
Table 3-1.2050 LRTP Evaluation Criteria and Performance Measures
Goal Evaluation Criteria Performance Measures Weighting
Planning of
Transportation
and Land Use
Total Weighting
Factor: 10%
(interstates, airports, ports,etc.) or adjacent
counties
8B - Improves access to tourist destinations Improves access = 5
Does not improve access = 0
1
8C - Supports targeted redevelopments or CRAs
(multimodal or vehicle improvements)
Yes = 5
No = 0
2
8D - Identified in partner agency (city, transit,
county, MPO, etc.) as a priority
Was this project identified as a priority by partnering
agencies or have prior investments, such as planning,
design, or right-of-way?
ROW Acquisition = 5
Design = 4
Planning Study Underway or Done = 3
Identified as Need by Partner Agency = 1
No Prior Investment = 0
3
8E - Improves vehicle or freight movement to an
intermodal facility
Does the project improve vehicle or freight
movement to intermodal facilities (for example,
airport, bus transfer station, freight center, park-and-
ride, etc.)?
Yes = 5
No = 0
1
8F – Reduces household cost by providing for
connectivity between housing and transportation
Does this project improve capacity or direct access
between major activity or employment centers and
medium- and high-density housing development(s)?
Yes = 5; No = 0
1
9.Promote
Sustainability
and Equity in
Transportation
9A - Benefits disadvantaged communities and
improves sustainability through increased
housing choices and reduced automobile
dependency
Does the project bring better mobility to
disadvantaged communities and CRAs (for example,
bike/ped improvements along a bus route or stop,
etc.)?
8
Page 97 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 3-19 Chapter 3 2050 LRTP Planning Context and Decision-Making Framework
Table 3-1.2050 LRTP Evaluation Criteria and Performance Measures
Goal Evaluation Criteria Performance Measures Weighting
Planning and
Land Use for
Disadvantaged
Communities
Total Weighting
Factor: 8%
Project in target area = 5
Project not in target area = 0
10.Promote Agile,
Resilient, and
Quality
Transportation
Infrastructure
in
Transportation
Decision-
Making
Total Weighting
Factor: 4%
10A - Promotes transportation infrastructure
resilience related to sea level rise, flooding, and
storms
Within 0.25 miles of NOAA 1 foot sea level rise
flooding area = 5
Within 0.25 miles of NOAA 1 foot sea level rise
low-lying area = 3
Not in high-risk area = 0
2
10B – Promotes housing and transportation in
areas that better withstand extreme weather
Is this project a new facility within a high-risk area?
Within 0.25 mile of NOAA 1 foot sea level rise
flooding or low-lying area = 0
Not in high-risk area = 5
2
11.Promote
Emerging
Mobility and its
Influential Role
on the
Multimodal
Transportation
System
Total Weighting
Factor: 4%
11A - Uses technological improvements (ITS,
Transit Signal Priority, etc.) that will foster the
development and growth of emerging mobility in
the multimodal transportation system
Yes = 5
No = 0
4
Page 98 of 397
4
2050 Needs Plan
Page 99 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-1 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
4.2050 Needs Plan
4.1 Needs Plan Overview
The 2050 LRTP Needs Plan identifies the multimodal
transportation projects needed to address existing and
future transportation network deficiencies within the
MPO’s jurisdiction. Developing the Needs Plan is the
starting point for understanding and prioritizing the
region’s overall transportation needs, and it is completed
without considering funding limitations. Once the
applicable transportation revenues available to the Collier
MPO are applied to the Needs Plan, the number of
projects that can be constructed to address the needs is
reduced.
4.1.1 Needs Plan Policy Constraints
While the projects identified as transportation needs are
not fiscally constrained, associated policy and
environmental constraints exist. The following policy
constraints are noted in the Collier County Growth
Management Plan (CCGMP) (amended November 2023):
All future roadway capacity improvements shall
include provisions for both bicycles and pedestrians
[B. Intermodal & Multi-modal Transportation].
County facilities are to be maintained at a level of
service (LOS) standard “D” or “E” as measured on a
peak hour basis; LOS calculations are to be based on
traffic experienced for 10 months of the year with
peak seasonal and tourist months of February and
March omitted [D. Implementation Strategy].
County roadways are physically constrained once they
are developed to a maximum of six lanes or when
intensive land use development is immediately
adjacent to roads prohibiting expansion. Roadways
identified as constrained shall be subject to growth
restrictions to not further degrade their LOS [D.
Implementation Strategy].
Environmental, historical, archeological, aesthetic, or
social impact considerations may restrict road
expansion as determined by action of the Board of
County Commissioners [D. Implementation Strategy].
Environmental constraints include conservation lands in
the northeastern and southeastern parts of the County,
wetlands, threatened and endangered species habitats,
and primary and secondary canal systems throughout the
County.
Collier County also maintains policies to guide the
planning of future facilities, including these policies from
the CCGMP:
The County will provide for the protection and
acquisition of existing and future right-of-way (ROW).
Sufficient ROW shall be acquired to facilitate arterial
and collector roads as appropriate to meet the needs
of the LRTP or other adopted transportation studies,
plans or programs, appropriate turn lanes, medians,
bicycle and pedestrian facilities, drainage canals, a
shoulder sufficient for pull offs, and landscaping areas
[Objective 3 & Policy 3.3].
The County is considering the viability of a Thorough-
fare Corridor Protection Plan ordinance to preserve
Page 100 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-2 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
ROW for corridors or projects listed in the LRTP. This
policy includes adoption of Corridor Preservation
Maps and Tables and Critical Intersection Maps and
Tables; and limits land uses within the corridors to
direct incompatible land uses away from environ-
mentally sensitive resources [Policy 3.5].
Reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and greenhouse
gas emissions by providing for the safe movement of
nonmotorized vehicles in new construction and
reconstruction of roadways [Policy 4.6].
Establish an integrated and connected road network
to provide multiple, viable alternative travel modes or
routes for common trips within the Northwest Trans-
portation Concurrency Management Area (TCMA) and
the East Central TCMA. Maintain 85% of the roadways
within the TCMAs at or above the County LOS
standard [Policies 5.6 & 5.7].
Transportation projects are to be pursued in a manner
consistent with the findings of the County Annual
Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) [Policy 6.5].
Encourage safe and efficient mobility for people
traveling in rural areas that is compatible with the
character of the County’s rural areas. Examine the
maintenance and operational needs of the rural
roadway system, addressing the mobility needs of
rural residents to include availability of roads for rural-
to-urban travel, travel within the rural area, and for
emergency evacuation purposes [Objective 10 &
Policy 10.1].
Improve transit services for the transportation-
disadvantaged in rural areas [Policy 10.2].
Encourage the efficient use of transit services now
and, in the future, consider intergovernmental efforts
to coordinate public transit service between Naples
and Bonita Springs in Lee County [Policy 12.4].
4.1.1.1 City of Naples Comprehensive Plan
The City of Naples Comprehensive Plan (updated June 10,
2025) (City of Naples 2025) puts forth the following
policy constraint with the primary objective of protecting
residential neighborhoods:
Protect the character of existing and future residential
neighborhoods by maintaining the integrity of the
City’s identified collector and arterial circulation plan
and, where possible, manage traffic flow to protect the
residential neighborhoods [Objective 1].
The City of Naples also maintains policies to guide the
planning of future facilities, including the following:
Evaluate proposed street improvements in Naples that
may potentially increase through traffic volumes to
protect residential neighborhoods [Policy 1-1].
Maintain LOS C as a goal for the arterials and all major
collectors, except for Fifth Avenue South between U.S.
41 and Gulf Shore Boulevard [Policy 1-3].
Naples shall not permit construction of vehicle road
overpasses or flyovers in favor of feasible alternative
planning solutions that will improve the long-term
traffic circulation patterns in the City [Policy 1-10].
Page 101 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-3 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Evaluate programs to modify peak hour travel
demand and reduce the number of VMT per capita
[Policy 2-5].
Assist the Southwest Florida Land Preservation Trust
in acquiring necessary easements and funding for the
design and construction of a greenway bicycle/
pedestrian pathway [Policy 3-3].
Maintain or reduce hurricane evacuation times
[Objective 4].
Enhance the safety, connectivity, and mobility of
existing and future pedestrian and bicycle pathways
[Objective 7].
Continue to coordinate with the Collier MPO to
evaluate the potential for developing an efficient
public transportation system and mechanisms to
reduce the reliance on private motor vehicles
[Objective 8].
Establish a transportation mobility program to identify
and implement strategies to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. Focus on programs, policies, and code
adoptions that have a net impact of reduced travel
delays, reduced vehicular trips, reduced vehicle trip
length, and measures to improve the efficiency of
travel [Objective 9].
4.1.1.2 City of Marco Island Comprehensive
Plan
The City of Marco Island 2040 Comprehensive Plan (City
of Marco Island 2021) puts forth policy constraints, with
the objective of preserving the existing street network:
The City shall vigorously preserve its existing street
network and evaluate opportunities to enhance and
expand connectivity between adjacent and parallel
roads [Policy 1.3.4].
The City of Marco Island also maintains policies to guide
the planning of future facilities, including the following:
Maintain designated LOS for arterial, collector, and
local roads on Marco Island. Marco Island’s adopted
LOS reflects generalized maximum daily volumes as
derived from peak hour traffic conditions:
–Arterials: LOS D (except County Road [CR] 951
from Jolley Bridge to CR 92—LOS C)
–Collectors: LOS D
–Local Roads: LOS D [Policy 1.2.1]
4.1.1.3 City of Everglades City Comprehensive
Plan
The City of Everglades City 2045 Comprehensive Plan
(City of Everglades City 2022) puts forth policy
constraints, with the objective of prioritizing the
functionality of the improvements:
The City shall prioritize transportation improvements
with highest priority given to safe and efficient
Page 102 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-4 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
multimodal access to schools, parks and other
locations commonly accessed by children, followed by
improvements to support multimodal access between
housing and non-residential uses, particularly for
affordable housing multimodal access to employment
opportunities [Policy T-1.5.1].
4.1.2 Planning Future Facilities
Context-sensitive solutions serve the transportation
needs of users of all ages and abilities, including
pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, motorists, and
freight handlers. A context-sensitive transportation
system is guided by principles that enhance safety, quality
of life, and economic development. In September 2014,
FDOT adopted the Statewide Complete Streets Policy
(Topic No. 000-625-017-a) (FDOT 2014). Additionally,
the City of Naples and the Collier County BCC approved
Complete Streets Resolutions in November 2015 and
January 2019, respectively. The City of Marco Island
Comprehensive Plan also references the adoption of a
Complete Streets policy.
These policies are context-sensitive with an approach that
provides a transportation system design that considers
local land development patterns. Roadways are to be
planned and designed to support the safety, comfort, and
mobility of all users based on the unique context of each
roadway. The FDOT context classification system pre-
sented on Figure 4-1 broadly identifies the various built
environments existing in Florida. Identifying the context
classification is a preliminary step in planning and design,
Figure 4-1.FDOT Context Classifications
Source: FDOT Context Classification Guide (FDOT 2024b)
Page 103 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-5 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
as different context classifications will have different
design criteria. The context classification of each roadway
must be considered, along with its transportation
characteristics and the built form to understand who uses
or could use it, the regional and local travel demand of
the roadway, and the challenges and opportunities of
each roadway user.
The 2050 Needs Plan incorporates various transportation
modes, including roadway needs for motorists and
freight, transit, bicycles, pedestrians, and air transporta-
tion. The following sections detail the needs for projects
related to these transportation modes. This chapter
breaks down the 2050 Needs Plan by Roadway Needs,
Bicycle and Pedestrian Needs, Transit Needs, and Air
Transportation Needs.
4.2 Roadway Needs
Roadway Needs encompass a variety of transportation
projects including capacity and non-capacity
improvements. The initial approach to developing the list
of roadway project needs included a review of the
following plans and studies:
Collier MPO Safe Streets for All Comprehensive Safety
Action Plan, October 2025
FDOT Districtwide Bus Rapid Transit Feasibility Study,
February 2025
2024 Collier County Annual Update & Inventory
Report/Capital Improvement Element, January 2025
FDOT Draft 2055 Florida Transportation Plan
Performance Report, January 2025
FDOT Freight Mobility and Trade Plan, October 2024
FDOT Five Year Work Program Fiscal Year (FY) FY25-
29 (Adopted July 1, 2024)
FDOT Strategic Intermodal System 2030 – 2050 Long
Range Cost Feasible Plan, July 2024
Collier MPO Transportation Improvement Program
FY 2026 – FY 2030 (Adopted June 14, 2025,
Amended September 22, 2025)
FDOT Resilience Action Plan, July 2023
FDOT Resilience Quick Guide: Incorporating Resilience
in the MPO Long Range Transportation Plan, April
2023
FDOT Moving Florida Forward Infrastructure Initiative
(2023)
FDOT 2045 Florida Transportation Plan, July 2022
Collier MPO Congestion Management Process 2022
Update (approved April 2022)
FDOT Strategic Intermodal System Policy Plan, March
2022
Florida Strategic Highway Safety Plan, March 2021
City of Naples Airport Authority, Naples Airport Master
Plan, February 2021
Collier MPO 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan,
approved December 11, 2020
Collier County Airport Authority Immokalee Regional
Airport, Airport Layout Plan Update, April 2019
Page 104 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-6 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Collier County Growth Management Plan Capital
Improvement Element, adopted November 12, 2019
Collier County Community Housing Plan, October 24,
2017
Collier 2040 LRTP Freight Congestion Considerations
Technical Memorandum, November 2015
Additional approaches to developing the Needs Plan
included collaboration with local and regional partners
including:
FDOT District 1
Lee County MPO
Collier County Transportation Management Services
and Transportation Engineering Division
Cities of Naples, Marco Island, and Everglades City
Seminole and Miccosukee Tribes
Collier MPO Boards and Committees
Community Redevelopment Agencies
Other Local and State Agencies
Members of the Public
4.2.1 Existing Plus Committed Projects
As described in Chapter 2, the initial list of project needs
was developed by modeling the E+C travel network. The
E+C network includes all new road or capacity projects
that have been implemented since 2023 (existing), plus
all projects that have construction funded through Fiscal
Year 2028 (committed).Table 4‐1 and Figure 4-2
present the E+C roadway projects in tabular and graphic
formats, respectively.
FDOT modeled the E+C travel network using the D1RPM
travel demand model and the 2050 socioeconomic data
discussed in Chapter 2. The modeling result identified
deficiencies in the roadway network including which road-
way segments were expected to be deficient in 2050 if no
further improvements were made to the surrounding
network. Deficiencies were measured using the ratio of
the forecasted traffic volume in Average Annual Daily
Traffic (AADT) to the capacity of the roadway segment (at
LOS D), referred to as the volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio.
A roadway is considered over capacity if the V/C ratio is
greater than 1.0.
Figure 4‐3 presents the 2050 Roadway Network
Deficiencies Map, which reflects the anticipated roadway
congestion in 2050 if no improvements to the network
are made beyond the E+C projects. The following
roadway facilities are predicted to experience high (V/C =
1.15 to 1.5) and significant (V/C > 1.5) levels of
congestion in 2050.
Page 105 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-7 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4‐1.2028 Existing Plus Committed (E+C) Roadway Projects
Map
ID Roadway From To Improvement Agency or Municipality
Existing (2019–2023)
1 Marbella Lakes Dr. Livingston Rd.Whippoorwill Ln. Existing two-lane road Collier County
2 State Road (SR) 82 Gator Slough Ln.SR 29 Existing four-lane road FDOT FPN 430849-1
3 Veterans Memorial Blvd. Secoya Reserve Cir. Livingston Rd.Existing four-lane road Collier County
4 Veterans Memorial Blvd.Aubrey Rogers High
School Secoya Reserve Cir. New four-lane road Collier County
5 Whippoorwill Ln.Stratford Ln.Marbella Lakes Dr. New two-lane road Collier County
6 Whippoorwill Ln.Pine Ridge Rd..Stratford Ln.Existing two-lane road Collier County
Committed (2023–2028)
7 10th Ave. SE New Bridge Collier County
8 16th St. NE South of 10th Ave.New Bridge Collier County
9 23rd St. SW 16th Ave. SW Intersection Improvements Collier County
10 Airport Pulling Rd. Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Immokalee Rd.Widen from four to six lanes FDOT FPN 440441-
1/Collier County
11 Collier Blvd..City Gate Blvd.Green Blvd.Widen from four to six lanes Collier County
14 Everglades Blvd..8th Ave. NE Oil Well Rd.Widen from two to four lanes Collier County
15 Goodlette-Frank Rd. Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Immokalee Rd.Widen from two to four lanes FDOT FPN 446341-
1/Collier County
16 I-75 Collier Blvd.Interchange improvements FDOT FPN 425843-2
17 I-75 Pine Ridge Rd.Interchange improvements - DDI FDOT FPN 445296-1
18 I-75 Immokalee Rd.Interchange improvements - DDI FDOT FPN 452544-4
19 Immokalee Rd.Livingston Rd.Logan Blvd.Restripe WBR to WBT Collier County
20 Immokalee Rd.Livingston Rd.Intersection improvements Collier County
21 Immokalee Rd.Oil Well Rd.Intersection Improvements Collier County
22 Livingston Rd.Entrada Ave.Intersection Improvements Collier County
Page 106 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-8 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4‐1.2028 Existing Plus Committed (E+C) Roadway Projects
Map
ID Roadway From To Improvement Agency or Municipality
23 Oil Well Rd.Everglades Blvd.Oil Well Grade Rd. Widen from two to four lanes Collier County
24 Oil Well Rd.Desoto Blvd.Intersection Improvements Collier County
25 Pine Ridge Rd.Napa Blvd.Intersection Improvements Collier County
26 Randall Blvd.Immokalee Rd.8th St.Widen from two to four lanes Collier County
27 Randall Blvd.Immokalee Rd.Intersection improvements Collier County
28 SR 29 CR 846 New Market Rd.New two-lane road FDOT FPN 417540-5
29 SR 29 New Market Rd.SR 82 Widen from two to four lanes FDOT FPN 417540-6
30 SR 82 Hendry County Line Gator Slough Ln. Widen from two to four lanes FDOT FPN 430848-1
31 US 41 Golden Gate Pkwy Intersection Improvements FDOT FPN 446451-1
32 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Wilson Blvd.16th St.New two-lane road Collier County
33 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. 16th St Everglades Blvd. New two-lane road Collier County
34 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Collier Blvd.Wilson Blvd.Widen from two to six lanes Collier County
35 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. US 41 East of Goodlette-Frank
Rd.Widen from four to six lanes Collier County
36 Veterans Memorial Blvd. Old US 41 Secoya Reserve Cir. New four-lane road Collier County
37 Veterans Memorial Blvd. Old US 41 US 41 New four-lane road Collier County
Sources:2024 Collier County Annual Update & Inventory Report/Capital Improvement Element (AUIR/CIE),Collier MPO 2045 LRTP,CAT Ten-Year
Transit Development Plan 2021-2030,Collier MPO Transportation Improvement Program FY2024-FY2028,FDOT Five Year Work Program 2025-
2029.
FPN = Financial Project Number
Page 107 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-9 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Figure 4-2.2050 Existing Plus Committed (E+C) Roadway Projects Map
Page 108 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-10 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Figure 4-3.2050 E+C Network Roadway Deficiencies Map
Page 109 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-11 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
4.2.1.1 2050 Facilities with High Degree of
Congestion
(V/C = 1.15 to 1.5)
Immokalee Road from Livingston Road to East of I-75
Interchange
Immokalee Road from Valewood Drive to Preserve
Lane
Immokalee Road from Collier Boulevard to East of
Founders Place
Everglades Boulevard N from Oil Well Road to 43rd
Avenue E
Collier Boulevard from Magnolia Pond Drive to City
Gate Boulevard N
Randall Boulevard from 8th Street NE to West of 16th
Street NE
South 1st Street from Camp Keais Road to Eustis
Avenue
Livingston Road from Mediterra Boulevard E to Talis
Park Drive
Old US 41 from Collier Center Way to Turtle Creek
Boulevard
Pine Ridge Road from Whippoorwill Lane to I-75
Interchange
4.2.2 Other Roadway Needs
Considerations
Once the initial list of roadway project needs was
developed based on the E+C roadway deficiency
modeling, other roadway-related needs were evaluated to
develop a more comprehensive project needs list.
Considerations included review of existing planning
studies, freight needs, resilience needs, and congestion
management strategies, which included safety issues and
Transportation Systems Management and Operations
(TSM&O).
4.2.2.1 Existing Planning Studies
The MPO reviewed the following existing County planning
studies to identify potential projects eligible for the
roadway Needs Plan. The following list reflects completed
or currently underway studies since the 2045 LRTP
update (Collier MPO 2020a).
Annual Update and Inventory Report
The AUIR is an essential resource for assessing the
County’s infrastructure. The 2024 report provides
thorough evaluation of program areas such as transpor-
tation, stormwater, water and wastewater, and parks to
determine whether existing infrastructure aligns with the
service levels outlined in the CCGMP. This analysis
informs planning and investment decisions, ensuring
infrastructure keeps pace with County growth.
Page 110 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-12 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Golden Gate City Master Plan
The purpose of the Golden Gate City Master Plan includes
evaluating previously identified infrastructure needs and
identifying additional improvements within Golden Gate
City. The plan includes development of an implemen-
tation plan for improvements, as well as recognizing
potential funding opportunities. Improvements evaluated
in the Plan include adding sidewalks and bicycle lanes;
improving landscaping, drainage, lighting, and pavement;
and adding or replacing utilities such as potable water,
wastewater, irrigation, and fiber optic cable. The Golden
Gate Master Plan is expected to be completed in the
summer of 2026.
Golden Gate Parkway Corridor Congestion Study
This study evaluates traffic congestion along Golden Gate
Parkway from west of Livingston Road to east of the I-75
Interchange. The study will identify improvements to
relieve congestion, improve travel time, and enhance
safety for all users, with an emphasis on improvements to
the Livingston Road intersection. The study is anticipated
to be completed in June 2026.
Veteran’s Memorial Boulevard Extension Phase II
The extension of Veteran’s Memorial Boulevard from
Aubrey Rogers High School to US 41 has long been
recognized as a need in the County. The 2035, 2040, and
2045 LRTPs included this project as a need, and multiple
studies completed to date have reaffirmed the need for
this extension. The recent completion of Aubrey Rogers
High School has further increased demand for these
improvements. In addition to relieving traffic congestion
on parallel facilities, such as Immokalee Road and Bonita
Beach Road, the project will also enhance safety and
access through inclusion of sidewalks and shared-use
pathways. As of late 2025, the project is in the conceptual
design and permitting phase.
Wilson Boulevard Extension Corridor Study
This study’s goal is to determine a preferred corridor
alignment to connect Golden Gate Boulevard East and
Collier Boulevard. It builds off of the previous 2005
Wilson Boulevard Extension Study that identified three
corridors for further evaluation and provided near- and
long-term recommendations (Collier County n.d.c). The
new study is evaluating use of County-owned property to
facilitate corridor development, as well as assessing
environmental impacts, land uses and potential
funding/implementation. The project was on hold as of
August 2025 but is expected to move forward.
Immokalee Road Corridor Congestion Study
The Immokalee Road Corridor Congestion Study
evaluated intersection concepts along the corridor to
enhance traffic operations and safety concerns based on
current and future travel demands (Collier County
2021b). The Collier BCC approved the study and the
recommendations on October 12, 2021. The study
recommendations included:
Implementing an adaptive traffic signal control
system
Page 111 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-13 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Developing a phasing plan for the addition of
combined through/right-turn lanes, and incorporate
into the Capital Improvement Element of the CCGMP
Implementing a grade-separated overpass at
Immokalee Road and Livingston Road and provide
additional turn lanes
Implementing a Diverging Diamond Interchange at
the Immokalee Road/I-75 Interchange in coordination
with FDOT
Implementing a Partial Displaced Left Turn also
known as a Continuous Flow Intersection at
Immokalee Road and Logan Boulevard
Pursuing other recommended activities as necessary
to manage congestion and improve the operational
efficiency, safety, and functionality of this corridor and
transportation network
Continued engagement with impacted stakeholders
through the design and construction process
Immokalee Transportation Network Plan
The Immokalee Transportation Network Plan was
completed in January 2024 and was developed based on
recommendations from the Immokalee Area Master Plan
(adopted December 10, 2019). The Immokalee
Transportation Network Plan identified potential
connectivity improvements to the transportation network
within Immokalee to improve connections between
residential areas, community facilities, and commercial
services. The Plan also established a set of priorities for
these multimodal network improvements.
Collier Boulevard III Bridge Location Study
The Collier Boulevard Bridge Location Study evaluated
various locations for a new bridge crossing of the CR 951
Canal to provide access between Collier Boulevard to 39th
Street SW (Collier County 2022). The study
recommendations included a new bridge location at 27th
Avenue SW with a new signalized intersection. The study
and recommendations were approved by the Collier BCC
on July 12, 2022.
East of CR 951 Bridge Reevaluation Study
In August 2008, the County conducted the East of CR 951
Infrastructure and Services Horizon Study to evaluate
missing bridge connections based on system-wide
infrastructure needs. The study’s stakeholders identified
twelve preferred canal crossing locations and ranked the
bridges based on criteria related to mobility, service
efficiency, and emergency response. The new bridges
would be strategically located throughout the Golden Gate
Estates area to reduce trip lengths and travel demand on
already congested collector roadways and to provide the
greatest opportunity to reduce response time for first
responders. On May 25, 2021, the Collier BCC approved
five of the bridge crossings listed in Table 4-2 for
programming for the design phase. The BCC also
recommended to reconsider and reevaluate the remaining
five crossing locations in the future.
Page 112 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-14 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4‐2.East of CR 951 Bridge Reevaluation Study
Bridges
Map ID New Bridge Projects
Approved for design
78a 47th Ave. NE (between Immokalee Rd. & Everglades
Blvd.)
75a North End of 13th St. NW (north of Golden Gate Blvd.)
7b 10th Ave. SE (between Everglades Blvd. and Desoto Blvd.)
81a Wilson Blvd. S (south of Golden Gate Blvd.)
79a 62nd Ave. NE (between Everglades Blvd. and 40th St. NE)
Recommended for future reevaluation
106a 16th St. SE (south of Golden Gate Blvd.)
80a Wilson Blvd. N (south of 33rd Ave NE)
76a 18th Ave. NE (between Wilson Ave & 8th St. NE)
77a 18th Ave. NE (between 8th St. NE & 16th St. NE)
83a 23rd St. SW (south of Golden Gate Blvd.)
a Refer to Figure 4-14, 2050 Needs Plan Roadway Projects Map
b Refer to Figure 4-2, 2050 Existing Plus Committed (E+C) Roadway
Projects Map
In addition to County planning studies, the MPO also
reviewed the following FDOT studies that are within
Collier County to identify potential projects eligible for
the roadway Needs Plan. The following list reflects
completed or currently underway studies since the 2045
LRTP update (Collier MPO 2020a).
SR 29 Immokalee Project Development and
Environment (PD&E) Study (FPID 417540-5)
This PD&E Study evaluated the potential widening of the
existing two-lane undivided segment of SR 29 to four
lanes as well as the addition of an alternative corridor that
bypassed downtown Immokalee (FDOT n.d.j.). The study
resulted in a Preferred Alternative that consists of
widening SR 29 to four lanes from Oil Well Road to
CR 846 and from New Market Road to SR 82. The
Preferred Alternative also includes a new four-lane
bypass roadway from CR 846 to north of Heritage
Boulevard. The study’s Location and Design Concept
Approval was received on June 19, 2024.
SR 29 from I-75 to Oil Well Road PD&E Study (FPID
434490-1)
The objective of this PD&E Study is to evaluate
improvements along SR 29 that accommodate projected
travel demand, specifically increased freight and
commuter traffic, improve safety conditions, and enhance
emergency evacuation for the Southwest Florida region
as well as address the need for improved regional
connectivity. The project was included in the Collier MPO
2040 LRTP.
Old 41 (CR 887) PD&E Study (FPID 435110-1)
This Study is evaluating two segments of Old 41 as part of
this project, which are from US 41/Tamiami Trail to the
Lee County Line and from the Collier County Line to
Bonita Beach Road. The goal of this PD&E study is to
evaluate and document potential engineering and en-
Page 113 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-15 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
vironmental effects of proposed improvements needed to
relieve existing congestion and accommodate future
travel demand along Old 41/CR 887. Improvements may
include the potential widening of the roadway up to four
lanes, as well as safety considerations for bicyclists and
pedestrians, such as marked bicycle lanes, sidewalks,
and/or a shared-use path. The study is anticipated to be
complete by June 2026. The MPO Board approved a
motion on February 14, 2025, to reevaluate the PD&E to
focus on improving intersections and adding bicycle and
pedestrian facilities.
4.2.2.2 Moving Florida Forward Infrastructure
Initiative
In 2023 the Florida legislature passed the Moving Florida
Forward Infrastructure Initiative (MFF) to focus on critical
needs on state-owned roadways. The initiative funds
improvements to ensure that transportation infra-
structure can meet future demands, including
investments in major interstates and arterial roadways.
A total of $4 billion dollars from the General Revenue
Surplus has been dedicated to MFF to advance
construction on these projects around the state that will
address congestion, improve safety, ensure the resilience
of our transportation network, and enhance Florida’s
supply chain and economic growth (FDOT n.d.g.).
Through MFF, five projects in Collier County have been
programmed for construction along the I-75 corridor:
I-75 Widening from Immokalee Road to Bonita Beach
Road (FPID 452544-3)
I-75 Widening from Pine Ridge Road to Immokalee
Road (FPID 452544-5)
I-75 Widening from Golden Gate Parkway to Pine
Ridge Road (FPID 452544-6)
I-75 at Immokalee Road Interchange Improvements
(FPID 452544-4)
I-75 at Pine Ridge Road) Interchange Improvements
(FPID 445396-1) – in construction
The I-75 widening projects include adding one travel lane
in each direction (from six to eight lanes) to increase
capacity. These segments were part of the I-75 Southwest
Connect South Corridor Managed Lanes Study (FPID
442519-1) that included the limits from south of Collier
Boulevard (SR 951) in Collier County to north of Bayshore
Road (SR 78) in Lee County, as well as the I-75 from
Golden Gate Parkway to Corkscrew Road PD&E Study
(FPID 452544-1). Both studies are part of the District One
I-75 Southwest Connect program, which was created to
identify and construct transportation solutions that
address the long-term needs of the interstate corridors in
Southwest Florida.
Additionally, the I-75 Southwest Connect program inclu-
ded the I-75 at Immokalee Road Interchange PD&E Study
to improve traffic operations and enhance safety at the
interchange. Through MFF, a diverging diamond inter-
change will be advanced for construction at this inter-
change.
MFF is also advancing the construction of a diverging
diamond interchange at I-75 and Pine Ridge Road.
Reconstruction of this interchange is underway.
Page 114 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-16 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Improvements are expected to significantly reduce delays
on Pine Ridge Road and improve safety for all users.
While not funded through MFF, the interchange at I-75
and Collier Boulevard/SR 951 (425843-2) is also under
construction to reconstruct the existing diamond inter-
change to a modified diamond interchange. This project
was also part of the I-75 Southwest Connect program,
which included a PD&E study (425843-1) to improve
traffic operations and enhance safety at the interchange.
4.2.2.3 Freight Needs
There are no Intermodal Logistic Centers (ILCs) in Collier
County. However, two of the state’s three existing ILCs are
located within the District One region: Central Florida ILC
in Polk County and America’s Gateway ILC in Glades
County. Both are designated SIS facilities and serve as
major inland ports within the region (FDOT 2023j).
Rail access to the County is limited to a 1-mile section of
the Seminole Gulf Railway in the far northwest corner of
the County. In addition to providing traditional rail freight
transportation, the rail line supplies regional trucking and
logistical services, as well as warehousing and distribution
from its distribution center located in North Fort Myers.
I‐75 is the only limited‐access facility within the County
and is a major element of the Florida SIS and freight
network. It serves as the primary transportation facility
connecting Collier County with its immediate neighboring
counties, the rest of Florida, and the National Highway
System (NHS). It also serves as a major commuter
corridor.
Regional Freight Corridors and Distribution Routes
A freight network is defined in FDOT District One Freight
Mobility and Trade Plan (District One FMTP) (FDOT
2023a) as including limited-access facilities, regional
freight mobility corridors, and freight distribution routes
that support the state and regional economy and
provided details on Collier County’s freight network within
District One’s region.
The regional freight corridors function as connectors
between limited-access facilities and regional freight
activity centers. The District One FMTP provides a
comprehensive assessment of its region’s freight network.
The Plan further informs the statewide FDOT Freight
Mobility & Trade Plan (FDOT 2024d) (FDOT FMTP) to
support federal and state funding requests for improve-
ments to the District’s regional freight network.
Figure 4-4 presents the freight mobility corridors within
District One. Collier County’s regional freight facilities
consist of:
SR 29 (I‐75 to Hendry County Line)
SR 82 (SR 29 to Hendry County Line)
US 41 (Monroe County/Miami-Dade County Line to
Lee County Line)
CR 951/Collier Boulevard (US 41 to CR 846/
Immokalee Road)
CR 858/Oil Well Road (CR 846/Immokalee Road to
SR 29)
Page 115 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-17 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
CR 846/Immokalee Road (US 41 to CR 858/Oil Well
Road)
Golden Gate Boulevard (US 41 to CR 951/Collier
Boulevard)
CR 896/Pine Ridge Road (US 41 to CR 951/Collier
Boulevard)
Figure 4-4.District One Freight Mobility Corridors
Source:FDOT District One Freight Mobility and Trade Plan (FDOT
2023a)
Review of 2024 traffic data at FDOT Florida Traffic
Online reveals that truck traffic volumes along I-75 are
greatest north of Immokalee Road where volumes
exceed 9,900 trucks per day, or more than 8% of total
AADT (FDOT 2024c). The portion of I‐75 between Pine
Ridge Road and Immokalee Road experiences truck
volumes exceed 9,200 per day (or 9% of the total
AADT). The data also reveal the highest daily truck traffic
along SR 29 is just north of Immokalee (Westclox Street)
at 2,935 trucks per day, which makes up approximately
13% of the total AADT. The segment of US 41 with the
most truck traffic is north of Pine Ridge Road, where
truck volumes reach more than 1,800 truck per day (or
4.23% of total AADT).
Freight Activity Centers
Freight Activity Centers (FACs) are locations where signifi-
cant freight-related activities occur, such as warehousing,
distribution, manufacturing, and intermodal freight
transfer. The District One FMTP also identified FACs
within its region (refer to Figure 4-5). Note that the
northeastern portion of Collier County includes one FAC
located in the Immokalee area, which is likely attributed
to the freight-related activities associated at the
Immokalee Regional Airport. The airport is located on
1,333 acres of land adjacent to SR 29 and is a designated
Florida Rural Enterprise Zone and HUB Empowerment
Zone. Additionally, in and around the airport property is a
designated 60-acre Foreign Trade Zone with numerous
manufacturing-related businesses.
Page 116 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-18 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Figure 4-5.District One Freight Activity Centers
Source:FDOT District One Freight Mobility and Trade Plan (FDOT 2023a)
When compared to the District One region, Collier County
has a low density of warehouses, distribution centers, and
third-party logistics providers. These facilities are pri-
marily in the western portions of the County along the
I-75 corridor, with some sparse density in the Immokalee
area as well (refer to Figure 4-6).
Figure 4-6.District One Warehouses, Distribution
Centers, & Third Party Logistics Companies Clusters
Source:FDOT District One Freight Mobility and Trade Plan (FDOT 2023a)
The Collier MPO 2040 Freight Congestion Considerations
Technical Memorandum also identified Primary and
Secondary FACs in the County and found that Primary
FACs within the County are concentrated where industrial
land uses are more prevalent and Secondary FACs are
located around agricultural land uses (refer to
Figure 4-7) (Renaissance Planning 2015).
Page 117 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-19 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Figure 4‐7.Freight Network and Activity Centers
Page 118 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-20 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
The District One FMTP notes that the primary freight
related activities in Collier County make up more than
15 million total square feet of land uses in the County
which include:
Warehouse and Distribution Centers
Light Manufacturing, Fruit, Vegetable, and Meat
Packing Plants
Airports, Bus Terminals, and Marine Terminals
Wholesale Outlets, Produce Houses, and
Manufacturing Outlets
The District One FMTP also notes that the top import
commodity for Collier County is furniture or fixtures, while
instruments, photo, and optical equipment are Collier
County’s top export commodity. Therefore, Collier County
contributes 2.74% of Florida’s total import tonnage and
12.32% of total export tonnage.
State-wide Freight Planning
The statewide FDOT FMTP is a comprehensive plan that
identifies freight transportation facilities critical to the
state’s economic growth and guides multimodal freight
investments in the state. The Plan highlights freight-
related needs and issues that were derived from an
analysis of Florida’s freight performance and input from
stakeholders. The top three issues identified in the Plan
were congestion/bottlenecks, truck parking, and empty
backhaul.
An increasing volume of vehicle traffic, comprising both
freight trucks and passenger traffic, contributes to
heightened congestion. While the FDOT FTMP did not
pinpoint any major truck bottlenecks within Collier
County, the adjacent counties of Lee, Broward, and
Miami-Dade report such challenges. FDOT’s proposed
improvements along SR 29 from Oil Well Road to SR 82
(FPID 417540) include an alternative route for regional
truck traffic to not only enhance the livability of down-
town Immokalee and improve access for local traffic, but
to improve the circulation of freight in the area.
In Florida, the limited availability of truck parking spaces
has caused overcrowding and overflow at existing truck
parking locations. In particular, the FDOT FTMP shows
that the truck parking in the Immokalee area is operating
at over 100% utilization (refer to Figure 4-8).
Truck empty backhaul occurs when a truck returns empty
from its destination to its point of origin. On average,
41.9% of Class 9 trucks left the state empty on I-95, I-10,
and I-75 in 2022 (FDOT 2024d). According to the District
One FMTP, District One plans to analyze Florida industries
to determine the level of contribution to empty backhaul.
Page 119 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-21 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Figure 4-8.Statewide Truck Parking Supply Locations
Source:FDOT Freight Mobility & Trade Plan (FDOT 2024d)
4.2.2.4 Safety Needs
The Collier MPO Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A)
Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (SAP) (Collier MPO
2025c) analyzes traffic crash data to identify hazardous
streets and intersections in the County. It defines a high-
injury network (HIN), highlighting areas that would
benefit most from safety countermeasures. The plan
categorizes priority locations into two tiers: Tier I, which
includes the top 15% of high-risk locations, and Tier II,
covering the next 15%. These tiers apply to intersections,
urban roadway segments, and rural roadway segments
and apply to all modes of travel.Tables 4-3, 4-4,and 4-5
list the top ten Tier I intersections, urban roadway
segments, and rural roadway segments, respectively.
Figure 4-9 also presents this information graphically.
Table 4-3.Top 10 HIN Tier I Intersections
Location Planning
Community
KSI Rank
Oil Well Road & FL-29 Royal Fakapalm 7 1
Golden Gate Parkway & Collier
Blvd.Golden Gate 3 2
Neapolitan Way & Tamiami Trail City of Naples 4 3
Airport Pulling Road & Pine Ridge
Crossing Central Naples 4 4
FL-82 & Corkscrew Rd.Corkscrew 4 5
Tamiami Trail & Goodlette-Frank
Rd.City of Naples 4 6
Tamiami Trail & Airport Pulling
Rd.East Naples 4 7
Golden Gate Parkway &
Goodlette-Frank Rd.City of Naples 4 8
Davis Boulevard & Airport Pulling
Rd.East Naples 4 9
Davis Boulevard & Collier Blvd. Royal Fakapalm 3 10
Page 120 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-22 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
The evaluation of safety risk for intersections and street
segments in Collier County is based on three equally
weighted criteria:
Severe Crash Risk Score: prioritizes locations with a
high number killed or serious injury crashes (KSI) from
2019-2023
Facility Risk Score: assesses the physical character-
istics of roadways to determine crash likelihood
Relative Risk Score: compares severe crash occur-
rences within similar roadway types to identify
underperforming areas.
Together, these criteria guide the development of the
HIN, ensuring targeted safety improvements in the most
critical locations.
Table 4-4.Top 10 HIN Tier I Urban Roadway Segments
Segment Name Segment Start Segment End Planning
Community Miles KSI Rank
Pine Ridge Rd.I-75 West Ramp I-75 East Ramp Urban Estates 0.13 3 1
Tamiami Trl.Bayshore Dr.Airport Pulling Rd.East Naples 0.25 5 2
Airport Pulling Rd. Cougar Dr.Naples Blvd.North Naples 0.18 3 3
W Main St.S 9th St.Immokalee Rd.Immokalee 0.45 7 4
Airport Pulling Rd. Estey Ave.North Rd.East Naples 0.21 3 5
Tamiami Trl.4th Ave N 7th Ave N City of Naples 0.28 4 6
Collier Blvd.Golden Gate Pkwy.Green Blvd.Golden Gate 0.99 13 7
Tamiami Trl.Barefoot Williams Rd.Lely Resort Blvd.South Naples 0.63 7 8
Pine Ridge Rd.I-75 East Ramp Napa Blvd.Urban Estates 0.19 2 9
5th Ave S 9th St. S Goodlette-Frank Rd.City of Naples 0.20 2 10
Page 121 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-23 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4-5.Top 10 HIN Tier I Rural Roadway Segments
Segment Name Segment Start Segment End Planning
Community Miles KSI Rank
Oil Well Rd.¾ Mile West of County Line Rd. County Line Rd.Corkscrew 0.68 3 1
N 15th St.New Market Rd.Johnson Rd.Corkscrew 1.97 8 2
Immokalee Rd.Orange Tree Blvd.Oil Well Rd.Rural Estates 0.36 1 3
Immokalee Rd.Majestic Trails Blvd.Wilson Blvd. N Rural Estates 1.84 4 4
Immokalee Rd Oil Well Rd.41st Ave NE Rural Estates 1.02 3 5
Immokalee Rd.Randall Blvd.Orange Tree Blvd.Rural Estates 0.60 1 6
Immokalee Rd.¼ Mile East of Redhawk Ln. Everglades Blvd. N Rural Estates 0.80 2 7
FL-82 Hendry County Line S Church Rd.Corkscrew 0.82 2 8
Immokalee Rd.Montserrat Ln.Majestic Trails Blvd.Rural Estates 2.00 2 9
Immokalee Rd.½Mile East of 25675 Immokalee
Rd.Camp Keais Rd.Corkscrew 2.34 4 10
Page 122 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-24 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Figure 4-9.All Modes High-Injury Network
Source: Collier MPO SAP (Collier MPO 2025c)
Page 123 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-25 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
4.2.2.5 Congestion Management Needs
Congestion management describes the activities used to
help reduce the negative impacts of traffic congestion
and improve roadway performance in urban areas.
Transportation planning agencies, such as the Collier
MPO, follow a detailed Congestion Management Process
when making decisions about the best ways to address
traffic congestion in specific areas, and eventually how
improvement strategies should be prioritized for available
funding.
As discussed in Chapter 1, the Collier MPO Congestion
Management Committee is responsible for creating and
amending the CMP and for prioritizing candidate
congestion management projects to be funded with
federal and state funding. As presented in Figure 4-10,
the CMP is an eight-step process that an urban area
follows to improve the performance of its transportation
system by reducing the negative impacts of traffic
congestion.
The CMP Update (Collier MPO 2022a) was approved by
the MPO Board in April 2022. The CMP includes
Congested Corridor Factsheets (Collier MPO 2022b),
which contain detailed information on ten of the most
congested corridors in Collier County and recommend
multimodal strategies for alleviating congestion.
Figure 4-11 presents congestion hot spot locations in the
County.Table 4-6 provides more information about these
congestion hot spot locations.
To address commuting congestion between Collier and
Lee Counties, the Collier MPO Board approved (in
February 2025) the development of a Joint Lee/Collier
Regional CMP Element for incorporation into both the
Collier MPO and Lee County MPO LRTPs. The Regional
CMP Element will address regional roadways within the
Bonita Springs-Estero Urban Area that is part of the Lee
County Metropolitan Planning Area including Alico Road
on the north and extending south to include Immokalee
Road in Collier County. The Regional Roadway Network
(refer to Figure 4-12) was approved by both MPO Boards
in 2017. The updated Collier MPO CMP and Joint
Regional Element and updated Regional Roadway
Network map will be incorporated by reference into the
2050 LRTP at a future date to better inform roadway
needs.
Figure 4-10.Congestion Management
Process Eight-Step Framework
Page 124 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-26 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Figure 4-11.Collier County Congested Corridors Map
Page 125 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-27 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4-6.Collier County Congested Corridors
Road From To Corridor Challenges Average Daily Duration of
Bottleneck Conditions
Airport-Pulling Rd. Pine Ridge Rd.Orange Blossom Dr.
Freight & small truck traffic
School traffic
Signal coordination
14 minutes
Collier Blvd.Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Immokalee Rd.Surrounding roadway network
Access to I-75 1 minute
Davis Blvd.US 41 Airport-Pulling Rd.Traffic on US 41
Freight & small truck traffic 9 minutes
Golden Gate Pkwy. Livingston Rd.I-75 Commuter traffic
Freight & small truck traffic 11 minutes
Golden Gate Pkwy. Santa Barbara Blvd. Collier Blvd.
School traffic
Trips from surrounding
neighborhoods
Local and regional traffic
8 minutes
Immokalee Rd.Goodlette-Frank Rd. Collier Blvd.I-75 interchange
High-intensity land uses 32 minutes
US 41 Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Old US 41
Regional traffic
High activity areas & visitor
destinations
4 minutes
Pine Ridge Rd.Goodlette-Frank Rd. I-75 I-75 interchange
Mix of trip purposes 22 minutes
Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Airport-Pulling Rd. Livingston Rd.
Commuter traffic
Potential bicycle & pedestrian
conflicts
3 minutes
Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Vanderbilt Dr.US 41 Seasonality
Beach trips 2 minutes
Source: Collier MPO CMP Congested Corridor Factsheets (Collier MPO 2022b)
Page 126 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-28 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Figure 4‐12.Lee County/Collier Regional Roadway Network
Page 127 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-29 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
4.2.2.6 Transportation System Management
and Operations Strategies
TSM&O include Transportation System Management
(TSM) approaches and ITS technologies that are noted in
the Collier MPO CMP as effective strategies to mitigate
congestion. TSM strategies are a low-cost but effective
way to reduce congestion particularly for:
Intersection and signal improvements
Special events management strategies
Incident management
These multimodal strategies are designed to maximize
the efficiency, safety, and use of existing and planned
transportation infrastructure. ITS projects are effective in
maximizing a transportation system’s efficiency. Based on
the Collier MPO CMP 2022 Update, strategies related to
ITS projects in Collier County include:
Expanded traffic signal timing & coordination
Traffic signal equipment modernization
Traveler information devices
Communications networks & roadway surveillance
Candidate ITS projects within Collier County include:
Those which are consistent with FDOT’s current ITS
Regional Architecture
Updates to existing equipment and software deployed
in the region
Improved incident management
Enhancements to City of Naples, Collier County Traffic
Operations/Management Centers (TOCs), including
studies and implementing their recommendations
Improved use of social media and public information
technologies
Within Collier MPO’s jurisdiction, both the City of Naples
and Collier County manage TOCs in close coordination
with each other and with FDOT to remain in full compli-
ance with the FDOT Statewide ITS architecture.
The CMP identified roadway facilities as candidates for ITS
and active roadway management strategies.Figure 4-13
summarizes the projects and associated recommenda-
tions along with projects adopted in the FY 2026-2030
TIP (refer to Table 6-1 in Chapter 6 [pending]).
While these projects are part of the roadway needs, the
LRTP-level modeling (D1RPM) is not sensitive enough to
determine whether congestion is relieved by implement-
ing these strategies. Evaluation and prioritization of these
projects is conducted by the MPO CMC using Strategy
Evaluation Criteria that are used to screen project sub-
mittals for consistency with CMP goals, strategies, and
congestion corridors identified by the CMP (refer to
Figure 4-12).
In addition, the 2045 Florida Transportation Plan Policy
Element (FDOT 2020) notes that the traditional definition
of transportation infrastructure must be broadened to
include communications backbone or technologies that
allow the transportation system to function. Building on
existing ITS and TSM&O infrastructure, FDOT will plan
Page 128 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-30 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
and invest in the following technologies to improve the
state’s transportation information technology infra-
structure, or “infostructure.”
Deploy surface transportation infrastructure to
support automated, connected, electric, and shared
vehicles and other emerging technologies
Support statewide broadband connectivity,
particularly to rural and underserved areas, to
supplement access to services and expand use of
transportation technologies
Adapt and accommodate emerging air and space
technologies
Adapt and accommodate emerging logistics
technologies
Support smart region/city initiatives to leverage
transportation technology and data
Identify, respond to, and mitigate cybersecurity and
data security threats to transportation systems
The 2045 Florida Transportation Plan Implementation
Element (FDOT 2022b) provides a strategy that focuses
on information and communications technologies that
enable advanced technology applications across all
modes and systems. Traditionally, transportation systems
have been planned by mode with an emphasis on moving
vehicles safely and efficiently. With a growing range of
mobility options enabled by technology and data, FDOT is
now emphasizing a shift to enhancing mobility for people
and freight. This shift will require updates to existing
decision-making processes, guidelines, and manuals; new
approaches to performance measures with more empha-
sis on connectivity, convenience, and accessibility; and
improvements to data and business processes to allow for
better flow of information and payment across systems.
Both the CMP and the bicycle/pedestrian planning
process strongly consider crash data as an important
component of the project identification and selection
process. As improvements are made to these facilities,
special attention is placed on identifying solutions that
enhance safety for motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists.
Traffic crashes are highly correlated with intersection
locations, and consideration of operational and ITS
improvements to major and minor intersections will
address many of the high crash locations. Input from the
LRTP into those continuing processes provides valuable
guidance in the identification of safety‐related improve-
ments.
Page 129 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-31 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Figure 4-13.ITS & Access Management Roadway Projects
Source: Collier MPO Congestion Management Process (Collier MPO 2022a) and Transportation Improvement Program FY 2026-2030 (Collier MPO
2025d)
Page 130 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-32 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Connected and Automated Vehicles Deployment
Connected and Automated Vehicles (CAV) continue to be
emerging technologies. The FDOT CAV Program has
gained significant momentum since 2017. FDOT’s CAV
Business Plan (FDOT 2019) identified seven focus areas
including policies, funding, education, outreach, partner-
ship, and advancing research (Figure 4-14) to carry the
CAV Program from initialization through full-scale
implementation and operations. Florida’s CAV Initiative
was developed from the CAV Business Plan and now
applies lessons learned from past or ongoing CAV
projects to future projects. The CAV Program deploys
projects statewide including the Collier Countywide
Connected Traveler Information System (CTIS). Collier
County leveraged existing funded projects (to maximize
connected vehicle data) to provide real-time travel
information. Real-time information allows travelers to
make more informed decisions and to realize a vision of
maximum mobility and safety in trips in and around
Collier County.
The project deployed a CTIS that uses connected vehicle
data on US 41, SR 951, and SR 84 within the County.
Further, the CTIS project deployed the following ad-
vanced transportation and congestion management
technologies:
Advanced mobile traveler information system
Advanced transportation management technologies
Transportation system performance data collection,
analysis, and dissemination systems
Advanced safety systems including vehicle-to-
infrastructure communications
4.2.2.7 Resilience Needs
In 2020, FDOT adopted a policy that defines resilience as
the ability to adapt to changing conditions and prepare
for, withstand, and recover from disruption. Collier County
is particularly susceptible to sea level rise (SLR), flooding,
and storm surge and therefore must consider resilience
projects that may help mitigate these impacts.
Federal Regulation 23 CFR 450.306(b)(9) requires MPOs,
in cooperation with the state and public transportation
operators, to “improve the resiliency and reliability of the
transportation system and reduce or mitigate stormwater
impacts of surface transportation” in the long-range
transportation planning process. The FDOT Resilience
Quick Guide provides guidance on planning for resilience
Figure 4-14.CAV Program Focus Areas
Page 131 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-33 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
and considers objectives and strategies in other planning
areas, as presented on Figure 4-15.
Resilience Planning and Studies
The following plans and studies were reviewed as part of
the assessment of resilience needs.
Assessing the Role of Natural and Nature-Based
Features in Enhancing Coastal Resilience of Urban and
Natural Ecosystems in the 21st Century (ACUNE+).
Collier County, City of Naples, City of Marco Island,
and City of Everglades City teamed with Florida Gulf
Coast University and the University of Florida to
sponsor a new initiative aiming to explore how
watershed flow, precipitation, and urban stormwater
affect coastal flooding. The study also assesses
potential wetland restoration efforts based on their
ability to mitigate future storm-related flooding and
wave damage to residential areas (ACUNE n.d.). A
future LRTP update will include the results of the
study to better inform roadway needs.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Collier County Coastal
Storm Risk Management Feasibility Study.This study
began in October 2018. As of January 2025, the study
has been placed on hold. A future LRTP update will
include the results of the study to better inform
roadway needs.
Climate Adaptation Plan (CAP).The City of Naples
and Collier County are developing the CAP to prepare
for potential impacts on public health, infrastructure,
and ecosystems in the community. The City conducted
a Climate Vulnerability Assessment (Collier County
2025b) to understand key public assets and infra-
structure that are at risk to impacts posed by SLR,
Figure 4-15.Resiliency Planning Considerations
Source: FDOT Resilience Quick Guide (FDOT 2023f)
Page 132 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-34 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
coastal storms, extreme heat, and precipitation.
Findings from the final CAP will be incorporated by
reference into the LRTP at a future date to better
inform the needs.
FDOT Resilience Action Plan (RAP) (FDOT 2023i):
The RAP identified a list of roadways that are vulner-
able to current and future flooding. The RAP defines
prioritization criteria to guide decisions on the state
highway system network. The prioritization is based on
the number of hazards affecting a location including
100-year floodplain, Category 3 hurricane storm
surge, and projected 2 feet of SLR. High Tier geo-
graphic areas are affected by all three hazards, while
Medium Tier areas are affected by two of the three
hazards. This assessment is used to inform the FDOT
Five-Year Work Program, the Strategic Intermodal
System Second Five-Year Plan, and the Strategic
Intermodal System Cost Feasible Plan.
Based on the assessment of these plans, resilience needs
within Collier County are summarized in Table 4-7. These
roadway segments were identified based on various
sources including the RAP Project List, RAP Data Viewer
High Tier Segments, the FDOT Environmental Screening
Tool for Intermediate Sea Level Rise, and various plans
and studies. It is important to note that these needs are
unfunded.
Table 4-7.Resilience Needs in Collier County (Unfunded)
Road Name/
Description
From To Source
US 41 (SR 90) near
Lely Canal
Lely Canal Lely Canal RAP Data Viewer -
High Tier Segment
US 41 (SR 90) near
Henderson Creek
Henderson
Creek
Henderson
Creek
RAP Data Viewer -
High Tier Segment
US 41 (SR 90)
various segments
SR 92 SR 29 RAP Data Viewer -
High Tier Segment
5th Ave S (US 41) 9th St. S Goodlette-
Frank Rd.
Environmental
Screening Tool
(Intermediate Level)
Tamiami Trail
(US 41)
Shores Ave. Wiggins Pass
Rd.
Environmental
Screening Tool
(Intermediate Level)
Vanderbilt Dr. 111th Ave. Wiggins Pass
Rd.
Environmental
Screening Tool
(Intermediate Level)
Collier Blvd. (951)N Barfield
Drive
US 41 Environmental
Screening Tool
(Intermediate Level)
SR 29 US 41 CR 837 RAP Appendix A
Project List
4.2.3 Ranking the Roadway Needs
Once a comprehensive list of the roadway project needs
was developed, they were scored using the defined goals,
objectives, and evaluation criteria described in Chapter 3
and the Goals, Objectives, and Evaluation Framework for
Page 133 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-35 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
the Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan
Technical Memorandum (prepared under separate cover).
The resulting score for each project was used to assist in
ranking the needs projects from highest to lowest.
Appendix D provides the complete Evaluation Matrix,
which presents how each project was scored across the
evaluation criteria and how they ranked.
4.2.4 2050 Roadway Needs Results
Table 4‐8 and Figure 4‐16 identify the 2050 roadway
needs projects in tabular and graphical format,
respectively. Roadway needs projects total more than
$4.5 billion in estimated present-day cost.
Table 4-8.2050 LRTP Roadway Needs
Map
ID
Needs
Ranking Project From To Description
1 49 Benfield Road City Gate Boulevard North Hacienda Lakes Parkway New two-lane roadway (four-lane
footprint)
2 56 Benfield Road Hacienda Lakes Parkway US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami
Trail East)
New two-lane roadway (four-lane
footprint)
3 90 Big Cypress Parkway 16th Street Golden Gate Boulevard New two-lane roadway (six-lane
footprint)
4 83 Big Cypress Parkway Golden Gate Boulevard Vanderbilt Beach Road Ext. New two-lane roadway
5 85 Big Cypress Parkway Vanderbilt Beach Road Ext.Oil Well Road New two-lane roadway
6 79 Big Cypress Parkway Oil Well Road Immokalee Road New two-lane roadway
7 75 Camp Keais Road Oil Well Road Pope John Paul II Boulevard Widen from two lanes to four lanes
8 65 Camp Keais Road Pope John Paul II
Boulevard Immokalee Road Widen from two lanes to four lanes
9 91 Camp Keais Road
Extension Camp Keais Road SR 29 New two-lane roadway (four-lane
footprint)
10 80 City Gate Boulevard
Extension Landfill Boulevard Wilson Boulevard Extension New four-lane roadway
Page 134 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-36 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4-8.2050 LRTP Roadway Needs
Map
ID
Needs
Ranking Project From To Description
11 11 Collier Boulevard
(SR 951)Pine Ridge Road Golden Gate Boulevard Capacity Improvement or Parallel
Facility
12 8 Collier Boulevard
(SR 951)South of Manatee Road North of Tower Road Widen from four lanes to six lanes
13 76 Collier Boulevard
Extension
Collier Boulevard (CR 951)
Northern Terminus
Lee/Collier County Line/
Logan Boulevard New two-lane roadway
14 86 Corkscrew Road SR 82 Lee County Line Widen from two lanes to four lanes
15 6 Davis Boulevard (SR 84) Airport Pulling Road Santa Barbara Boulevard Widen from four lanes to six lanes
16 51 Everglades Boulevard I-75 (SR-93)Golden Gate Boulevard Widen from two lanes to four lanes
17 44 Everglades Boulevard Golden Gate Boulevard Vanderbilt Bch Road
Extension Widen from two lanes to four lanes
18 26 Everglades Boulevard Oil Well Road Immokalee Road Widen from two lanes to four lanes
19 77 Golden Gate Boulevard Everglades Boulevard Desoto Boulevard Widen from two lanes to four lanes
20 84 Golden Gate Boulevard
Extension Desoto Boulevard Big Cypress Parkway New four-lane roadway
21 73 Golden Gate Parkway Livingston Road Overpass (GGP over Livingston)
22 29 Golden Gate Parkway Livingston Road I-75 SB Ramps Capacity Improvement or Parallel
Facility
23 9 Golden Gate Parkway Santa Barbara Boulevard Sunshine Boulevard Widen from four lanes to six lanes
24 14 Green Boulevard Santa Barbara/ Logan
Boulevard Sunshine Boulevard Widen from two lanes to four lanes
(Future Study Area)
Page 135 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-37 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4-8.2050 LRTP Roadway Needs
Map
ID
Needs
Ranking Project From To Description
25 70 Green Boulevard
Extension CR 951 23rd Street SW New four-lane roadway (Future Study
Area)
26 82 Green Boulevard
Extension 23rd Street SW Wilson Boulevard Extension New two-lane roadway (Future Study
Area)
27 78 Green Boulevard
Extension
Wilson Boulevard
Extension Everglades Boulevard New two-lane roadway (Future Study
Area)
28 81 Green Boulevard
Extension Everglades Boulevard Big Cypress Parkway New two-lane roadway (Future Study
Area)
29 27 I-75 (SR 93)Vicinity of Everglades
Boulevard
New Partial Interchange, EB Off-
Ramp and WB On-Ramp
30 47 I-75 (SR 93)Vanderbilt Beach Road New Partial interchange, NB On-
Ramp and SB Off-Ramp
31 45 I-75 (SR-93)Collier Boulevard (CR 951) SR 29 Widen from four lanes to six lanes
33 2 Immokalee Road Strand Boulevard Northbrooke Road Capacity Improvement or Parallel
Facility
34 21 Immokalee Road Logan Boulevard Rose Boulevard Capacity Improvement or Parallel
Facility
35 42 Immokalee Road Collier Boulevard Bellaire Bay Drive Capacity Improvement or Parallel
Facility
36 72 Immokalee Road Bellaire Bay Drive Wildwood Boulevard Capacity Improvement or Parallel
Facility
37 4 Immokalee Road (CR
846)Camp Keais Road Carver Street Widen from two lanes to four lanes
with sidewalks, bike lanes, and curb &
Page 136 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-38 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4-8.2050 LRTP Roadway Needs
Map
ID
Needs
Ranking Project From To Description
gutter (includes milling and
resurfacing of existing pavement)
38 12 Immokalee Road (CR
846)SR 29 Airpark Boulevard
Widen from two lanes to four lanes
with sidewalks, bike lanes, and curb &
gutter (includes M&R of existing
pavement)
39 74 Immokalee Road Collier Boulevard (CR 951)Overpass (Immokalee Rd. over
Collier Blvd.)
41 89 Keane Avenue Inez Road Wilson Boulevard Extension New two-lane roadway
42 43 Little League Road
Extension SR-82 Westclox Street New two-lane roadway (four-lane
footprint)
43 92 Little League Road
Extension Lake Trafford Road Immokalee Road New two-lane roadway (four-lane
footprint)
45 69 Livingston Road Entrada Avenue Learning Lane Capacity Improvement or Parallel
Facility
46 87 Livingston Road Veterans Memorial
Boulevard
Terry Street (Lee County
Line)Widen from four lanes to six lanes
47 19 Logan Boulevard Green Boulevard Pine Ridge Road Widen from four lanes to six lanes
48 28 Logan Boulevard Vanderbilt Beach Road Immokalee Road Widen from two lanes to four lanes
49 35 Logan Boulevard Pine Ridge Road Vanderbilt Beach Road Widen from two lanes to four lanes
50 53 Oil Well Road / CR 858 Ave Maria Entrance Camp Keais Road Widen from two lanes to six lanes
51 58 Oil Well Road/CR 858 Camp Keais Road SR 29 Widen from two lanes to four lanes
(six-lane footprint)
Page 137 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-39 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4-8.2050 LRTP Roadway Needs
Map
ID
Needs
Ranking Project From To Description
52 31 Old US 41 US 41 (SR 45)Lee/Collier County Line Widen from two lanes to four lanes
53 33 Orange Blossom Drive Airport Pulling Road Livingston Road Widen from two lanes to four lanes
56 38 Pine Ridge Road Logan Boulevard Collier Boulevard Widen from four lanes to six lanes
57 40 Randall Boulevard Immokalee Road Major Intersection Improvement
58 39 Randall Boulevard 8th Street NE Everglades Boulevard Widen from two lanes to six lanes
59 57 Randall Boulevard Everglades Boulevard Big Cypress Parkway
Widen existing portion from two
lanes to four lanes and extend four-
lane roadway
61 18 Santa Barbara Boulevard Painted Leaf Lane Green Boulevard Widen from four lanes to six lanes
62 3 SR 29 / North Main
Street North 9th St Immokalee Drive Widen from two lanes to four lanes
63 20 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami
Trail)Immokalee Road Imperial Golf Course
Boulevard
Capacity Improvement or Parallel
Facility
64 7 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami
Trail)10th Street South Goodlette-Frank Road Capacity Improvement or Parallel
Facility
65 5 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami
Trail)Goodlette-Frank Road Riverpoint Drive Capacity Improvement or Parallel
Facility
66 1 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami
Trail)Airport Pulling Rd Rattlesnake Hammock
Road
Capacity Improvement or Parallel
Facility
67 16 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami
Trail East)Greenway Road 6 L Farm Road Widen from two lanes to four lanes
68 22 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami
Trail East)Collier Boulevard (SR 951)Overpass (US 41 over Collier Blvd.)
Page 138 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-40 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4-8.2050 LRTP Roadway Needs
Map
ID
Needs
Ranking Project From To Description
69 54 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami
Trail East)Immokalee Road Overpass (US 41 over
Immokalee Rd.)
70 88 Vanderbilt Beach Road
Extension Everglades Boulevard Big Cypress Parkway New two-lane roadway in a four-lane
footprint
71 52 Vanderbilt Drive 111th Avenue N/Bluebill
Avenue Woods Edge Parkway Widen from two lanes to four lanes
72 48 Westclox Street
Extension Little League Road West of Carson Road New two-lane roadway
73 66 Wilson Boulevard
Extension
City Gate Boulevard
Extension Golden Gate Boulevard New four-lane roadway
74 71 Wilson Boulevard Golden Gate Boulevard Immokalee Road Widen from two lanes to four lanes
75 63 Bridge at 13th Street NW North End at Vanderbilt
Beach Road Extension New Bridge over Canal
76 59 Bridge at 18th Avenue
NE
Between Wilson Boulevard
and 8th Street NE New Bridge over Canal
77 67 Bridge at 18th Avenue
NE
Between 8th Street NE and
16th Street NE New Bridge over Canal
78 64 Bridge at 47th Avenue
NE
West of Everglades
Boulevard New Bridge over Canal
79 62 Bridge at 62nd Avenue
NE West of 40th Street NE New Bridge over Canal
80 60 Bridge at Wilson
Boulevard South of 33rd Avenue NE New Bridge over Canal
Page 139 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-41 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4-8.2050 LRTP Roadway Needs
Map
ID
Needs
Ranking Project From To Description
81 50 Bridge at Wilson
Boulevard, South End New Bridge over Canal
83 61 Bridge @ 23rd Street SW South of Golden Gate
Boulevard New Bridge over Canal
84 10 Golden Gate Parkway
(Intersection)Goodlette-Frank Road Major Intersection Improvement
85 46 Pine Ridge Road
(Intersection)Airport Pulling Road Minor intersection improvements
86 36 Immokalee Road
(Intersection)Logan Boulevard Major Intersection
Innovation/Improvements
87 55 Vanderbilt Beach Road
(Intersection)Livingston Road Minor intersection improvements
89 41 Collier Boulevard
(Intersection)Pine Ridge Road Major Intersection Improvement
90 24 Pine Ridge Road
(Intersection)Goodlette-Frank Road Minor intersection improvements
91 30 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami
Trail E) (Intersection)Pine Ridge Road Intersection
Innovation/Improvements
93 37 Vanderbilt Beach Road
(Intersection)Airport Pulling Road Intersection
Innovation/Improvements
94 23 Airport Pulling Road
(Intersection)Orange Blossom Drive Intersection
Innovation/Improvements
95 17 Airport Pulling Road
(Intersection)Golden Gate Parkway Intersection
Innovation/Improvements
Page 140 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-42 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4-8.2050 LRTP Roadway Needs
Map
ID
Needs
Ranking Project From To Description
96 25 Airport Pulling Road
(Intersection)Radio Road Intersection
Innovation/Improvements
97 15 Airport Pulling Road
(Intersection)Davis Boulevard Intersection
Innovation/Improvements
99 32 Immokalee Road Randall Boulevard west of Wilson Boulevard Widen from six lanes to eight lanes
100 13 Immokalee Road Camp Keais Road Roundabout/Intersection
Improvement
101 - I-75 Immokalee Road Bonita Beach Road Widen from six lanes to eight lanes
102 - I-75 Immokalee Road Modify interchange
103 - I-75 Pine Ridge Road Immokalee Road Widen from six lanes to eight lanes
104 - I-75 Golden Gate Boulevard Pine Ridge Road Widen from six lanes to eight lanes
106 68 Bridge at 16th Street SE South of Golden Gate
Boulevard New Bridge over Canal
EB = eastbound
DDI = diverging diamond interchange
NB = northbound
Page 141 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-43 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Figure 4-16.2050 Needs Plan Roadway Projects Map
Page 142 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-44 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
4.3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Needs
Bicycle and pedestrian facilities are an integral part of the
County’s transportation network. They facilitate access to
public transportation and provide alternative mobility
choices. In October 2025 (pending), the Collier MPO
approved and updated a Bicycle/Pedestrian Master Plan
endorsed by the BPAC that addresses pedestrian and
bicycle needs (Collier MPO 2025b).
The 2025 BPMP continues policies established in the
previous 2019 BPMP for including bicycle and pedestrian
facilities along all collector and arterial roads, updates the
applicability of the MPO’s Design Guidelines to reference
FDOT’s Design Manual, updates FDOT’s Complete Streets
Policy to reference FDOT’s Context Classification System,
cross-references the MPO’s Comprehensive SAP, and
describes the MPO’s process for identifying priorities for
funding improvements. The policies continue the com-
mitment that MPO staff report performance measures
and targets to the MPO Board on an annual basis.
4.3.1 Vision, Goals, and Strategies
The BPMP’s Vision, Goals, Objectives, and Strategies were
refined with input from the MPO’s BPAC, public outreach,
Collier MPO staff, and the consultant, and were vetted by
the MPO TAC, CAC, and Board. The overall Vision is:
“To create a safe and connected network of active
transportation facilities in Collier County that promotes
and encourages the use of bicycle and pedestrian
pathways which support business and recreation for
community access and well-being.”
The BPMP goals became the basis for the development
of strategies, policies, and project prioritization criteria.
These goals and strategies include:
Safety. Enhance safety for cyclists, pedestrians, and
micromobility users by promoting education and
enforcement as the primary strategies, followed by
engineering solutions.
Connectivity. Ensure accessibility and ease of use for
all modes of transportation by developing a seamless
network that connects key points of interest.
Economy.Contribute to economic growth and com-
munity vitality by developing bicycle-pedestrian
facilities to support local businesses, attract tourists,
and provide affordable transportation options.
Education.Empower users with the knowledge to
navigate the network confidently and effectively by
promoting awareness, responsible use, and under-
standing of bicycle and pedestrian facilities through
educational programs, outreach efforts, and com-
munity engagement.
Health. Support public health initiatives by designing
pathways that encourage active transportation.
Efficiency.Alleviate roadway congestion by pro-
moting walking and biking as preferred modes of
transportation by supporting the design, implemen-
tation and ongoing maintenance of bicycle and
pedestrian facilities that encourage shifts in travel
behavior and reduce dependence on motor vehicles.
Page 143 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-45 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Interactive Map.Provide a valuable resource for navi-
gation and planning by creating and maintaining a
continuously updated, interactive map that is acces-
sible for cyclists and pedestrians to download and
share.
4.3.2 Identification of Network Needs
The BPMP employed a systematic approach to identify
deficiencies and opportunities along the County’s
collector and arterial roads to develop a comprehensive
understanding of the infrastructure gaps and needs within
Collier County’s bicycle and pedestrian network:
1.Plans Review – A thorough review of local, regional,
and state plans, policies, and studies was conducted.
Locally adopted plans and formal studies are incor-
porated by reference into the BPMP to ensure projects
identified from those efforts are eligible for MPO
funding.
2.Inventories – An inventory of existing, programmed
and planned bicycle and pedestrian improvements
along collector and arterial roads was completed to
establish baseline conditions. The same inventory was
conducted for the regional SUN Trail network. Upon
completion of the inventory, the MPO collaborated
with Naples Pathways Coalition to produce a joint map
published in March 2025.
3.Public Input - The Collier MPO posted an interactive
map and surveys on its website and social media to
attract community and agency participation. Partici-
pants could review and comment on existing con-
ditions and deficiencies. The results of that
engagement and findings were summarized on the
MPO’s project website along with the inventory maps
and tables.
4.SS4A Safety Action Plan – Bike-Ped Serious Injury
and Fatality Crashes and High Injury Network – The
Crash Analysis and Safety Focus section of the BPMP
builds on data and insights from the Comprehensive
Safety Action Plan, which is supported by the federal
SS4A grant. This analysis examines the severity and
distribution of crashes involving vulnerable road users,
such as pedestrians and cyclists, which represent a
disproportionate percentage of severe traffic incidents
in Collier County. By focusing on high-risk corridors,
crash trends, and contributing factors, the analysis
identified which bicycle-pedestrian facilities should be
prioritized for improvement. The results of the crash
data analysis conducted for the MPO’s SAP serve as
supporting documentation for prioritizing bicycle-
pedestrian facilities.
5.Gap and Needs Analysis - Using GIS data, the needs
analysis included overlaying the collected data, public
input, and draft policies to identify missing links and
segment deficiencies in the bicycle and pedestrian
network. Throughout the process, regular updates on
the needs and priorities were provided to the BPAC
and presented to the TAC and CAC in August and
September 2025. Further refinement of the prioritiza-
tion criteria, network gaps, facility needs, and priority
projects continued throughout the development of
the Plan.
Page 144 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-46 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Potential facility improvements identified through
gap analysis were grouped into three categories.
The first grouping of identified facilities involves
collector and arterial roadways, major corridors that
connect multiple communities and support higher
traffic volumes. This includes regionally identified
facilities that serve as key connectors within the
broader transportation network.
The second grouping includes residential streets that
were identified as potential opportunities for bicycle
and pedestrian improvements because of their prox-
imity to schools, parks, and areas with higher reliance
on public transportation. These locations provide op-
portunities to improve access to community destina-
tions and enhance connectivity for pedestrians and
bicyclists where implementation may be more
feasible. In addition to the identified facilities for local
roads in unincorporated Collier County, the local road
needs assessment conducted as part of the 2019
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan remains eligible
for consideration.
The third grouping includes segments located near or
within a 0.75-mile radius of transit-dependent areas.
These gaps were identified by mapping the influence
areas around transit-dependent populations and
evaluating the proximity of those areas to existing
public bus stops. Segments were considered gaps if
they lacked any existing bicycle or pedestrian
facilities, or if the only facility present was a minimal
paved shoulder.
The gaps and needs analysis considered programmed,
planned, and existing facilities. This analysis identified
substantial miles of roadway lacking any type of bicycle
or pedestrian facility as shown in the tables in the BPMP
of the three groupings of potential facilities. It also shows
that there are 195 arterial road centerline miles where
sidewalks are the only facility available for cyclists to use,
representing less than ideal conditions.
While the public requested improved facilities on approx-
imately 90 roadway miles, many requested improve-
ments are already in the planning or programmed stage
(refer to Appendix E). The FY26-30 TIP includes the
construction of 54 miles of sidewalks on local residential
roads. Another 20 miles of sidewalks are planned but not
programmed yet.
New roadway construction and widening projects in
Collier County now routinely include a combination of
bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Nearly 50 miles of
combined bicycle and pedestrian facilities are program-
med for construction as part of various road improve-
ments. Approximately 80 miles of new shared use paths
could ultimately be constructed within the MPO’s SUN
Trail network. The Needs Analysis in the BPMP provides a
comprehensive analysis of the bicycle and pedestrian
needs in Collier County.
4.3.3 Prioritized Bicycle and Pedestrian
Facilities
Once bicycle-pedestrian needs were identified, the
BPMP’s goals and objectives served as the prioritization
Page 145 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-47 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
criteria to develop a list of prioritized bicycle and pedes-
trian facilities.
Collier MPO’s member governments include the cities of
Naples, Marco Island, and Everglades City, each with its
own bicycle-pedestrian master plan outlining prioritized
projects to guide future development and infrastructure
improvements. The following sections provide an over-
view of these bicycle-pedestrian plans and their priorities.
4.3.3.1 City of Naples
The City of Naples 2022 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master
Plan Update (City of Naples 2022) focuses on enhancing
traffic safety and accessibility for bikers and pedestrians.
This planning process aims to ensure the city’s network of
parks and open spaces remains interconnected and safe
for all users while effectively addressing the mobility and
recreational needs of residents and visitors. The Master
Plan identifies the following priorities:
Closing Network Gaps:Installing sidewalks, bike lanes,
and shared-use paths in priority areas like Downtown
Naples, Gulf Shore Boulevard N, and Crayton Road to
create a continuous network.
Addressing Crash Hotspots:Improving safety at high-
incident locations such as U.S. 41 near 5th Avenue S
and Goodlette-Frank Road and at Crayton Road
intersections with high-visibility crosswalks, raised
crosswalks, and pedestrian beacons.
Enhancing Multi-Use Trails:Upgrading trails like the
Gordon River Greenway and connections to Naples
Pier with better lighting, pavement, and access.
Bicycle Safety:Enhancing bike lanes with green boxes,
adding bike detection, and incorporating bike lanes
where feasible.
Traffic Calming:Implementing speed humps, raised
intersections, and roundabouts to improve
neighborhood safety.
Connectivity to Schools and Parks:Improving
pedestrian and bicycle access to key locations like
Fleischmann Park, Lowdermilk Park, and Naples High
School.
Intersection Upgrades:Improve safety and
communications, visibility, and Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance at deficient
intersections.
Future updates to the Master Plan approved by Naples
City Council will automatically become eligible for
funding under BPMP and the LRTP.
4.3.3.2 City of Marco Island
The City of Marco Island Bike Path Master Plan (City of
Marco Island 2025) is focused on enhancing its multi-
modal infrastructure to support a safe, connected, and
sustainable network. As presented on Figure 4-17,
priority projects have been identified to expand bike
lanes, shared-use paths, and other key transportation
routes. These projects aim to improve connectivity across
the island, close existing network gaps, and promote a
more accessible environment for pedestrians and cyclists.
The City of Marco Island gained official Trail Town status
Page 146 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-48 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
in October 2025, reinforcing its commitment to providing
multimodal options.
The following priority projects from the Master Plan are
funded.
Bald Eagle Drive:Funded for construction in FY 2027,
this project will provide new bike lanes, enhancing
connectivity between North Collier Boulevard and San
Marco Road.
Seagrape Drive, Swallow Avenue, and Castaways
Street:These corridors are funded for bike lane
installations and are scheduled for construction by FY
2025. These improvements will enhance safety and
close existing network gaps in southern Marco Island.
Sandhill Street (Leland Way to Winterberry Drive):A
shared-use path is programmed and funded for FY
2025, improving multimodal connectivity in the
central portion of the island.
The following priority was identified in the Master Plan as
an unfunded need:
Elkam Circle Loop:This priority segment, connected
to North Collier Boulevard and North Barfield Drive,
remains unprogrammed but is recognized as an
important extension of the island’s multimodal
network.
Future updates to the Plan approved by the Marco Island
City Council will automatically become eligible for
funding under the BPMP and LRTP.
Figure 4-17.Marco Island Bike Path Master Plan
Priority Projects
Source: Marco Island Bike Path Master Plan (City of Marco Island
2025)
Page 147 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-49 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
4.3.3.3 Everglades City
Everglades City has made significant strides in enhancing
its transportation infrastructure for pedestrians and
cyclists, starting with the adoption of its first Bike/
Pedestrian Master Plan in 2020 (City of Everglades City
2020). A major milestone in the City's efforts came in
2019 when Everglades City was officially recognized as a
Florida Trail Town, which further strengthened its com-
mitment to improving non-motorized transportation
options. Future updates to the Bike/Pedestrian Master
Plan approved by the City of Everglades City Council
automatically become eligible for funding under the
BPMP and the LRTP.
Recently completed projects include:
437096-1 Copeland Avenue South, Everglades City
BPMP Phase 2: The sidewalk on the east side of the
roadway has been completed with final funding for
construction in FY 2025. This sidewalk provides a
connection from the Circle/Broadway Avenue south to
the Chokoloskee Bridge.
County Road 29 Lane Re-purpose: The re-surfacing
and striping to create buffered bike lanes on Collier
Avenue and Copeland Avenue South was provided
through the Collier County Roadway Maintenance
Department activities. The bike lanes now provide a
continuous connection from the northern entry bridge
to the Chokoloskee Causeway paved shoulders.
Priority projects for Everglades City include:
Planned and Programmed Improvements
–448265-1 Broadway Avenue and Hibiscus
Avenue, Everglades City BPMP Phase 3: Funded
for design in FY 2026 and construction in
FY 2028, the proposed bike lanes and sidewalks
will connect to existing facilities and extend
access to the central historic district, including
City Hall, McLeod Park, the Museum, and the
Bank Building.
–452052-1 Datura Street, Camellia Street, Collier
Avenue (CR29), and School Drive East,
Everglades City BPMP Phase 4: Funded for design
in FY 2028, the proposed bike lanes and
sidewalks will provide safer routes and promote
walking and biking to the Everglades City School
and to businesses in the north part of town.
Connecting to Regional Networks
–Developing connections to regional bicycle and
pedestrian facilities, such as linking local routes to
the SUN Trail Network, including the Gulf Coast
Trail, the Florida Heartland Regional Trail
(formerly known as Collier to Polk Trail) and the
Florida Wildlife Corridor, to enhance the area as a
Trail Town destination.
These efforts reflect Everglades City’s ongoing dedication
to building a more sustainable and accessible bicycle/
pedestrian network that serves both the local population
and seasonal residents as well as thousands of tourists
who come to visit Everglades National Park and other
ecotourism outlets. Through the implementation of its
Bicycle-Pedestrian Master Plan (refer to Figure 4-18) and
Page 148 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-50 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
the recognition as a Florida Trail Town, Everglades City
has laid the groundwork for future improvements that will
enhance both local mobility and regional connectivity.
4.3.3.4 Unincorporated Collier County
Needs identified in the BPMP, Community Redevelop-
ment Agency (CRA) Master Plans, Walkability Studies,
other community master plans, and the Regional SUN
Trail Network are eligible for funding under the BPMP and
incorporated by reference into the 2050 LRTP. Eligible
projects in unincorporated Collier County focus on closing
the remaining gaps in the network, prioritizing key travel
corridors, underserved communities, and locations with
safety concerns.
4.3.3.5 SUN Trail Alignments and Spine
Pathway Corridors
The SUN Trail program is a statewide initiative managed
by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Office of Greenways and Trails and FDOT aimed at
developing a network of paved, shared-use paths for
bicyclists and pedestrians across Florida. This program
seeks to promote safe, non-motorized transportation
options while enhancing recreational opportunities. The
initiative connects communities, facilitates regional travel,
and supports the growth of sustainable transportation
networks. The SUN Trail program funds trails that are part
of the Florida Greenways and Trails System Priority Trails.
The Gulf Coast Trail and the Florida Heartland Regional
Trail comprise Collier County's regional bicycle and
pedestrian infrastructure. These two SUN Trail alignments
coincide with the Paradise Coast Trail vision outlined by
the Naples Pathways Coalition and connect Collier County
Figure 4-18.Everglades City BPMP Priority Projects
Source:Everglades City BPMP (City of Everglades City 2020)
Page 149 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-51 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
to neighboring counties.Figure 4-19 presents the
planning status of major segments of these trails.
The regional trail network is undergoing more detailed
planning through a combination of SUN Trail funding,
MPO funding, and County and/or FDOT roadway plans.
Figure 4-19.SUN Trail Alignments Planning Status
Source:Collier MPO BPMP (Collier MPO 2025b)
Page 150 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-52 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Two PD&E Studies are underway for segments of the SUN
Trail network in Collier County:
The FPL Easement adjacent to Livingston Road
Florida Heartland Regional Trail (a district-wide study)
The outcome of the PD&E studies for the Florida
Heartland Regional Trail and the FPL easement on
Livingston Road will provide guidance for prioritizing
future phases of segments on Collier County’s SUN Trail
network.
In addition, the BPMP supports acquisition of ROW to
construct the proposed Bonita-Estero Railroad Trail.
4.4 Transit Needs
This section summarizes the needs and improvements
identified in the Collier County Ten-Year Transit Develop-
ment Plan 2026-2035 (Collier MPO 2025a), which is
incorporated by reference into this LRTP and was de-
veloped by CAT in coordination with the Collier MPO. The
TDP is a 10‐year horizon plan to support the develop-
ment of an effective multimodal transportation system
within a specific jurisdiction. TDPs are required to be a
transit provider’s planning, development, and operational
guidance document – fostering a crucial link between a
transit system and the livability in the communities that it
serves. Transit agencies are required to do major updates
to their TDPs every 5 years and provide annual progress
reports in the interim years as a prerequisite to receive
State Block Grant funds. Transit needs information
identified in the TDP was used to assess transit needs for
the County and its municipalities through 2050.
4.4.1 Goals and Objectives
CAT established seven goals to help fulfill their vision and
mission for the County and its municipalities. These goals
guide the transit needs and improvement development
process.
Goal 1: Operate reliable, convenient, and cost-
effective mobility services that safely and efficiently
meet the mobility needs of Collier County’s workers,
residents and visitors.
Goal 2: Increase the resilience of Collier County, pro-
tecting our infrastructure and natural resources, by
providing attractive and convenient mobility alterna-
tives that will reduce adverse environmental impacts
within our communities.
Goal 3: Build meaningful partnerships that increase
awareness and education of and about mobility
options and increase the viability of mobility services
to promote livability and enhance economic and
social well-being.
Goal 4: Coordinate the development and provision of
mobility services with local, regional, state planning
efforts and through public and private partnerships.
Goal 5: Use technologies and innovations in service
delivery to improve productivity, efficiency, reliability,
and cost-effectiveness of mobility services and
operations.
Goal 6: Monitor and improve mobility service quality
and service standards.
Page 151 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-53 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Goal 7: Maximize the use of all funding sources avail-
able, including through partnerships with businesses,
employers, and other institutions, to increase and
improve access to mobility services and mobility for
workers, residents, and visitors.
4.4.2 Development of Transit Needs
The identification of transit needs was guided by a review
of existing plans and studies, baseline conditions, existing
transit performance, public input, regional coordination,
and the development of a transit demand analysis, which
includes market assessments and transit modeling to
identify gaps in the system.
4.4.2.1 Existing Plans and Studies
The initial process for developing the list of transit needs
included a review of local, regional, state, and federal
planning documents.
Southwest Florida Passenger Rail Feasibility Study
In addition to documents noted in the TDP, the Passenger
Rail Priorities Program was reviewed for its 2025 Project
Priority List. This list notes the Southwest Florida
Passenger Rail Feasibility Study (Project ID LEEC – 24 -
01), which is supported by all four southwest Florida
Coastal MPOs including Collier, Lee, Charlotte County –
Punta Gorda, and Sarasota/Manatee. The study will
investigate the feasibility of running an intercity or high-
speed rail along I-75 connecting all four metropolitan
areas with the existing and planned passenger rail
network in Tampa. The results and recommendations
from the study will help guide FDOT, the four MPOs, and
local governments to coordinate, collaborate, plan, and
fund the next phases (MPOAC Freight and Rail Committee
n.d.).
4.4.2.2 Public Outreach
Public outreach occurred throughout the development of
the TDP. Community members, elected officials, and
other stakeholders were invited to engage with the TDP
planning team through online and onboard public
surveys, stakeholder interviews, targeted listening group
sessions for the employment and social services sectors,
public transit advisory committee meetings, public
workshops, and a 30-day public comment period.
4.4.2.3 Existing Transit Evaluation
The existing transit evaluation process consisted of three
elements: identifying existing transit service in the County
and its municipalities, comparing CAT transit perfor-
mance against similarly sized peer transit agencies, and
developing a trend analysis that summarizes the results
from the peer review analysis.
Existing Transit Service
CAT operates a fleet of 34 buses that provide service on
16 fixed-route bus lines to the public 7 days per week.
Daily service typically begins between 5:30 a.m. and
6:00 a.m. and ends later in the evening between 7:30 p.m.
and 8:00 p.m. CAT also provides door-to-door paratransit
service through CAT Connect for people with a qualifying
Page 152 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-54 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
disability that are otherwise not able to access the fixed-
route buses.
CAT operates out of
the County-owned
Radio Road Transit
facility. This facility
offers connections for
pedestrians,
bicyclists, drop-off
passengers, and
nearby park-and-ride
passengers at its Intermodal Transfer Station. A new
transfer station was recently constructed in Immokalee
and includes bus bays and passenger facilities.
Additionally, CAT operates the seasonal Paradise Beach
Trolley on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays from February
to April, providing free shuttle service to Collier County
beaches.
Peer and Trend Analysis
The peer comparison and trend analysis examine the CAT
transit system’s performance and compare services to
peer agencies. The peer comparison and trend analysis
provided a starting point for understanding CAT’s transit
system operating environment over time when compared
to other similar sized transit systems. Key trends between
2021 and 2022 included:
Performance Measures
–Passenger trips, passenger miles, and vehicle
revenue hours, vehicles operating at max service,
and operating expense all declined in 2021 but
increased in 2022.
–Vehicles available at max service increased in
2021 and decreased in 2022.
–Vehicle revenue miles decreased.
–Fare revenue increased.
–CAT was just below the peer average for
passenger miles and vehicle revenue miles in
2022, and fairly below the average for the
remaining performance measures above.
Effectiveness Measures
–Passenger trips per capita, passenger miles per
capita, and passenger trips per revenue hour
declined in 2021 but increased in 2022.
–Vehicle revenue miles per capita decreased.
–Passenger trips per vehicle revenue mile stayed
steady.
–CAT is at the peer average for passenger trips per
revenue hour, just below the average for the
passenger miles per capita and vehicle revenue
miles per capita, and below average for the
remaining effectiveness measures above.
Efficiency measures
–Operating expense per passenger trip and
operating expense per passenger mile both
decreased.
Page 153 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-55 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
–Operating expense per capita, operating expense
per vehicle revenue mile, operating expense per
vehicle revenue hour, and vehicle revenue miles
per vehicle declined in 2021 but increased in
2022.
–Farebox recovery ratio and average fare increased
in 2021 and decreased in 2022.
–CAT is above the peer average for vehicle revenue
miles per vehicle, at average for average fare, and
below average for the remaining efficiency
measures above.
4.4.2.4 Transit Demand Analysis
The transit demand analysis for the MPO boundary area
included an evaluation of two main rider markets: the
discretionary market and traditional market. This analysis
was conducted to help determine whether the existing
transit routes effectively serve areas with characteristics
supportive of transit and to identify areas for future
transit investment.
Discretionary Market Assessment
The discretionary market refers to people who may
choose to ride transit but who have other mobility
options. Previous studies have shown that most CAT
riders are not discretionary riders. The analysis was based
primarily on population and employment density to
categorize areas in the County that have enough popula-
tion or employment density to support fixed-route transit
services. While much of the area falls under the “Mini-
mum” transit-investment category, there are employ-
ment-based areas that have “High” or “Very High” transit-
investment potential east of Naples Airport, in
Immokalee, around Pine Ridge Road, and along the
Tamiami Trail (US 41). Household unit-based areas with
“High” transit-investment potential include City of Naples,
Marco Island, north/south of Pine Ridge Road, along
US 41, Immokalee Road west of Logan Boulevard, and in
Immokalee.
Traditional Market Assessment
The traditional market assessment refers to people that
are more likely to use transit because they have limited
mobility options and depend on public transit for most
transportation. Demographic factors including population
density, older adults, youth, and households below the
federal poverty level, which were used to create transit
propensity scores for each census block group. Areas with
“High” or “Very High” propensity scores include west of
Naples airport, east of Collier Boulevard, near US 41, and
near Lee County.
4.4.2.5 Ridership Projections
Transit demand and mobility needs were evaluated for
the CAT fixed-route system using the Transit Boardings
Estimation and Simulation Tool (T-BEST). The model
assumes that technology, transit routes, and existing
roadway connectivity are the same as today. The model
relied on socioeconomic forecasts from the 2045 D1RPM
for population and employment growth rates.Table 4-9
provides the ridership forecast by route in the years 2026
and 2035. The model projected a nearly 12% increase in
transit ridership for all routes by 2035. Routes 121, 21,
Page 154 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-56 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
and 27 are forecast to experience the highest average
percentage growth. Routes 11, 19, and 24 are expected
to have the highest absolute growth during the next
10 years. The TDP suggests the highest ridership
increases are possible by expanding service in areas with
high population density and growth.
4.4.2.6 Gap Overview
The gap analysis compares existing service coverage to
transit market analysis results. The goal was to identify
gaps in public transit where travel demand is high but
where transit service is less than predicted demand, and
where transit stops may have barriers.
The gap analysis from the TDP noted that the areas that
have potential for being underserved are located west
and east of US 41 south of Bonita Beach Road. Other
major areas that are underserved include North Naples,
Immokalee, Collier Boulevard between Rattlesnake
Hammock Road and Radio Road, and areas east of
Goodlette-Frank Road.
4.4.2.7 Transit Needs Results
The evaluation baseline conditions, existing transit
performance, public input, regional coordination, and
transit demand and gap analysis helped identify a set of
transit needs for the County and its municipalities.
A quantitative and qualitative methodology was
developed to evaluate transit needs and prioritize them
based on weighing the benefits of each service improve-
ment against the others.
Table 4-9.Transit Ridership and Growth Rates with No
Improvements, 2026–2035a
Route
2026
Average
Annual
Ridership
2035
Average
Annual
Ridership
2026–2035
Absolute
Change
2026–2035
Average
Growth Rate
11 133,083 149,106 16,023 12.05%
12 71,636 78,108 6,472 9.03%
13 53,944 60,451 6,507 12.06%
14 45,155 50,810 5,655 12.52%
15 87,628 95,448 7,820 8.92%
16 50,935 55,304 4,369 8.58%
17 28,256 31,430 3,174 11.23%
19 112,352 126,605 14,253 12.69%
20 23,402 25,700 2,298 9.82%
21 13,261 15,289 2,028 15.29%
22 35,986 40,281 4,295 11.94%
23 27,832 31,491 3,659 13.15%
24 97,743 109,635 11,892 12.17%
25 22,957 25,820 2,863 12.47%
27 39,467 45,354 5,887 14.92%
29 25,696 29,195 3,499 13.62%
121 26,731 32,181 5,450 20.39%
Totals 896,064 1,002,208 106,144 11.85%
Source: Collier County TDP (CAT 2025)
a Based on T-BEST model
Page 155 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-57 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Three categories were identified for determining the
criteria for evaluation: public outreach, transit markets,
and productivity and efficiency.Table 4-10 presents the
criteria, measure of effectiveness, and weighting used to
rank the needs.
Transit needs include extending operating hours for
current bus routes, realigning routes to create more
efficient service, increasing how often buses provide
service, and providing new service to underserved areas.
Operation and maintenance of existing transit routes
also continues to be a need.
Table 4-11 lists new transit needs identified in the TDP
through 2050.Figure 4-20 presents these needs in map
form. The needs listed are organized by type of
improvement: route network and new service, frequency
improvements, span improvements, and capital
infrastructure. The needs identified are intended to
address specific mobility, parking, congestion concerns
as well as pilot and test the application of new
technologies and emerging mobility concepts. Capital
infrastructure needs include continued rehabilitation of
public transportation facilities (such as bus shelters) and
replacement of bus and service vehicles. However, new
capital needs include studies for future services,
modernization of the system through improvements in
technology, and addition of a series of park-and-ride
lots that would improve access to transit.
Additionally, the TDP noted program recommendations
that include policy considerations and other
improvements for CAT’s transit service including:
Table 4-10.Transit Needs Evaluation Measures
Category Criteria Measure of
Effectiveness
Relative
Weighting
Overall
Category
Weight
Public
Outreach Public Input
Level of interest
in specific
alternatives
(Very High, High,
Moderate, Low)
40% 40%
Transit
Markets
Traditional
Market
Percent serving
poverty 15%
30%Proximity to
Employment
Market
Percent of
countywide
employment
market served
15%
Productivity
and Efficiency
Productivity
Trips per hour
(T-BEST-
generated trips
and revenue
hours of service)
15%
30%
Cost Efficiency
Cost per trip
(including new
trips)
15%
Total 100% 100%
Source: Collier MPO and CAT Ten-Year Transit Development Plan 2026-
2035 (Collier MPO 2025f)
Page 156 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-58 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Potential service along I-75 and potential transfer
hubs along Immokalee Road may require further
study
A Mobility On Demand (MOD) demand and operations
requirements pilot study
Conducting a transit fare study approximately every
5 years to assess CAT’s fare structures and whether
modification is needed.
Carrying out comprehensive operations analysis
studies in between major TDP updates
Integrating advanced bus shelter technology,
including solar lighting, real-time displays, charging
ports, and interactive kiosks
Exploring opportunities to implement artificial
intelligence for improved rider experience, such as
predictive scheduling to reduce wait times, detailed
recommendations for multimodal trip planning,
reduce trip booking times, demand forecasting, fuel
efficiency, and predictive maintenance.
Implementing end-to-end trip planning software
allowing riders to plan trips using all types of CAT
services and connect to third-party applications for
“first and last mile” including park-and-ride, ride
share, microtransit, and micromobility
Integrating Internet of Things to provide real-time
data for improved decision-making and service
delivery, enabling better route planning, accurate
responsiveness, and predictive maintenance
scheduling
Consider recommendations from the recently
completed park-and-ride study and implement new
lots and improvements as opportunities arise
Continued exploration, piloting and assessment of
alternative fuel technologies to promote efficiency
and diversify CAT’s fleet
In addition to program recommendations, the TDP
identifies additional recommendations through 2050.
These recommendations are listed as follows:
Expand regional transit services between Collier and
Lee Counties
Broader implementation of (Mobility-On-Demand)
MOD services
Brand buses on the beach and those associated with
proposed MOD services
Establish a coordinating committee with the region’s
local planning departments to review transportation
needs and ensure funding and strategies are in place
for implementation
Establish transit service policies to adopt in Collier
County’s land development regulations
Modify the Land Development Code and
Development Review processes to include
recommendations from the 2020 Transit Impact
Analysis by coordinating with Collier County and local
municipalities
Continue coordination with LeeTran to explore a
seamless fare system between LeeTran and CAT
Page 157 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-59 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4-11.Transit Needs Summary
Route Location Rank Improvement Description
Route Network and New Service
New Bayshore Shuttle 1
The Bayshore CRA has requested that CAT help mitigate parking needs by operating two shuttles
within the Bayshore CRA. The route would require one vehicle but would likely need two vehicles to
provide 15-minute headways from Weeks Avenue to the Naples Botanical Garden from 11:00 a.m. to
9:00 p.m.
New Route 31 (Golden Gate Pkwy.)
(Split Route 25 E-W)1 Split and keep east-west alignment the same while changing the north-south alignment.
New Route 33 (Immokalee Rd.)
(Split Route 27 E-W)2 Extend the east-west alignment east to provide service along Immokalee Road from Walmart on
Tamiami Trail to the Publix at the intersection of Immokalee Road and Randall Boulevard.
Route 32 (Collier Blvd.) (Split
Route 27 N-S)2
Extend the north-south alignment this alignment would provide service along Collier Boulevard from
Immokalee Road to Tamiami Trail with a deviation to the Golden Gate Community Center on Golden
Gate Parkway.
Realign Route 14 operate at
60 min. headway 3 Realign Routes 13 and 14 from a one-way pair to two bidirectional routes, with Route 14 operating
along Goodlette-Frank Rd.
Realign Route 23 headway 60 to
40 minutes 3
Realign Route 23 to provide direct connections to the westernmost residential cluster on Lake
Trafford Road, the County Health Department, several packing houses along New Harvest Road, and
the easternmost residential cluster on Farm Workers Way. Reduce headway from 60 to 40 minutes.
Route 30 (Goodlette Frank Rd.)
(Split Route 25 N-S)3 Split and extend the north-south alignment this alignment would provide service along Goodlette-
Frank Road from Immokalee Road to the Coastland Center Mall.
Express Premium Route to Lee
County 4
Would operate as an express commuter service beginning at the Government Center and ending at
the Florida Gulf Coast Town Center. Route would require one vehicle to provide 90-minute headway
service from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m.
Realign Route 13 shorten to
40 min. headway 4 Reduce headway time to 40 minutes.
Frequency Improvements
Route 15 1 Reduce headway time from 90 to 45 minutes.
Route 121 1 Add one morning and one evening trip during peak periods.
Page 158 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-60 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4-11.Transit Needs Summary
Route Location Rank Improvement Description
Route 11 1 Reduce headway time from 30 to 20 minutes.
Route 12 1 Reduce headway time from 90 to 45 minutes.
Route 13 1 Reduce headway time from 60 to 30 minutes.
Route 17 2 Reduce headway time from 90 to 45 minutes.
Route 16 3 Reduce headway time from 90 to 45 minutes.
Route 14 3 Reduce headway time from 60 to 30 minutes.
Proposed Span Improvements
Route 11 1 Extend service to 10:00 p.m.
Route 14 1 Extend service to 10:00 p.m.
Route 19 2 Extend service to 10:00 p.m.
Route 24 2 Extend service to 10:00 p.m.
Route 15 3 Extend service to 10:00 p.m.
Route 17 4 Extend service to 10:00 p.m.
Capital Infrastructure Needs Identified but Not Ranked
Mobility-On-Demand --
Uses on-demand information, real-time data, and predictive analytics that provides travelers the best
transportation choice for their needs. Service can be requested via a mobile app, website, or by calling
CAT. Helps solve the ‘first/last mile’ problem associated with limited access to transit. Five MOD Zones
identified: Immokalee, Golden Gate Estates, North Naples, Naples Zone, and Marco Island. Further
study is recommended.
New Autonomous Circulator –
Downtown Naples --This circulator would address the parking shortage in downtown and would begin on S. 4th Ave. from
S. 9th St. to S. 3rd St. and go south along S. 3rd St. to S. 13th Ave.
New Naples Pier Electric Shuttle --This shuttle would make stops at the Naples Pier, Crayton Cove, as well as shops and restaurants
within the area south of S 6th Avenue.
Page 159 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-61 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Table 4-11.Transit Needs Summary
Route Location Rank Improvement Description
Immokalee/Lehigh Acres Regional
Route --Would connect CAT’s Immokalee Transfer Station to LeeTran’s Lehigh Acres Park-and-Ride Transfer
Facility, with a stop at University of Florida/IFAS satellite campus on State Road 29.
Regionwide Technology --
CAT has recently completed technology upgrades including Automated Vehicle Location
replacement, Automated Passenger Counters, onboard annunciators, and onboard information media.
A farebox replacement project is currently underway.
Park-and-Ride Lots -- Improve transit access through the development of park-and-ride lots.
Bus Stop Infrastructure --Continue to improve and add additional benches, shelters, bicycle storage facilities, and other
infrastructure at bus stops to enhance the rider experience and potentially attract new riders.
Improve Americans with
Disabilities Act Accessibility -- Improve bus stop safety and ADA accessibility throughout the entire system for all riders.
Replace and Add New Vehicles -- Continue to replace existing fleet and add new vehicles to provide new service.
Source:Collier MPO and CAT Ten-Year Transit Development Plan (Collier MPO 2025f)
Page 160 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-62 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
Figure 4-20.Transit Network Service Needs
Page 161 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-63 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
4.5 Air Transportation Needs
Collier County includes General Aviation airports that are
non-SIS facilities. These airports tend to have less air and
ground congestion, lower taxi times, proximity to local
market areas, and less demanding ground support needs.
There are four publicly owned General Aviation airports
within the Collier MPO Jurisdiction:
Naples Municipal Airport (Airport ID APF)
Immokalee Regional Airport (Airport ID IMM)
Marco Island Executive Airport (Airport ID MKY)
Everglades Airpark (Airport ID X01)
The Collier County Airport Authority, which is a branch of
the local government overseen by the Collier County BCC,
oversees the development and management of the
airports in Immokalee, Marco Island, and Everglades City.
The City of Naples Airport Authority is charged with the
operation, development, and improvements of the Naples
Airport. The closest international airport (SIS Facility) to
the Collier County area is the Southwest Florida
International Airport (RSW), which is located to the north
in Fort Myers in Lee County.
4.5.1 Naples Airport
Naples Airport is located in the City of Naples and is
bounded by Corporate Flight Drive to the north, North
Road to the south, Airport Pulling Road to the east, and
the Gordon River to the west. The airport includes three
runways with a maximum runway length of 6,600 feet.
Primary public access to the airport is at the intersection
of Radio Road and Airport Pulling Road. In FY 2022, there
were 122,281 takeoffs and landings. The airport typically
houses 360 aircraft, which significantly increases during
the seasonal months (Naples Airport Authority n.d.).
There is no regularly scheduled passenger service at this
airport. However, it maintains a Title 14 CFR, Part 139
Airport Operating Certificate to accommodate both
scheduled and unscheduled operations. According to the
Naples Airport Master Plan (ESA 2021), in 2017 the
airport operated at 56% capacity and is forecasted to
operate at 84% capacity by 2038. The Naples Airport
Master Plan includes capital improvements through
2039, and there are no plans to expand the airport. The
roadway project needs include intersection improvements
at Airport Pulling Road and Radio Road to accommodate
future airport operations.
4.5.2 Immokalee Regional Airport
The Immokalee Regional Airport is on 1,333 acres and
bordered by Immokalee Road to the south and Airway
Road to the west. The airport includes two runways with a
maximum runway length of 5,000 feet. CR 846/
Immokalee Road and Airpark Boulevard provides public
access to the airport. This airport has been designated for
a 60-acre Foreign Trade Zone, which includes portions of
the Florida Tradeport Industrial Park. The industrial park
covers 400 acres and is accessed by Airpark Boulevard.
The airport also includes the Immokalee Regional
Raceway (International Hot Rod Association Drag Strip)
and is used for aerial firefighting and crop dusting
operations.
Page 162 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-64 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
The Immokalee Regional Airport, Airport Layout Plan
Update (Collier County Airport Authority 2017) notes that
the airport operations are expected to grow through
2037 requiring some airfield improvements. The roadway
project needs include widening Immokalee Road from
SR 29 to Airpark Boulevard to accommodate future
airport operations.
4.5.3 Marco Island Executive Airport
The Marco Island Executive airport is located 12 miles
south of downtown Naples. The airport covers 140 acres
and contains one asphalt runway that measures approxi-
mately 5,000 feet. The airport can accommodate smaller
general aviation aircraft as well as business jets.
4.5.4 Everglades Airpark
The Everglades Airpark is located on 29 acres and is
immediately southwest of the Big Cypress National
Preserve and is surrounded on three sides by the waters
of the Everglades National Park. The Fakahatchee Strand
State Preserve and Collier Seminole Park are to the north.
The airpark primarily supports recreational flying, en-
vironmental patrol, and flight training. It includes one
2,400-foot-long runway and is considered Collier
County’s Eco-tourism Airport.
4.6 Advanced Air Mobility
Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) is an emerging air-based
transportation mode that uses electric vertical take-off
and landing aircraft to carry passengers and cargo to
provide essential services in urban and rural settings. The
Federal Aviation Administration will oversee AAM aircraft
certification and their integration into the National
Airspace System. The FDOT Plan of Action for AAM:
Leading the Highway in the Sky’s Development (FDOT
2025c) notes that with advancements in energy power
systems, aerospace and manufacturing technologies, and
artificial intelligence, AAM is positioned to revolutionize
how people and goods travel.
Figure 4-21 presents FDOT’s timeline for AAM. Florida
began planning for AAM in 2021 and in June 2025, the
Florida Governor signed legislation incorporating AAM
Figure 4-21.Advanced Air Mobility Timeline
Page 163 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 4-65 Chapter 4 2050 Needs Plan
into the state’s regulatory framework, advancing the
industry across the state, and directed FDOT to facilitate
additional state investments.
With plans to accelerate statewide AAM initiatives, local
governments and agencies are encouraged to plan for
land use considerations and site approval processes for
proposed AAM takeoff and landing facilities. In
September 2024, FDOT issued the AAM Land Use
Compatibility & Site Approval Guidebook (FDOT 2024f).
This guidebook provides local governments with a
background on AAM, the land use considerations for
vertiport development, proactive planning steps to
prepare for AAM, and a step-by-step process for vertiport
site approval at the local, federal, and state level.
Page 164 of 397
5
Financial Resources
Page 165 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 5-1 Chapter Financial Resources
5.Financial Resources
The Collier MPO 2050 LRTP financial plan establishes the
basis for determining how many of the Needs Assessment
projects can be included in the Cost Feasible Plan. The
financial plan recognizes all revenues by source that
reasonably can be expected to be available during the
planning period. The available revenues and planning-
level cost estimates are applied to each project from the
Needs Assessment to develop the Cost Feasible Plan.
5.1 Overview
Ensuring that financial resources will be available to fund
the multimodal transportation projects by 2050 is a
crucial element of the Collier MPO 2050 LRTP. The
premise of the long-range revenue forecast is rooted in
federal regulation originally required by the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. All
transportation acts since that time have continued the
requirement for a financial plan. Consistent with the
1 https://www.mpoac.org/
requirements of Title 23 United States Code Section 134
(23 USC 134) and Section 339.175(7)(b), Florida
Statutes, the revenues identified for the 2050 LRTP are
reasonably expected to be available during the planning
period through 2050. This chapter summarizes
transportation revenues available to fund multimodal
transportation projects within the County and its
municipalities through 2050. This chapter further
documents the assumptions used to develop the future
revenues.
In accordance with federal statutes, FDOT, in coordination
with the Florida Metropolitan Planning Organization
Advisory Council (MPOAC),1 provides long-range revenue
forecasts to assist Florida MPOs. These forecasts help
MPOs comply with federal requirements for developing
cost-feasible transportation plans and demonstrate a
coordinated planning effort for transportation facilities
and services in Florida.
As presented in Figure 5-1, financial planning for
statewide and metropolitan transportation plans is
Figure 5‐1.Planning Periods Summary (Revenue Bands)
Page 166 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 5-2 Chapter Financial Resources
typically required for three periods: long range (20 or
more years), intermediate range (10 to 15 years), and
short range (5 years). It is important to note that long-
range revenue and program forecasts are general in
nature to encourage a variety of approaches and
technologies to meet the goals and objectives.
The revenues and, ultimately, the cost-feasible project
costs in this LRTP update are shown in year-of-
expenditure (YOE) dollars to reflect inflation. Federal
guidance (23 CFR 450.324(F)(11)) notes that revenue
and cost estimates must use an inflation rate to reflect
the YOE dollars. The YOE represents the value of money
at the time it will be collected. The YOE dollars are based
on reasonable financial principles and information and
are developed in cooperation between the MPO, state,
and public transportation operator(s).
The Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Financial Resources
Technical Memorandum (provided under a separate
cover) describes each revenue source, revenue
forecasting assumptions, and the methodology for
developing statewide estimates of federal and state
revenues.
5.2 Roadway and Transit Revenue
Projections
Revenue projections include federal, state, and county
sources. The County and its municipalities have
historically funded transportation projects using local
sources, such as fuel taxes, impact fees, and General Fund
transfers (ad valorem) in addition to federal and state
revenues. It is assumed that the County and its
municipalities will continue to use these revenue sources
to fund transportation projects from 2026 through 2050.
Table 5-1 summarizes the total projected revenues in
YOE dollars that are anticipated to be available for the
2050 LRTP.
5.3 Roadway and Transit
Federal/State Funding
Projections of federal and state roadway and transit
revenues for use in LRTPs are developed by FDOT.
Through enhanced federal, state, and MPO cooperation
and guidance provided by the MPOAC, FDOT has
provided a long‐range revenue estimate through 2050
that is documented in FDOT’s 2050 Revenue Forecast
Handbook (FDOT 2023h). These revenues are for
capacity and non-capacity programs consistent with
statewide priorities.Table 5-2 highlights these revenue
amounts in YOE format per federal guidance. The
following provides a brief description of each revenue
source.
Surface Transportation Block Grant: Additional
federal funds are distributed to an urban area that
has a population greater than 200,000 (known as a
Transportation Management Area [TMA]), as
designated by the U.S. Census Bureau following the
2020 Census.
Transportation Alternatives (TA) Program:TA funds
are funds set aside from each state’s Surface
Transportation Block Grant apportionment. Revenue
estimates for TA are developed into categories based
on population, and the TA-Urbanized Area
Page 167 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 5-3 Chapter Financial Resources
apportionment applies to the Collier MPO.Designed
solely to fund non-automobile-based projects, nine
eligible project types can be funded by these
revenues, as outlined in 23 USC 213(b) and
101(a)(29).
Strategic Intermodal System (SIS): The SIS capacity
program provides funds for construction,
improvements, and associated ROW acquisition on
the State Highway System (SHS) roadways that are
designated as part of the SIS. In the County, State
Road (SR) 29, SR 82, and I-75 are part of the SIS
network.
State Highway System (SHS):This capacity program
provides funds for construction, improvements, and
associated ROW acquisition on SHS roadways that are
not designated as part of the SIS. In the County,
US 41, I-75, SR 84 (Davis Boulevard), SR 951 (Collier
Boulevard) south of US 41, SR 29, SR 82, and I-75
are part of the SHS network.
Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP):The
HSIP funds the FDOT Safety Office’s management of
the FHWA engineering safety program throughout
the state. Projects funded by the HSIP include low-
cost (typically $1,000,000 or less) safety
improvements along the SHS that address specific
safety problems involving serious and fatal injury-
related crashes.
State Highway System Resurfacing, Bridge, and
Operations and Maintenance:This non-capacity
program provides funding for maintaining the SHS.
These funds can be used for resurfacing roadways,
bridge maintenance, and operations and
maintenance programs along the SHS.
Other Roads: Non-SIS, Non-SHS:This capacity
program provides funds for construction,
improvements, and associated ROW acquisition on
roadways that are not designated as part of the SHS
or SIS and could also include other programs like the
Small County Outreach Program (SCOP) and the
County Incentive Grant Program (CIGP).
Transportation Regional Incentive Program (TRIP):
This program is intended to encourage regional
planning by providing matching funds for
improvements to regionally significant transportation
facilities identified and prioritized by regional
partners. The Collier MPO has partnered with the Lee
County MPO to develop a regional roadway network
that identifies regional facilities that could be eligible
for TRIP funding. Projected TRIP funding is allocated
throughout the state at the districtwide level.
However, because this revenue source is not directly
allocated to the Collier MPO, it was not assumed as a
revenue source for developing the 2050 Cost
Feasible Plan.
Federal and State Transit Revenues: Estimates of
federal and state transit revenues are based on
information provided in the FDOT Revenue
Forecasting Guidebook.
Page 168 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 5-4 Chapter Financial Resources
Table 5‐1.2050 LRTP Revenue Projections Summary
Jurisdiction Funding Source Total 2031–2050 (YOE)
Revenues Dedicated to Transit Operations
Federal/State Transit Formula: Transit Block Grant and Transportation Disadvantaged $58,561,520
Federal Transit Operating $121,315,110
State Transit Operating $9,830,600
Local Transit Operating $49,588,590
Local Fares and Other Local Revenues $22,944,760
Local Collier County General Fund Contributions for CAT Enhancements and Transportation
Disadvantaged $149,523,770
Local Transit Block Grant – Local Match $36,669,736
Subtotal – Transit Operations $448,434,086
Revenues Dedicated to Transit Capital Projects
Federal Transit Capital $58,111,318
Federal/State Transit Infrastructure Grants - Community Project Funding/Congressionally Directed Spending $0
State Transit Capital $2,893,452
Local Transit Capital $2,893,452
Subtotal – Transit Capital $63,898,222
Total Transit Revenues $512,332,307
Revenues Dedicated to State Highway Safety Improvement Program
Federal/State Non-Capacity Programs – Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)$34,751,601
Revenues Dedicated to Roadway Operations and Maintenance
Federal/State Non-Capacity Programs – Resurfacing, Bridge, and Operations and Maintenance (state-
maintained facilities)$1,054,953,578
County General Fund (Ad Valorem)$11,592,000
County Fuel Tax $47,100,041
Total for Operations and Maintenance $1,113,645,619
Revenues Dedicated for Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Roadway Projects
Federal Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) - SU $103,078,386
Federal Transportation Alternatives – Urban Area (TALU)$29,766,655
Page 169 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 5-5 Chapter Financial Resources
Table 5‐1.2050 LRTP Revenue Projections Summary
Jurisdiction Funding Source Total 2031–2050 (YOE)
State Strategic Intermodal System (SIS)$77,128,000
State State Highway System (SHS)$49,840,000
State Other Roads: Non-SIS, Non-SHS $30,300,000
County Transportation Impact Fees $400,000,000
County General Fund (Ad Valorem)$181,608,000
County Fuel Tax (91% of $638,000,000 Net Revenues)$463,576,799
Total for Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Roadway Projects $1,335,297,840
Table 5‐2.Federal and State Revenue Projections (YOE)
Jurisdiction Funding Source 2031–2035 2036–2040 2041–2050 Total 2031–2050
Federal and
State
Transit Formula: Transit Block Grant
and Transportation Disadvantaged $11,385,846 $11,760,863 $23,809,257 $46,955,965
Federal and
State
Non-Capacity Programs – Resurfacing,
Bridge, and Operations and
Maintenance
$259,852,068 264,803,989 530,297,521 $1,054,953,578
Federal and
State
Non-Capacity Programs – Highway
Safety Improvement Program $8,758,874 $8,717,976 $17,274,752 $29,766,655
Federal Surface Transportation Block Grant
(STBG) - SU $25,768,807 $25,809,569 $51,500,009 $103,078,386
Federal Transportation Alternatives (TA) –
Urbanized Area $7,475,933 $7,457,228 $14,833,494 $29,766,655
State Strategic Intermodal System (SIS)-$77,128,000 -$77,128,000
State State Highway System (SHS)$11,990,000 $12,470,000 $25,380,000 $49,840,000
State Other Roads: Non-SIS, Non-SHS $7,290,000 $7,580,000 $15,430,000 $30,300,000
State Transportation Regional Incentive
Program (TRIP)$4,409,341 $4,587,180 $9,270,479 $18,267,000
Total Revenues $336,930,869 $420,314,805 $687,795,512 $1,445,041,185
Page 170 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 5-6 Chapter Financial Resources
5.4 Local Revenue Projections and
Sources
In addition to federal and state funding, local revenue
sources help build and maintain the transportation
network within the County and its municipalities.
By creating a partnership between local jurisdictions and
FDOT that combines local revenues such as impact fees
and other non-traditional transportation funding sources
(for example, TRIP, sales tax initiatives, and others) with
FDOT funds, the MPO, FDOT, and the local governments
have the potential to fund a significant number of local
and state capacity projects that support safety, growth,
economic enhancements, and development. This also
allows the MPO to invest more in citizen priorities like
Complete Streets initiatives, transit, and sidewalk/bike
path facilities.
The following briefly describes each County funding
element:
Transportation Impact Fees (TIFs): TIFs provide
revenue for financing the addition and expansion of
roadway facilities needed to accommodate specific
new growth and development.
Fuel Taxes: Fuel taxes represent a major portion of
Collier County’s local transportation revenues. Fuel
tax revenue is dedicated to both transportation
capacity expansion and maintenance and operations.
Fuel taxes collected by the cities within the County
were not considered during the LRTP.
General Fund/Ad Valorem: The County uses General
Fund/Ad Valorem revenues to help fund capacity
expansion and debt service, using taxable values. The
County transfers General Fund/Ad Valorem dollars
into the Transportation Capital 3081 Fund to support
the maintenance and improvement of the
transportation network. The County also transfers
General Fund/Ad Valorem into the Public Transit and
Neighborhood Enhancement (PTNE) services, which
includes local, general revenue funding for
Transportation Disadvantaged (Fund 4033) and
Collier Area Transit Enhancements (Fund 4030). It
was assumed that the County will continue to transfer
General Fund/Ad Valorem revenues to these funds at
their current level through FY 2050.
Sales Tax:The Collier County 1-cent infrastructure
sales surtax was approved in 2018 and set to expire
in 2025 or when revenues exceeded $490 million. It
sunset early on December 31, 2023, after generating
approximately $539 million, with $487 million
allocated to the County and its municipalities. The
remaining reserves will be held for future capital
projects, but its use must be approved by the
Infrastructure Surtax Citizens Oversight Committee.
Therefore, the remaining reserves were not
considered for the 2050 LRTP Update.
County Debt Repayment Expenditures:The County’s
debt repayment schedule was also considered. The
County estimates debt repayments to equal
$20 million per fiscal year.
Page 171 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 5-7 Chapter Financial Resources
5.5 Summary of Reasonable Available
Funding for 2050 LRTP Roadway
Projects
Based on the revenue sources outlined in previous
sections, it is estimated that approximately $1.4 billion
will be available between FY 2031 and FY 2050 for
programs and projects incorporated into the 2050 LRTP.
State and federal sources are estimated to account for
$290.1 million (or 21.7 percent), while County sources
are estimated to account for $1.05 billion (or 78.3
percent). Between FY 2031 and FY 2050, an estimated
$127 million from state and federal sources will be used
for SHS and SIS facilities. County debt repayments are
estimated to decrease available County revenue sources
by $400 million between FY 2031 and FY 2050. Transit
capital revenues equaling nearly $64 million between FY
2031 – FY 2050 will be dedicated to transit-based
improvements. Additionally, TA funds equaling
$29.8 million between FY 2031 and FY 2050 are
designated solely to fund non-automobile-based
projects. As a result, it is estimated that $778.5 million in
funding between FY 2031 and FY 2050 is anticipated to
be available for County- and locally maintained roadway
projects.
5.6 Bicycle and Pedestrian Funding
Similar to roadway and transit funding sources, there are
multiple funding sources for bicycle and pedestrian
projects. Funding sources for bicycle and pedestrian
projects may overlap with funding sources available for
roadway improvements. The primary funding sources
available for bicycle and pedestrian projects presented in
the BPMP are through federal programs, as discussed in
the following:
National Highway Performance Program: These
funds were established under BIL and provide
support for projects or program projects that are on
an eligible facility or an eligible activity that supports
national performance goals. Bicycle and pedestrian
improvements associated with an NHS facility are
eligible.
Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG)
Program: The STBG Program provides the most
flexible funding among all federal-aid transportation
programs. Specifically, the STBG-Transportation
Alternatives provides funding for programs and
projects defined as transportation alternatives.
Transportation alternatives are defined as non-
automobile-based projects and include recreational
trails, pedestrian and bicycle, and Safe Routes to
School (SRTS) projects.
Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP): This
program provides funds to reduce traffic fatalities
and serious injuries on all public roads, including
non-state-owned public roads and roads on tribal
lands and can be used for pedestrian and bicycle
safety improvements. States may obligate funds
under HSIP to carry out any highway safety
improvement project on any public road or publicly
owned bicycle or pedestrian pathway or trails.
Page 172 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 5-8 Chapter Financial Resources
Recreational Trails Program (RTP): This federally
funded competitive grant program provides financial
assistance to city, county, state, or federal
governments; organizations approved by the state; or
state‐ and federally recognized Indian tribal
governments for the development of recreational
trails, trailheads, and trailside facilities.
Federal Transit Administration Funds: Some FTA
funds may be used to fund the design, construction,
and maintenance of pedestrian and bicycle projects
that enhance or are related to public transportation
facilities.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA) Funds: NHTSA provides funding to states
for implementing priority-area programs and
activities to improve traffic safety and reduce crashes,
serious injuries, and fatalities. Emphasis areas under
the pedestrian and bicycle safety program include:
–Increasing awareness and understanding of safety
issues and compliance with traffic laws
–Development and use of a systematic approach to
identify locations and behaviors prone to bicycle
and pedestrian crashes and implementing
multidisciplinary countermeasures
–Creating urban and rural built environments that
support and encourage safe walking and biking
SUN Trail Network Funds: SUN Trail funds are
managed by the FDEP Office of Greenways and Trails.
The Southwest Coast Connector Trail Alignment
noted in the Needs Plan (Chapter 4) is eligible to
receive SUN Trail funding.
Not all funding for bicycle and pedestrian projects is done
through traditional funding programs. Alternative funding
sources include the following:
Collier County and its associated municipalities have
jurisdictional authority over land use and zoning and
can, therefore, work with developers to address gaps
in bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and make
connections as new homes, communities, and
shopping areas are constructed.
The MPO can form partnerships with other agencies
to implement projects.
Bicycle and pedestrian improvements can be
incorporated into roadway construction projects or
funded independently. For example, Collier County
typically funds transportation improvements that
incorporate bicycle and pedestrian facilities using
local funds on County‐owned roads.
Local transportation improvements incorporating
bicycle and pedestrian facilities can often be funded
through local impact fees, transportation surtaxes,
and general funds, which provide additional
resources for enhancing mobility and connectivity
within communities.
The County and its municipalities can apply for
funding related to state and federal grant programs,
SRTS programs, NHTSA, and the Better Utilizing
Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD)
Discretionary Grant Program.
Page 173 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 5-9 Chapter Financial Resources
5.7 Airport Funding
The primary funding mechanisms for airports include
federal grants through the Federal Aviation Authority’s
(FAA) Airport Improvement Program, Passenger Facility
Change local user fee, and tenant rents and fees (ACI-NA
n.d.). The following text details funding sources for the
major airports within the Collier Metropolitan Area.
Table 5-3 presents the projected airport capital revenues.
According to the Naples Airport Authority’s adopted
FY 2025 operating and capital budget, Naples Airport is
estimated to have approximately $30.9 million for capital
projects in FY 2025. Naples Airport is also projected to
maintain an operating reserve in the amount of
$16 million in FY 2025 (Naples Airport Authority 2024).
Additional short-term revenue projections for FY 2026
through FY 2029 were provided to the MPO by the Naples
Airport Authority in July 2024. Based on those
projections, it is estimated that approximately $4.3
million in net revenue (following operating and capital
expenses) will be available for Naples Airport between FY
2026 and FY 2029.
The Collier County Airport Authority oversees the
development and management of the Immokalee
Regional Airport, Everglades Airpark, and Marco Island
Executive Airport. The Airport Authority is a branch of the
Collier County government and is overseen by the BCC.
The projected capital revenues for each airport were
determined through coordination with the Airport
Authority in November 2024.
Table 5‐3.Airport Capital Revenue Projections
Airport Funding Source 2026–2030 2031–2035 2036–2040 2041–2050 TOTAL
Collier County Airport Authority
Immokalee Regional Airport FAA, FDOT, Local, PPP $8,400,000 $15,000,000 $17,500,000 $36,782,000 $77,682,000
Everglades Airpark FAA, FDOT, Local, PPP $12,000,000 $1,200,000 $3,860,000 $11,400,000 $28,460,000
Marco Island Executive Airport FAA, FDOT, Local, PPP $4,100,000 $7,000,000 $9,250,000 $13,950,000 $34,300,000
City of Naples
Naples Airport FAA, FDOT $4,279,932a $4,279,932
a For FY 2026 through FY 2029 only
Page 174 of 397
6
Cost Feasible Plan
Page 175 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-1 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
6.Cost Feasible Plan
This chapter summarizes the 2050 LRTP Cost Feasible
Plan, which identifies the multimodal transportation
projects that can be funded through 2050 based on the
estimated revenues presented in Chapter 5.
6.1 Roadway Cost Feasible Projects
Development of the cost feasible roadway projects began
by estimating the costs associated with each project in the
roadway needs. As detailed in the Collier MPO 2050 LRTP
Update Project Cost Development Methodology Technical
Memorandum (provided under separate cover), planning-
level costs were developed for each project phase,
including:
Preliminary Engineering (PE) Phase1
Right-of-Way (ROW)
Construction (CST)
The cost to construct each project was developed using
FDOT’s 2024 Cost Per Mile Model Reports and recently
completed roadway projects within the County (FDOT
n.d.c.). Project phases prior to construction, such as PD&E
Study and PE, were established using a percentage of
construction cost. The anticipated cost for ROW and
Environmental Mitigation were developed using estimated
impacts and recent property appraisals and mitigation
pricing in the region.
1 The PE phase includes PD&E studies and environmental mitigation.
6.1.1 Roadway Projects Prioritization
Roadway projects from the Needs Plan were prioritized
based on project ranking, traffic modeling results, stake-
holder collaboration, and public input. Using an online
interactive map, the public was able to like, dislike, or
comment on projects from the roadway needs list and draft
cost feasible plan. This input was used to further guide the
identification of needs and prioritization of cost feasible
projects. More details on public engagement are presented
in Chapter 2.
As noted in Chapter 2, six alternative network scenarios
were modeled using the D1RPM travel model to test how
different transportation projects might perform through-
out the network. The first two network scenarios were not
financially constrained and helped further refine the list
of roadway needs. Alternative Network Scenarios 3, 4, and
6 were modeled using an iterative process on a financially
constrained list of projects to test travel demand and
congestion throughout the network.
The results of each network scenario test were shared
with the TAC, CAC, and MPO Board during publicly
advertised meetings to allow for input on projects that
could be included in the model runs. The Collier MPO
2050 LRTP Update Scenario Network Modeling Technical
Memorandum (provided under separate cover) presents
more details on the results of each network scenario
modeled.
The roadway projects selected for inclusion in this Cost
Feasible Plan are presented in the following maps and
Page 176 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-2 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
tables. As noted in Chapter 5, financial planning for
statewide and metropolitan transportation plans is
typically required for three periods: short range,
intermediate range, and long range. The cost feasible
projects for this LRTP are presented in four multi‐year
planning periods, which includes the already funded
projects in Collier MPO FY 2026-2030 TIP. Therefore, the
cost feasible projects are presented in four multi-year
planning periods:
Plan Period 1 (TIP): FY2026 to FY2030
Plan Period 2: FY2031 to FY2035
Plan Period 3: FY2036 to FY2040
Plan Period 4: FY2041 to FY2050
The Collier MPO TIP and FDOT Work Program are updated
annually and provide details on projects funded within the
next 5 years. The cost feasible projects presented herein
are consistent with the Collier MPO FY2026-2030 TIP
(Planning Period 1) and the FY2026-2030 FDOT Work
Program. Should funding for a project phase in this LRTP
be advanced from Plan Periods 3 or 4 to the TIP/STIP
years, or advanced more than one 5-year planning period,
an amendment of this LRTP will be required to maintain
consistency across planning documents.
An inflation factor was applied to the estimated cost for
each project based on the anticipated year of expenditure.
Because the TIP (Plan Period 1) is a short range period
(within the next 5 years), an inflation factor was only
applied to Plan Periods 2, 3, and 4 as follows:
FY2031–FY2035 = 1.29 (Plan Period 2)
FY2036–FY2040 = 1.56 (Plan Period 3)
FY2041–FY2050 = 1.94 (Plan Period 4)
The TIP includes projects for the entire County transporta-
tion network including roadway, congestion management,
bridges, bicycle and pedestrian, transportation planning,
transit, aviation, and maintenance. This is because the TIP
is a short-range planning period and funding availability is
better identified and includes projects FDOT has program-
med from the MPO’s annual list of Project Priorities.
Table 6-1 summarizes the projects adopted in the Collier
MPO’s TIP (FY2026–FY2030) by project type and phase.
Note that Table 6-1 includes projects funded in the TIP as
approved by the MPO Board in June 2025.
Table 6-2 summarizes FDOT’s SIS cost feasible roadway
projects by planning year and project phase.Figure 6-1
presents a map of FDOT’s SIS cost feasible projects.
Table 6-3 summarizes the FDOT Other Roads Projects and
Local Road Projects that have construction fully funded
through FY 2050 and includes the distribution of costs by
phase and revenue source.Figures 6-2,6-3, and 6-4
present a map of these projects by plan period.Table 6-4
presents the partially funded projects within the FDOT
Other Roads Projects and Local Roadway Projects, and
Figure 6-5 presents a map of these projects for the entire
planning period (FY2031 to FY2050).
Page 177 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-3 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-1.Collier MPO FY2026–FY2030 TIP Summary ($in millions)
Facility Limits From Limits To Description
Lead
Agency
Financial
Project
Number
Funding
Source
Total TIP
Funding
2026–2030
(YOE)
Plan Period 1 (TIP):
2026-2030
O&M PRE-ENG ROW CST
ROADWAY PROJECTS
SR 29 CR 846 N of New Market
Rd.New Rd. Construction FDOT 417540-5 State $96.27 $9.70 $13.82 $72.75
SR 29 N of New Market
Rd.SR 82 Add Lanes and
Reconstruct FDOT 417540-6 State $66.38 $8.29 $0.30 $57.78
I-75 at SR 951 (Collier
Blvd)
Ultimate Interchange
Improvement FDOT 425843-3 State $1.47 $1.47
Old US 41 US 41 Lee County Line Widen from Two to Four
Lanes County 435110-2 Federal $3.00 $3.00
US 41/SR 45 Golden Gate
Parkway
5th Avenue
South
Flexible Pavement
Reconstruct FDOT 437908-1 State $5.30 $5.30
Goodlette Frank Rd.Vanderbilt Rd. Immokalee Rd.Add Lanes and
Reconstruct County 446341-1 Local/State $5.50 $5.50
Immokalee Rd.Livingston Rd. Logan Blvd. Pave Shoulders County 452247-1 Local/State $22.00 $1.50 $20.50
I-75 Immokalee Rd.Bonita Beach
Rd.
Add Lanes and
Reconstruct FDOT 452544-3 State $122.95 $9.14 $7.60 $106.22
I-75 at Immokalee Rd.Modify Interchange FDOT 452544-4 State $71.54 $12.44 $7.60 $51.51
I-75 Immokalee Rd. Pine Ridge Rd.Add Lanes and
Reconstruct FDOT 452544-5 State $30.46 $5.12 $11.60 $13.73
I-75 Pine Ridge Rd.Golden Gate
Pkwy.
Add Lanes and
Reconstruct FDOT 452544-6 State $13.90 $4.20 $9.60 $0.10
Immokalee Rd.Pave Shoulders County 456013-1 State $1.00 $1.00
BRIDGE PROJECTS
Caxambas Court/Roberts Bay
Replacement Structure #034112 Bridge Replacement FDOT 445460-1 Local/Federal $9.77 $1.50 $8.27
47th Ave. NE Bridge Everglades Blvd. 20th St. NE New Bridge Construction County 453421-1 Federal $4.81 $4.81
Goldenrod Avenue over
Smokehouse Bay Bridge
#034116
Bridge Replacement FDOT 455935-1 Local/Federal $4.85 $0.52 $4.34
Alligator Alley Fire Station @
MM63 Miscellaneous Structure N/A 435389-1 State $3.00 $3.00
Page 178 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-4 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-1.Collier MPO FY2026–FY2030 TIP Summary ($in millions)
Facility Limits From Limits To Description
Lead
Agency
Financial
Project
Number
Funding
Source
Total TIP
Funding
2026–2030
(YOE)
Plan Period 1 (TIP):
2026-2030
O&M PRE-ENG ROW CST
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS/INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (CMS/ITS) PROJECTS
Alligator Alley Toll Plaza N/A N/A
Toll Operations
Everglades Parkway
Alligator Alley
FDOT 000151-1 Toll $32.68 $32.68
Collier MPO Identified
Operational Improvements
Funding
Traffic Ops Improvement FDOT 405106-1 Federal $1.77 $1.77
Collier MPO Identified
Operational Improvements
Funding
Traffic Ops Improvement FDOT 405106-2 Federal $5.18 $5.18
Collier County TSMCA Traffic Control
Devices/System County 412666-1 State $1.45 $1.45
City of Naples TSMCA Traffic Control
Devices/System
City Of
Naples 413627-1 State $0.44 $0.44
Collier TMC Ops Fund County
Wide Other ITS County 437103-1 State $0.48 $0.48
Signal Timing County Roads at Various
Locations Traffic Signal Update County 437925-1 Federal $0.78 $0.78
Airport Pulling Road Vanderbilt Rd. Immokalee Rd. Add Through Lanes County 440441-1 Local/Federal $9.86 $9.86
Travel Time Data Collier County
ITS
ITS Communication
System
Collier
County 446251-1 Federal $0.70 $0.70
US 41/SR 45 At CR 866/Golden
Gate Pkwy.Intersection Improvement FDOT 446451-1 Federal $1.80 $1.80
ITS Fiber Optic and FPL ITS Communication
System County 449526-1 Federal $0.83 $0.83
ATMS Retiming for Arterials ITS Communication
System County 449580-1 Federal $0.88 $0.88
Harbor Dr. & Mooring Line Dr. US 41 Crayton Rd. Traffic Signal Update City Of
Naples 455927-1 Federal $2.00 $2.00
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS
Orchid Drive Sidewalk and Bike
Lane Connection Bike Lane/Sidewalk City of
Naples 440436-1 Federal $0.39 $0.05 $0.35
South Golf Drive Gulf Shore Blvd.W US 41 Bike Lane/Sidewalk City of
Naples 440437-2 Federal $2.98 $2.98
Lake Trafford Road Sidewalk and Bike Lanes County 443375-4 Federal $0.57 $0.57
Page 179 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-5 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-1.Collier MPO FY2026–FY2030 TIP Summary ($in millions)
Facility Limits From Limits To Description
Lead
Agency
Financial
Project
Number
Funding
Source
Total TIP
Funding
2026–2030
(YOE)
Plan Period 1 (TIP):
2026-2030
O&M PRE-ENG ROW CST
Linwood Avenue Airport Rd.Commercial Dr.Sidewalk County 446550-2 Federal $0.10 $0.10
Wiggins Pass Vanderbilt Dr.US 41 Sidewalk County 448069-1 Federal $2.94 $2.94
Goodlette Frank Road Various Locations Sidewalk County 448126-2 Federal $1.51 $1.51
Pine Street Becca Ave.US 41 Sidewalk County 448128-2 Federal $0.27 $0.27
Naples Manor Various Locations Sidewalk County 448129-1 Federal $2.35 $2.35
Golden Gate Various Locations Sidewalk County 448130-1 Federal $1.53 $1.53
Phase 3 Everglades City Bike/Ped
Masterplan Bike Lane/Sidewalk FDOT 448265-1 Federal $1.80 $0.43 $1.37
Lavern Gaynor Elementary School
- Safe Routes to School Sidewalk County 449484-1 Federal $0.85 $0.85
91st Ave. N Sidewalk County 449514-1 Federal $1.15 $1.15
Immokalee Sidewalks Various Locations Sidewalk County 451542-1 Federal $1.08 $0.18 $0.90
Bayshore CRA Sidewalk Various Locations Sidewalk County 451543-1 Federal $0.29 $0.07 $0.21
Everglades City Ph4 Bike/Ped
Improvements Bike Lane/Sidewalk FDOT 452052-1 Federal $0.43 $0.43
McCarty Street Floridian Ave.Caroline Ave Sidewalk County 452064-1 Federal $1.08 $0.16 $0.93
Golden Gate City Sidewalks 23rd Place SW &
45th St. SW Sidewalk County 452065-1 Federal $0.31 $0.04 $0.27
Vanderbilt Beach Road Gulf Shore Dr.US 41 Bike Path/Trail County 452207-1 Federal $0.10 $0.10
106th Avenue Vanderbilt Dr.US 41 Sidewalk County 452208-1 Federal $0.07 $0.07
Bald Eagle Dr.San Marco Rd.N Collier Blvd Bike Lane/Sidewalk
City of
Marco
Island
452209-1 Federal $1.47 $1.47
109th Avenue Vanderbilt Dr.US 41 Sidewalk County 452210-1 Federal $0.07 $0.07
108th Avenue Vanderbilt Dr.US 41 Sidewalk County 452211-1 Federal $0.07 $0.07
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROJECTS
Collier County MPO FY
2024/2025-2025/2026 UPWP Transportation Planning Collier
MPO 439314-5 Federal $1.18 $1.18
Collier County MPO FY
2026/2027-2027/2028 UPWP Transportation Planning Collier
MPO 439314-6 Federal $2.36 $2.36
Collier County MPO FY
2028/2029-2029/2030 UPWP Transportation Planning Collier
MPO 439314-7 Federal $2.56 $2.56
Vanderbilt Beach Road Airport Road Livingston Road Feasibility Study County 449397-1 Federal $0.43 $0.43
Page 180 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-6 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-1.Collier MPO FY2026–FY2030 TIP Summary ($in millions)
Facility Limits From Limits To Description
Lead
Agency
Financial
Project
Number
Funding
Source
Total TIP
Funding
2026–2030
(YOE)
Plan Period 1 (TIP):
2026-2030
O&M PRE-ENG ROW CST
US 41/SR 45 3rd Ave SR 84 PD&E Study FDOT 453415-1 Federal $1.19 $1.19
TRANSIT PROJECTS
Collier County FTA Section 5311
Operating Assistance
Operating/Admin.
Assistance County 410120-1 Local/Federal $5.92 $5.92
Collier County State Transit Block
Grant Operating Assistance
Operating For Fixed
Route County 410120-1 Local/State $13.54 $13.54
Collier County/Bonita Spring
UZA/FTA Section 5307 Capital
Assistance
Capital For Fixed Route County 410146-1 Local/Federal $36.59 $36.59
Collier County/Bonita Springs
UZA/FTA Section 5307 Operating
Assist
Operating For Fixed
Route County 410146-2 Local/Federal $13.31 $13.31
Collier Co./Bonita Springs
UZA/FTA Section 5339 Capital
Assistance
Capital For Fixed Route County 434030-1 Local/Federal $4.50 $4.50
Collier Area Transit Operating
Assistance Corridor Us 41
Urban Corridor
Improvements County 452749-1 Local/State $4.42 $4.42
AVIATION PROJECTS
Immokalee Airport Environmental
Study for Runway 9/27 Extension
Aviation Environmental
Project County 441784-1 Local/State/
Federal $0.20 $0.20
Naples Municipal Airport South
Quadrant Box and T-Hangars
Aviation
Revenue/Operational
City of
Naples 446353-1 State $7.50 $7.50
Immokalee Regional Airport
Airpark Boulevard Extension Aviation Capacity Project County 446358-1 Local/State $3.87 $3.87
Marco Island Exec Airport
Maintenance Facility
Aviation
Revenue/Operational County 446360-1 Local/State $0.75 $0.75
Naples Municipal Airport East
Quadrant Apron Construction Aviation Capacity Project City of
Naples 446385-1 Local/State/
Federal $10.30 $10.30
Marco Island Executive Airport
Master Plan Aviation Capacity Project Collier
County 455456-1 Local/State/
Federal $0.78 $0.78
MAINTENANCE PROJECTS
Collier County Highway Lighting Routine Maintenance County 412574-1 State $1.11 $1.11
Collier County Asset Maintenance Routine Maintenance FDOT 412918-2 State $3.28 $3.28
Page 181 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-7 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-1.Collier MPO FY2026–FY2030 TIP Summary ($in millions)
Facility Limits From Limits To Description
Lead
Agency
Financial
Project
Number
Funding
Source
Total TIP
Funding
2026–2030
(YOE)
Plan Period 1 (TIP):
2026-2030
O&M PRE-ENG ROW CST
Naples Highway Lighting DDR
Funding Routine Maintenance City of
Naples 413537-1 State $0.42 $0.42
US 41/SR 45 N of Old U 41 S of Gulf Park
Dr.Resurfacing FDOT 441512-1 State/Federal $23.91 $23.91
US 41/SR 45 Lee County Line N of Old US 41 Pavement Only Resurface
(Flex)FDOT 451272-1 State $3.75 $3.75
SR 29 N of Bridge
#030307
S of Bridge
#030299
Pavement Only Resurface
(Flex)FDOT 451274-1 State $0.01 $0.01
SR 29 S of I-75 N of Bridge
#030298
Pavement Only Resurface
(Flex)FDOT 451276-1 State $5.57 $5.57
SR 29
N of Wildlife
Crossing Bridge
#030298
N of Oil Well
Rd./CR 858
Pavement Only Resurface
(Flex)FDOT 452632-1 State $0.01 $0.00
SR 951/Collier Blvd.North of Mainsail
Dr.S of Tower Rd.Routine Maintenance FDOT 456026-1 State $0.28 $0.28
YOE = year of expenditure
Page 182 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-8 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-2.Collier MPO 2050 LRTP SIS Cost Feasible Plan Projects ($in millions)
SIS 2035-2050 Long Range Cost
Feasible Plan
Map
ID
Facility
(FPID No.)
Limits
From Limits To Description
TIP
Funding
2026–
2030
TIP: 2026-2030
SIS Approved Second Year
Plan: 2031–2034b
Plan Period 3:
2035–2040
Plan Period 4:
2041–2050 Total
Cost
2031–
2050
PRE-
ENG ROW CST PRE-
ENG ROW CST PRE-
ENG
ROW/
CST
PRE-
ENG
ROW/
CST
28a SR 29
(417540-5)CR 846 North of New
Market Road
New Road
Construction 104.81 1.08 21.42 82.31 0.00
29a SR 29
(417540-6)
North of
New
Market
Road
SR 82
Add Lanes and
Reconstruct
(two lanes to
four lanes)
68.32 0.93 1.76 65.62 0.00
30a SR 82
(430848-1)
Hendry
County
Line
Gator Slough
Lane
Add Lanes and
Reconstruct
(two lanes to
four lanes)
7.42 0.41 7.01 0.00
17a
I-75
(445296-1,
445296-2)
at Pine
Ridge Road
Modify
Interchange 1.18 0.03 1.15 0.00
16a I-75
(425843-2)at SR 951 Modify
Interchange 2.84 0.00 2.84 0.00
101 I-75
(425843-3)
Immokalee
Road
Bonita Beach
Road
Add Lanes and
Reconstruct 120.95 7.14 7.60 106.22 TBD TBD
102 I-75
(452544-4)
at
Immokalee
Road
Add Lanes and
Reconstruct 71.54 8.44 7.60 55.51 TBD TBD
Page 183 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-9 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-2.Collier MPO 2050 LRTP SIS Cost Feasible Plan Projects ($in millions)
SIS 2035-2050 Long Range Cost
Feasible Plan
Map
ID
Facility
(FPID No.)
Limits
From Limits To Description
TIP
Funding
2026–
2030
TIP: 2026-2030
SIS Approved Second Year
Plan: 2031–2034b
Plan Period 3:
2035–2040
Plan Period 4:
2041–2050 Total
Cost
2031–
2050
PRE-
ENG ROW CST PRE-
ENG ROW CST PRE-
ENG
ROW/
CST
PRE-
ENG
ROW/
CST
103 I-75
(452544-5)
Immokalee
Road
Pine Ridge
Road
Add Lanes and
Reconstruct 30.46 5.12 11.60 13.73 TBD TBD
104 I-75
(452544-6)
Pine Ridge
Road
Golden Gate
Boulevard
Add Lanes and
Reconstruct 13.90 4.20 9.60 0.10 TBD TBD
18a I-75 (3693)
at
Immokalee
Road
Modify
Interchange 0.00 2.20 74.93 77.13
Totals
421.43 27.36 59.59 334.48 TBD 2.20 74.93
77.13
421.43 TBD 77.13
aProject is included in E+C Network and are not shown on Figure 6-1 as these projects are included in the Collier MPO FY 2026–2030 TIP; refer to Figure 4-2 in Chapter 4
bFiscal years consolidated to account for work program overlap
Page 184 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-10 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Figure 6-1.Collier MPO 2050 LRTP SIS Cost Feasible Plan Projects (FY2031–FY2050)
Page 185 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-11 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-3.Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Cost Feasible Plan Projects – FDOT Other Roads Projects and Local Roadway Projects ($ in millions)
Map
ID Facility Limits From Limits To Description
Total Project
Cost (PDC
2024 $)
Total
TIP
Funding
2026-
2030
(YOE)
Plan Period 1 TIP:
2026–2030
Plan Period 2:
2031–2035
Plan Period 3:
2036–2040
Plan Period 4:
2041–2050
Funding
Source
Total
YOE
Costs
2031-
2050
(YOE $
without
SIS)
SHS
(Non-
SIS)SU
Other
Roads County
PRE-
ENG ROW CST PRE-
ENG ROW CST PRE-
ENG ROW CST PRE-
ENG ROW CST
PLAN PERIOD 2 CONSTRUCTION FUNDED PROJECTS
75 Bridge at 13th
Street NW
North End at
Vanderbilt
Beach Road
Ext
New Bridge
over Canal $6.66 $0*$8.58
County/
Other
Roads
$8.58 $7.29 $1.29
12 Collier Blvd.
(SR 951)
South of
Manatee Rd.
North of
Tower Road
Widen from
four to six lanes $14.80 $0 $6.95 $14.68 SHS/SU $21.64 $19.42 $2.21
47 Logan Blvd. Green Blvd.Pine Ridge
Road
Widen from
four to six lanes $20.96 $0*$23.46 County $23.46 $23.46
61 Santa Barbara
Blvd.
Painted Leaf
Lane
Green
Boulevard
Widen from
four to six lanes $35.78 $0*$40.26 County $40.26 $40.26
81
Bridge at
Wilson Blvd.,
South End
New Bridge
over Canal $8.50 $0*$8.58 County $8.58 $8.58
100 Immokalee
Road
Camp Keais
Road
Roundabout/
Intersection
Improvement
$20.00 $0 $25.80 County $25.80 $25.80
79 Bridge at 62nd
Avenue NE
West of 40th
Street NE
New Bridge
over Canal $6.66 $0*$8.58 County $8.58 $8.58
PLAN PERIOD 3 CONSTRUCTION FUNDED PROJECTS
56 Pine Ridge
Road Logan Blvd. Collier Blvd.Widen from
four to six lanes $36.55 $0 $8.53 $32.57 County $41.10 $41.10
74 Wilson Blvd Golden Gate
Blvd.
Immokalee
Rd.
Widen from two
to four lanes $88.37 $0*$137.86 County $137.86 $137.86
21 Golden Gate
Parkway
Livingston
Road
Overpass (GGP
over Livingston)$62.61 $0*$5.22 $43.41 $24.21
County/
Other
Roads
$72.85 $7.58 $65.27
PLAN PERIOD 4 CONSTRUCTION FUNDED PROJECTS
94 Airport Pulling
Road
Orange
Blossom Dr.
Intersection
Innovation/
Improvement
$5.22 $0 $1.54 $0.65 $7.92 County $10.12 $10.12
106 Bridge at 16th
Street SE
South of
Golden Gate
Blvd
New Bridge
over Canal.$6.66 $0 $12.91 County $12.91 $12.91
Total $40.95 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $12.50 $5.22 $165.63 $12.50 $0.00 $185.29 $26.54 $0.65 $53.40 $461.75 $19.42 $52.21 $14.87 $375.24
a Project partially funded through Collier County Capital Improvement Plan
Page 186 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-12 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Figure 6-2.FDOT Other Roads and Local Roadway Projects Cost Feasible Plan Projects Map – Plan Period 2 (FY2031–
FY2035)
Page 187 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-13 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Figure 6-3.FDOT Other Roads and Local Roadway Projects Cost Feasible Plan Projects Map – Plan Period 3 (FY2036–
FY2040)
Page 188 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-14 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Figure 6-4.FDOT Other Roads and Local Roadway Projects Cost Feasible Plan Projects Map – Plan Period 4 (FY2041–
FY2050)
Page 189 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-15 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-4.Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Cost Feasible Plan Projects –Partially Funded Projects (FY2031–FY2050)($in millions)
Map
ID Facility
Limits
From Limits To Description
Total
Project
Cost
(PDC
2024 $)
TIP
Funding
2026-
2030
Plan Period 1 TIP:
2026-2030
Plan Period 2: 2031-
2035
Plan Period 3: 2036-
2040 Plan Period 4: 2041-2050
Total
YOE
Costs
SHS
(non-SIS)SU
Other
Roads County
Funding
Source
PRE-
ENG ROW CST PRE-
ENG ROW CST PRE-
ENG ROW CST PRE-
ENG ROW CST
29 I-75
(SR 93)
Vicinity of
Everglades
Blvd.
New Partial
Interchange;
EB Off-
Ramp and
WB On-
Ramp
$62.61 $8.38 $4.77 $6.32 $26.14 $45.61 $45.61 SU
67
US 41
(SR 90)
(Tamiami
Trail East)
Greenway
Rd.
6 L Farm
Rd.
Widen from
two to four
lanes
$58.58 $10.13 $25.38 $35.51 $30.42 $5.09 SHS/
SU
16 Everglades
Blvd.
I-75
(SR-93)
Golden
Gate Blvd.
Widen from
two to four
lanes
$147.31 $8.19 $23.41 $25.86 $123.11 $180.56 $180.56 County
18 Everglades
Blvd.
Oil Well
Rd.
Immokalee
Rd.
Widen from
two to four
lanes
$141.51 $37.61 $23.40 $15.43 $76.44 $15.43 $61.01
Other
Roads/
County
37
Immokalee
Rd.
(CR 846)
Camp
Keais Rd.
Carver
Street
Widen from
two to four
lanes
$63.69 $16.37 $11.59 $27.97 $27.97 County
Total $473.69 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $26.69 $0.00 $0.00 $4.77 $6.32 $0.00 $77.39 $60.85 $190.07 $366.09 $30.42 $50.70 $15.43 $269.54
Page 190 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-16 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Figure 6-5.FDOT Other Roads and Local Roadway Projects Cost Feasible Plan Projects Map – Partially Funded (FY2031–
FY2050)
Page 191 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-17 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Figure 6-6 presents the total costs by project phase for
FDOT’s SIS cost feasible projects within the County.
Figures 6-7 and 6-8 present the total costs by project
phase and funding source, respectively, for cost feasible
projects funded through FY2050.
Figure 6-6.Total Costs by Project Phase for FDOT’s SIS
Funded Projects 2031–2050 (YOE $ in millions)
Figure 6-7.Total Costs by Project Phase for FDOT Other
Roads and Local Roads Funded Projects (2031–2050)
(YOE $ in millions)
Figure 6-8.Total Costs by Funding Source 2031–2050
(YOE $ in millions)
6.1.2 Funding of Other Roadway Needs
6.1.2.1 East of CR 951 Bridges
In November 2018 the citizens of Collier County ap-
proved a 1% infrastructure surtax that was subsequently
sunset on December 31, 2023. During the period it was
active, the tax generated more than $520 million in
revenues. The BCC approved the award of a $5.4 million
contract funded by the surtax for the design of the
following four bridges:
10th Avenue SE (between Everglades Boulevard and
Desoto Boulevard)
13th Street NW (north of Golden Gate Boulevard)
$0.00
$20.00
$40.00
$60.00
$80.00
PRE-ENG ROW/CST
$2.20
$74.93
Cost (in millions $)Phase
$0.00
$100.00
$200.00
$300.00
$400.00
$500.00
$600.00
PRE-ENG ROW CST
$160.40
$73.05
$594.39
Cost (millions $)Phase
$102.72
$30.30
$49.84
$77.13
$644.78
SU Funds Other Roads SHS (Non-SIS)SIS County
Page 192 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-18 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
62nd Avenue NE (between Everglades Boulevard and
40th Street NE)
Wilson Boulevard S (south of Golden Gate Boulevard)
The16th Street NE and 47th Avenue NE bridge projects
are also included in County priorities validated for surtax
funding. However, to receive partial federal funding for
the bridges, FDOT, in coordination with the Collier County
Transportation Services Management Department, per-
formed a PD&E study (431895-3) for the 16th Street NE
and 47th Avenue NE bridge projects. The study was
approved as a Type 2 Categorical Exclusion, and Location
and Design Acceptance was approved on February 15,
2017. The 16th Street NE bridge project is a committed
project in the 2028 E+C (refer to Project no. 8 in
Table 4-1), and the 47th Avenue NE bridge project is
funded for construction in the FY2026–FY 2031 TIP
(refer to Bridge Projects in Table 6-1).
6.1.2.2 Congestion Management, ITS, and
Safety Projects
Congestion management and ITS projects are generally
short-term and immediate action projects. Therefore,
their role in the LRTP process is modest and is more
thoroughly addressed in the CMP. The current TIP
includes several traffic equipment improvements that
address safety, active roadway management, and bicycle
and pedestrian facilities. Refer to Table 6-1 for
congestion management and ITS projects funded for
construction in the 2026–2030 TIP.
Through the SAP, the Collier MPO identified traffic safety
solutions or countermeasures to reduce the risk of
crashes or address existing crash problems.Table 6-5
summarizes recommended infrastructure improvements
(or countermeasures) available to improve roadway
safety in Collier County, especially along the HIN.
As noted in Chapter 4, the Collier MPO Board approved
(in February 2025) the development of a Joint
Lee/Collier Regional CMP Element for incorporation into
both the Collier MPO and Lee County MPO LRTPs. The
Regional CMP Element will address regional roadways
within the Bonita Springs-Estero Urban Area that is part of
the Lee County Metropolitan Planning Area including
Alico Road on the north and extending south to include
Immokalee Road in Collier County (refer to Figure 4-10).
Upon approval by the MPO Board, the updated Collier
MPO CMP and Joint Regional Element and updated
Regional Roadway Network map will be incorporated by
reference in the 2050 LRTP to better inform the needs
and ultimately the Roadway Cost Feasible Plan.
6.1.2.3 Other Considerations for SU Box and
TA Funds
Federal Surface Transportation Block Grants fund both
Transportation Alternative Program projects as well as
the Suballocated Urbanized Area Funds or “SU Box”
projects. SU Box funds are allocated to urbanized areas
with populations of more than 200,000 and are managed
by MPOs. The Transportation Alternatives Program, which
provides Transportation Alternative (TA) funds, was
incorporated into the Surface Transportation Block Grants
as a set-aside funding under 23 U.S.C. 133(h) and are
solely to fund non-automobile-based projects.
Page 193 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-19 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
The Collier MPO allocates its SU Box funds to planning,
congestion management, bicycle/pedestrian, safety, and
occasionally transit capital projects. SU Box funds are
used to supplement the MPO’s federal Planning funds to
cover costs associated with updating the LRTP every
5 years. The MPO may also use SU Box funds to update
the BPMP, CMP, SAP, freight studies, and other plans and
studies that are integral to updating the LRTP. Safety
projects submitted for SU Box funding will be vetted by
the Collier MPO CMC, BPAC, TAC, and CAC before going
to the MPO Board for approval. The MPO has integrated
the SAP HIN into its project prioritization process to target
investments toward corridors with the highest incidences
of severe and fatal crashes. The MPO may also choose to
use SU Box funds to supplement FDOT funding on safety
projects that address the MPO’s and FDOT’s shared
Target Zero Safety Performance Measures. Regarding TA
funds, the Collier MPO is allocating its $29.8 million in TA
funds for future bicycle-pedestrian improvement
priorities identified in the Collier MPO BPMP.Table 6-6
summarizes planned SU Box and TA funding by allocation
type and plan period (MPO planning, LRTP roadway
projects, congestion management and safety projects,
and bicycle and pedestrian projects).Figure 6-9 presents
a summary of the SU Box funds allocated through 2050.
To clearly demonstrate the fiscal constraint of this 2050
Cost Feasible Plan,Tables 6-7 and 6-8 provide details on
the anticipated 2050 LRTP (FY2031–FY2050) revenue
dollars and costs, respectively. Additionally,Table 6-9
summarizes the total revenue and costs for the 2050
LRTP projects with remaining balances.Table 6-10
summarizes the total revenue and costs for the Collier
MPO TIP (FY2026–FY2031) projects with the remaining
balance to also demonstrate the TIP’s fiscal constraint.
Page 194 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-20 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-5.Potential Infrastructure Improvements (Countermeasures)to Improve Roadway Safety in Collier County
Infrastructure/
Countermeasure Type
Where it Works
Signalized
Intersections
Unsignalized
Intersections
Major
Roads Local Roads Rural Roads
Drainage/
Stormwater
Capture
Constrained
ROW
Near Parks/
Schools/Safety
Zones
Access Management X X X X X X
ADA-Compliant
Sidewalks and Curb
Ramps
X X X X X X X
Bike Boulevard/
Neighborhood Greenway X X X X
Bike Lanes X X X X X
Crosswalk Visibility
Enhancements X X X X X X
Dedicated Left & Right
Turn Lanes X X X X
High Friction Surface
Treatment X X X X
Lane Repurposing
(Roadway
Reconfiguration)
X X X X X
Medians & Pedestrian
Refuge Islands X X X X X X
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon
(HAWK)X X X X X
Rectangular Rapid
Flashing Beacon X X X X X
Page 195 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-21 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-5.Potential Infrastructure Improvements (Countermeasures)to Improve Roadway Safety in Collier County
Infrastructure/
Countermeasure Type
Where it Works
Signalized
Intersections
Unsignalized
Intersections
Major
Roads Local Roads Rural Roads
Drainage/
Stormwater
Capture
Constrained
ROW
Near Parks/
Schools/Safety
Zones
Roundabout X X X X X X
Rumble Strips X X
Street Lighting X X X X X X X
Turning Movement
Restrictions X X X
Wider Edge Lanes X X X X
Road Safety Audits X X X X X X X
Road User Education
Programs
Speed Limit Reduction X X X X
Coordinated Signal
Timing X X X
Leading Pedestrian
Intervals X X X X X
High-Visibility Speed
Enforcement Programs X X X X X X X
Source: Collier MPO 2025 SS4A Comprehensive SAP (Collier MPO 2025c)
Page 196 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-22 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-6.SU Box Fund and TA Fund Allocation by Planning Period ($ in millions)
Allocation Type Fund
Plan Period 2:
2031-2035
Plan Period 3:
2036-2040
Plan Period 4:
2041-2050
Total Cost
2031-2050
MPO Planning SU Box $5 $5 $10 $20
LRTP Roadway Projects SU Box $13.3 $13.3 $26.5 $53.1
Congestion Management & Safety SU Box $7.5 $7.5 $15 $30
Total SU
Box Funds $25.8 $25.8 $51.5 $103.1
Bicycle & Pedestrian TA $7.5 $7.5 $15 $30
Figure 6-9.SU Box Funding Allocation Through FY 2031–FY 2050 ($ in millions)
$20
(19%)
$53.10
(52%)
$30
(29%)MPO Planning
LRTP Roadway Projects
Congestion Management
& Safety
Page 197 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-23 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-7.Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Revenue Sources (FY 2031–FY 2050)
Federal Sources FY2031–FY2035 FY2036–FY2040 FY2041–FY2050 Total
SU Funds $25,768,807 $25,809,569 $51,500,009 $103,078,385
TA Funds $7,475,933 $7,457,228 $14,833,494 $29,766,655
Total $33,244,740 $33,266,797 $66,333,503 $132,845,040
State Sources FY2031–FY2035 FY2036–FY2040 FY2041–FY2050 Total
SIS1 $0 $77,128,000 $0 $77,128,000
SHS $11,990,000 $12,470,000 $25,380,000 $49,840,000
Other Roads $7,290,000 $7,580,000 $15,430,000 $30,300,000
Total $19,280,000 $97,178,000 $40,810,000 $157,268,000
Local Sources (County)FY2031–FY2035 FY2036–FY2040 FY2041–FY2050 Total
Traffic Impact Fees $100,000,000 $100,000,000 $200,000,000 $400,000,000
General Fund (Ad Valorem)$45,402,000 $45,402,000 $90,804,000 $181,608,000
Fuel Tax $119,798,351 $117,623,778 $226,154,670 $463,576,799
Total $265,200,351 $263,025,778 $516,958,670 $1,045,184,799
County Debt Repayments $100,000,000 $100,000,000 $200,000,000 $400,000,000
Revised Total $165,200,351 $163,025,778 $316,958,670 $645,184,799
Grand Total $217,725,091 $293,470,575 $424,102,173 $935,297,839
Revenue for Collier MPO LRTP
Projects (without SIS and TA
revenues)
$210,249,158 $208,885,347 $409,268,679 $828,403,184
a Based on FDOT's SIS Second Five‐Year Plan (FY2029/2030–FY2033/2034)
Page 198 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-24 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-8.Collier MPO 2050 LRTP Project Costs (FY2031–FY2050)
Federal Expenditures FY2031–FY2035 FY2036–FY2040 FY2041–FY2050 Total
SU Funds $25,768,807 $25,802,887 $51,144,168 $102,715,862
TA Funds a $7,475,933 $7,457,228 $14,833,494 $29,766,655
Total $33,244,740 $33,260,115 $65,977,662 $132,482,517
State Expenditures FY 2031 - FY 2035 FY 2036 - FY 2040 FY 2041 - FY 2050 Total
SIS b $0 $77,128,000 $0 $77,128,000
SHS $11,990,000 $12,470,000 $25,380,000 $49,840,000
Other Roads $7,290,000 $7,580,000 $15,430,000 $30,300,000
Total $19,280,000 $97,178,000 $40,810,000 $157,268,000
Local Expenditures (County)FY 2031 - FY 2035 FY 2036 - FY 2040 FY 2041 - FY 2050 Total
County $164,800,425 $163,025,778 $316,958,670 $644,784,873
Total $164,800,425 $163,025,778 $316,958,670 $644,784,873
Grand Total $217,325,165 $293,463,893 $423,746,332 $934,535,390
Cost of Collier MPO LRTP
Projects (without SIS and TA
project costs)
$209,849,232 $208,878,665 $408,912,838 $827,640,735
a TA funds set-aside to future bicycle-pedestrian improvement priorities identified in the Collier MPO Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan
b Based on FDOT's SIS Second Five‐Year Plan (FY 2029/2030 – FY 2033/2034)
Page 199 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-25 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-10.Total Revenue and Costs for Collier MPO’s
TIP (FY2026–FY2030)
Revenue Source Revenue/Costs Amount
TIP / Plan Period 1 (FY2026–FY2030)
Federal
Revenues $134,483,150
Costs $134,483,150
Balance $0
State
Revenues $464,986,605
Costs $464,986,605
Balance $0
Local
Revenues $52,158,516
Costs $52,158,516
Balance $0
Toll
Revenues $38,586,699
Costs $38,586,699
Balance $0
Table 6-9.Total Revenue and Costs for LRTP Projects
(FY2031–FY2050)
Revenue Source Revenue/Costs Amount
Plan Period 2 (FY2031–FY2035)
Federal
Revenues $33,244,740
Costs $33,244,740
Balance $0
State
Revenues $19,280,000
Costs $19,280,000
Balance $0
Local
Revenues $165,200,351
Costs $164,800,425
Balance $399,926
Plan Period 3 (FY2036–FY2040)
Federal
Revenues $33,266,797
Costs $33,260,115
Balance $6,682
State
Revenues $97,178,000
Costs $97,178,000
Balance $0
Local
Revenues $163,025,778
Costs $163,025,778
Balance $0
Plan Period 4 (FY2041–FY2050)
Federal
Revenues $66,333,503
Costs $65,977,662
Balance $355,841
State
Revenues $40,810,000
Costs $40,810,000
Balance $0
Local
Revenues $316,958,670
Costs $316,958,670
Balance $0
Page 200 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-26 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
6.1.2.4 Maintenance and Other State
Operations
Maintenance funding of the state roadways within the
County and its associated municipalities is included in
Chapter 5 in Table 5-2 (Non-Capacity Programs –
Resurfacing, Bridge, and Operations and Maintenance (of
state-maintained facilities). FDOT projects $1.055 billion
in available revenues between 2031-2050 (YOE). It is
anticipated that operations and maintenance costs during
these planning periods will align with the projected
revenues presented in Table 6-11.
Table 6-11.Anticipated Operations and Maintenance
Costs of State-Maintained Roadway Infrastructure ($ in
millions)
Jurisdiction Funding
Source
2031–
2035
2036–
2040
2041–
2050
Total
2031–
2050
Federal &
State
Non-Capacity
Programs -
Resurfacing,
Bridge, and
Operations and
Maintenance
$260 $265 $530 $1,055
As noted in the FDOT’s 2050 Revenue Forecast Handbook
(FDOT 2023h), FDOT has included sufficient funding to
meet the following statewide objectives and policies:
Safety: includes the FHWA engineering safety
program and the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration behavioral safety program
Resurfacing Program:includes resurfacing of all
pavements on the SHS including Florida’s Interstate,
Turnpike, and other arterial highways
Bridge Program: includes repair and replacement of
bridges in the Bridge Work Plan in accordance with
program objectives
Operations and Maintenance Program: includes
activities that support and maintain the transportation
infrastructure once it is constructed and operations
Product Support:includes preliminary engineering,
construction engineering and inspection, ROW
support, environmental mitigation, materials, applied
research, and planning and environment
Administration: includes staff, equipment, and
materials required to develop and implement the
budget, personnel, executive direction, reprographics,
and contract functions
Maintenance of the County and its associated munici-
palities’ roadways is funded primarily through fuel taxes
and General Fund revenues. Maintenance funding pri-
marily addresses routine maintenance operations that are
preventive or corrective in nature and that address safety
concerns. In addition to maintenance funding, other state
operational improvements, such as installing wildlife
crossings, wildlife detection systems, and other ITS
improvements, may be funded through the MPO’s TIP
without specific listing of the projects in the LRTP Cost
Feasible Plan.
Page 201 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-27 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
6.1.3 ETDM Input and Review
In addition to the process outlined in the Florida Statutes
and implemented by the MPO and its partner agencies,
the FDOT Efficient Transportation Decision Making
(ETDM) process is used to seek input on individual, quali-
fying, long-range transportation projects allowing for
specific commentary. This ensures that mitigation oppor-
tunities are identified, considered, and available as the
LRTP is developed and projects are advanced. The ETDM
screening process was applied to qualifying projects
identified in the 2050 LRTP Cost Feasible Plan, which
further provided opportunities to engage on any socio-
cultural impacts as well. The projects were added to the
Environmental Screening Tool through coordination with
the FDOT District One ETDM Coordinator in October 2025
and include the following projects.
Everglades Boulevard widening from I-75 to Golden
Gate Boulevard
Everglades Boulevard widening from Oil Well Road to
Immokalee Road
Golden Gate Parkway Overpass at Livingston Road
Immokalee Road widening from Camp Keais Road to
Carver Street
Logan Boulevard widening from Green Boulevard to
Pine Ridge Road
Pine Ridge Road widening from Logan Boulevard to
Collier Boulevard
Santa Barbara Boulevard widening from Painted Leaf
Lane to Green Boulevard
US 41 from Greenway Road to 6 L Farm Road (within
limits of an existing ETDM Screen – ID 3254-1)
New bridge over a canal on 13th Street NW at the
north end of Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension
New bridge over a canal on 62nd Avenue NE west of
40th Street NE
New bridge over a canal on 16th Street SE south of
Golden Gate Boulevard
6.1.4 Unfunded Roadway Needs
While the projects included in the roadway Cost Feasible
Plan aim to address the congestion, safety, and capacity
issues forecasted through 2050, financial resources are
limited. Therefore, several projects in the 2050 Roadway
Needs Plan remain unfunded in this Cost Feasible Plan.
Table 6-12 presents a comparison of total costs for
unfunded roadway needs versus cost feasible projects.
Table 6-12.Summary of Funded vs. Unfunded Roadway
Projects
Roadway (SIS not included)2050 Costs
Unfunded Roadways Needs (YOE)$7,697,081,547
Cost Feasible Roadway Projects (YOE)$827,640,735
Given the total revenue estimated through 2050, ap-
proximately 12% of the identified roadway needs can be
funded.Table 6‐13 summarizes projects included in the
Roadway Needs Plan that remain unfunded in this 2050
LRTP update.
Page 202 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-28 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
6.2 Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects
The BPMP, noted in Chapter 4, is a systems plan that
focuses on identifying the needs and a policy framework
for prioritization and implementation of bicycle and
pedestrian projects. Further, it provides flexibility in
bringing projects forward for funding and offers design
guidelines based on best practices that implementing
agencies may use as guidance. Therefore, implementation
of these projects is more thoroughly addressed through
individual agencies and the MPO bicycle and pedestrian
advisory process.
The BPMP does not provide project costs for the bicycle
and pedestrian projects summarized in Chapter 4 and
Appendix E because of the number of unknown factors.
The MPO’s allocation of federal TA funds and the state-
wide SUN Trail program will be used to fund standalone
bicycle/pedestrian projects that meet the eligibility re-
quirements. SU Box funds may be used, but are prioritized
for roadway improvements, congestion management,
safety projects, and planning.
Approximately $30 million in TA funding is dedicated for
future pedestrian and bicycle projects identified in the
Collier MPO BPMP:
Planning Period 2 (2031 to 2035): $7.5 million
Planning Period 3 (2036 to 2040): $7.5 million
Planning Period 4 (2041 to 2050): $15.0 million
The MPO Board establishes policy by which it allocates SU
Box funds (including TA) for congestion management,
safety, and bicycle and pedestrian projects. MPO staff
issue a Call for Projects based on the MPO Board’s estab-
lished allocation policy and schedule. It is anticipated that
this process will be continued throughout the period of
the 2050 LRTP, with a biannual Call for Projects issued by
the MPO, vetted by the BPAC, CMC, TAC, and CAC, and
approved by the MPO Board for updating priorities for
inclusion in the TIP by FDOT.
6.3 Transit Cost Feasible Projects
Similar to the development of roadway cost feasible
projects, the cost feasible transit projects were developed
by estimating the costs associated with each project in the
transit needs.
6.3.1 Transit Cost Assumptions
In the CAT FY2026-2035 TDP, cost assumptions were
made to forecast transit costs for 2026 through 2050.
Costs include annual service and technology/capital
improvements that are programmed for implementation
within the planning period. The following subsections
summarize assumptions for capital and operating costs
noted in the TDP.
Page 203 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-29 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-13.2050 LRTP Unfunded Roadway Needs Projects
Map ID Project From To Project Description
1 Benfield Road City Gate Boulevard North Hacienda Lakes Parkway New two-lane roadway (four-lane footprint)
2 Benfield Road Hacienda Lakes Parkway US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami Trail East)New two-lane roadway (four-lane footprint)
3 Big Cypress Parkway 16th Street Golden Gate Boulevard New two-lane roadway (six-lane footprint)
4 Big Cypress Parkway Golden Gate Boulevard Vanderbilt Beach Road Ext.New two-lane roadway
5 Big Cypress Parkway Vanderbilt Beach Road Ext.Oil Well Road New two-lane roadway
6 Big Cypress Parkway Oil Well Road Immokalee Road New two-lane roadway
7 Camp Keais Road Oil Well Road Pope John Paul II Boulevard Widen from two to four lanes
8 Camp Keais Road Pope John Paul II Boulevard Immokalee Road Widen from two to four lanes
9 Camp Keais Road Extension Camp Keais Road SR 29 New two-lane roadway (four-lane footprint)
10 City Gate Boulevard Extension Landfill Boulevard Wilson Boulevard Ext.New four-lane roadway
11 Collier Boulevard (SR 951)Pine Ridge Road Golden Gate Boulevard Capacity Improvement or Parallel Facility
13 Collier Boulevard Extension Collier Blvd (CR 951) Northern Terminus Lee/Collier County Line/Logan Boulevard New two-lane roadway
14 Corkscrew Road SR 82 Lee County Line Widen from two to four lanes
15 Davis Boulevard (SR 84)Airport Pulling Road Santa Barbara Boulevard Widen from four to six lanes
17 Everglades Boulevard Golden Gate Boulevard Vanderbilt Beach Road Ext.Widen from two to four lanes
19 Golden Gate Boulevard Everglades Boulevard Desoto Boulevard Widen from two to four lanes
20 Golden Gate Boulevard Extension Desoto Boulevard Big Cypress Parkway New four-lane roadway
22 Golden Gate Parkway Livingston Road I-75 SB Ramps Capacity Improvement or Parallel Facility
23 Golden Gate Parkway Santa Barbara Boulevard Sunshine Boulevard Capacity Improvement or Parallel Facility
24 Green Boulevard Santa Barbara Boulevard/Logan Boulevard Sunshine Boulevard Widen from two to four lanes (Future Study Area)
25 Green Boulevard Extension CR 951 23rd Street SW New four-lane roadway (Future Study Area)
26 Green Boulevard Extension 23rd Street SW Wilson Boulevard Ext.New two-lane roadway (Future Study Area)
27 Green Boulevard Extension Wilson Boulevard Ext Everglades Boulevard New two-lane roadway (Future Study Area)
Page 204 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-30 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-13.2050 LRTP Unfunded Roadway Needs Projects
Map ID Project From To Project Description
28 Green Boulevard Extension Everglades Boulevard Big Cypress Parkway New two-lane Roadway (Future Study Area)
30 I-75 (SR 93)Vanderbilt Beach Road New Partial Interchange, NB On-Ramp and SB Off-
Ramp
31 I-75 (SR-93)Collier Boulevard (CR 951)SR 29 Widen from four to six lanes
33 Immokalee Road Strand Boulevard Northbrooke Road Capacity Improvement or Parallel Facility
34 Immokalee Road Logan Boulevard Rose Boulevard Capacity Improvement or Parallel Facility
35 Immokalee Road Collier Boulevard Bellaire Bay Drive Capacity Improvement or Parallel Facility
36 Immokalee Road Bellaire Bay Drive Wildwood Boulevard Capacity Improvement or Parallel Facility
38 Immokalee Road (CR 846)SR 29 Airpark Boulevard
Widen from two to four lanes with sidewalks, bike
lanes, and curb & gutter (includes milling &
resurfacing of existing pavement)
39 Immokalee Road Collier Boulevard (CR 951)Overpass (Immokalee Rd. over Collier Blvd.)
41 Keane Avenue Inez Road Wilson Boulevard Ext New two-lane roadway
42 Little League Road Extension SR-82 Westclox Street New two-lane roadway (four-lane footprint)
43 Little League Road Extension Lake Trafford Road Immokalee Road New two-lane roadway (four-lane footprint)
45 Livingston Road Entrada Avenue Learning Lane Capacity Improvement or Parallel Facility
46 Livingston Road Veterans Memorial Boulevard Terry Street (Lee County Line)Widen from four to six lanes
48 Logan Boulevard Vanderbilt Beach Road Immokalee Road Widen from two to four lanes
49 Logan Boulevard Pine Ridge Road Vanderbilt Beach Road Widen from two to four lanes
50 Oil Well Road/CR 858 Ave Maria Entrance Camp Keais Road Widen from two to six lanes
51 Oil Well Road/CR 858 Camp Keais Road SR 29 Widen from two to four lanes (six-lane footprint)
52 Old US 41 US 41 (SR 45)Lee/Collier County Line Widen from two to four lanes
53 Orange Blossom Drive Airport Pulling Road Livingston Road Widen from two to four lanes
57 Randall Boulevard Immokalee Road Major Intersection Improvement
Page 205 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-31 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-13.2050 LRTP Unfunded Roadway Needs Projects
Map ID Project From To Project Description
58 Randall Boulevard 8th Street NE Everglades Boulevard Widen from two to six lanes
59 Randall Boulevard Everglades Boulevard Big Cypress Parkway Widen existing portion from two to four lanes and
extend four-lane roadway
62 SR 29/North Main Street North 9th Street Immokalee Drive Widen from two to four lanes
63 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami Trail)Immokalee Road Imperial Golf Course Boulevard Capacity Improvement or Parallel Facility
64 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami Trail)10th Street South Goodlette-Frank Road Capacity Improvement or Parallel Facility
65 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami Trail)Goodlette-Frank Road Riverpoint Drive Capacity Improvement or Parallel Facility
66 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami Trail)Airport Pulling Road Rattlesnake Hammock Road Capacity Improvement or Parallel Facility
68 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami Trail East)Collier Boulevard (SR 951)Overpass (US 41 over Collier Blvd.)
69 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami Trail East)Immokalee Road Overpass (US 41 over Immokalee Rd.)
70 Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Everglades Blvd Big Cypress Parkway New two-lane roadway in a four-lane footprint
71 Vanderbilt Drive 111th Avenue N/Bluebill Ave.Woods Edge Parkway Widen from two to four lanes
72 Westclox Street Extension Little League Road West of Carson Road New two-lane roadway
73 Wilson Boulevard Extension City Gate Boulevard Extension Golden Gate Boulevard New four-lane roadway
76 Bridge at 18th Avenue NE Between Wilson Boulevard and 8th Street NE New Bridge over Canal
77 Bridge at 18th Avenue NE Between 8th Street NE and 16th Street NE New Bridge over Canal
78 Bridge at 47th Avenue NE West of Everglades Boulevard New Bridge over Canal
80 Bridge at Wilson Boulevard South of 33rd Avenue NE New Bridge over Canal
83 Bridge at 23rd Street SW South of Golden Gate Boulevard New Bridge over Canal
84 Golden Gate Parkway (Intersection)Goodlette-Frank Road Major Intersection Improvement
85 Pine Ridge Road (Intersection)Airport Pulling Road Minor intersection improvements
86 Immokalee Road (Intersection)Logan Boulevard Major Intersection Innovation/Improvements
87 Vanderbilt Beach Road (Intersection)Livingston Road Minor intersection improvements
89 Collier Boulevard (Intersection)Pine Ridge Road Major Intersection Improvement
Page 206 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-32 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-13.2050 LRTP Unfunded Roadway Needs Projects
Map ID Project From To Project Description
90 Pine Ridge Road (Intersection)Goodlette-Frank Road Minor intersection improvements
91 US 41 (SR 90) (Tamiami Trail E)
(Intersection)Pine Ridge Road Intersection Innovation/Improvements
93 Vanderbilt Beach Road (Intersection)Airport Pulling Road Intersection Innovation/Improvements
95 Airport Pulling Road (Intersection)Golden Gate Parkway Intersection Innovation/Improvements
96 Airport Pulling Road (Intersection)Radio Road Intersection Innovation/Improvements
97 Airport Pulling Road (Intersection)Davis Boulevard Intersection Innovation/Improvements
99 Immokalee Road Randall Boulevard west of Wilson Boulevard Widen from six to eight lanes
Page 207 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-33 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
6.3.1.1 Operating Cost Assumptions
Operating cost assumptions are based on a variety of
factors, including service performance data from CAT and
information from the recent TDP. These assumptions are
summarized as follows:
Annual operating costs for fixed-route and paratransit
services are based on the most recent adopted budget
(FY2025). These costs include operations and
maintenance costs of existing services and facilities,
such as administrative buildings, maintenance
facilities, and transit hubs.
An annual inflation rate of 2.28% was used for opera-
ting cost projections, based on the average Consumer
Price Index as used in the 2024 TDP Annual Progress
Report.
Annual operating costs for future service
enhancements are based on the projected annual
service hours and cost per revenue hour of $118 for
fixed route service.
6.3.1.2 Capital Cost Assumptions
Several assumptions were also developed to estimate the
costs for capital transit needs described in Chapter 4 and
are summarized as follows:
New vehicles planned to be purchased include those
necessary to replace vehicles within the existing fleet
that have reached the end of their useful life and
vehicles to implement the new service.
Assumed vehicle costs are $576,800.60 for fixed-
route bus, $158,653.28 for paratransit vehicles, and
$45,000 for support vehicles based on information
provided by CAT. Cost assumptions for fixed routes
vehicles were based on averaging the total net value
of 30- to 40-foot fixed route buses from 2024 pur-
chase orders, while the total net cost of paratransit
vehicles was based on the cost of one bus in 2024.
Between 2026 and 2035, it is estimated that 32
fixed-route buses, 8 support vehicles, and 68 para-
transit vehicles will need to be purchased.
The useful life for fixed-route buses is assumed to be
12 years, while the useful life of a paratransit vehicle
is assumed to be 5 years, reduced by 2 years from the
previous TDP.
An annual inflation rate of 2.28% was used for capital
cost projections, based on the average Consumer
Price Index as used in the 2024 TDP Annual Progress
Report.
Based on the funding availability and prioritized results in
the TDP, the transit cost feasible projects are summarized
in Table 6‐14.
Page 208 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-34 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
Table 6-14.2050 Transit Cost Feasible Summary
Funded Need
Plan Period 1: 2026–
2030
(YOE)
Plan Period 2:
2031–2035
(YOE)
Plan Period 3:
2036–2040
(YOE)
Plan Period 4:
2041–2050
(YOE)
Total Costs
2031–2050
(YOE)
Operating
Maintain Existing Fixed Route $49,589,477.58 $55,506,408.79 $62,129,338.07 $147,382,699.76 $265,018,446.63
Maintain Existing Paratransit $37,552,604.19 $42,033,316.37 $47,048,659.42 $111,608,439.11 $200,690,414.89
Total Operating Costs $87,142,081.78 $97,539,725.16 $109,177,997.48 $258,991,138.87 $ 465,708,861.52
Capital
Maintain Existing Fixed-Route
Service $9,301,801.89 $12,581,388.90 $9,164,279.35 $25,782,533.91 $47,528,202.17
Maintain Existing Paratransit
Service $5,791,361.66 $6,845,641.82 $7,255,843.05 $16,161,474.71 $30,262,959.58
Replacement of Support Vehicles $149,985.15 $164,276.35 $178,283.26 $645,250.53 $987,810.14
Bus Shelter Rehab $218,985.68 $245,114.67 $274,361.33 $650,837.68 $1,170,313.69
Safety & Security Program $523,325.79 $585,768.13 $655,660.97 $1,555,353.51 $2,796,782.62
Facilities Improvements $29,437,469.00
New Bus Shelters $2,635,955.39 $2,950,473.05 $3,302,518.43 $7,834,206.78 $14,087,198.26
I-75 Study $50,000.00 $50,000.00
Immokalee Road Corridor Study $75,000.00
MOD Demand/Operations
Requirements Pilot Projects $50,000.00 $50,000.00
Total Capital Costs $48,133,884.56 $23,472,662.92 $20,830,946.40 $52,629,657.13 $96,933,266.45
Note: Transit planning studies are funded through grants provided by the Federal Transit Administration and the Florida Department of Transportation. 49 U.S.C.
5303 establishes the FTA Section 5305(d) grant to support metropolitan transportation planning. These funds are apportioned to the MPOs in accordance with the
rules established in 49 U.S.C. 5305(d). In addition to Section 5305(d) funds, FTA Section 5307 grant funding may be used for planning purposes.
Page 209 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-35 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
6.4 Freight Network Projects
FDOT updated its Freight Mobility and Trade Plan in
October 2024 (FDOT 2024d). The FMTP is a compre-
hensive plan that identifies freight transportation facilities
critical to the state’s economic growth and guides multi-
modal freight investments in the state. The FMTP
identified freight hotspots as presented in Figure 6-10.
From a statewide perspective, Collier County overall has
relatively low freight activity, which is limited to the
northwestern portion of the County along I-75.
Figure 6-10.Freight Hotspot Locations
Source: FDOT FMTP (FDOT 2024d)
The FMTP Technical Memorandum 6, Project
Prioritization (FDOT 2024d) describes the methodology
and the freight project selection and prioritization
process. The projects listed in Table 6-2, 2050 SIS Cost
Feasible Projects, are part of the Regional Freight Mobility
Corridors within the Collier MPO boundary (refer to
Figure 4-4 in Chapter 4). Additionally, some of the
projects listed in Tables 6-3 and 6-4 are also located on
the Regional Mobility Corridors. Therefore, 17 projects in
the 2050 Cost Feasible Plan, will support Collier County’s
freight network.
6.5 Airport Transportation Projects
As noted in Chapter 4, two off-airport transportation
projects were identified in the roadway Needs Plan to
improve access to Naples Airport and Immokalee
Regional Airport. Project no. 38, Immokalee Road from
Airpark Boulevard to SR 29, includes widening Immokalee
Road from two to four lanes and will improve traffic
operations and access to the industrial warehouses within
the property of the Immokalee Regional Airport.
Project no. 96 in the roadway Needs Plan includes in-
novative intersection improvements at Radio Road and
Airport Pulling Road. This intersection provides access to
the entrance of the Naples Airport. While these projects
are not part of the Cost Feasible Plan, they will remain on
Needs Plan. Naples Airport estimates their development
costs for airport operations at $56.8 million for short-
term (2020–2024), $67.1 million for intermediate
(2025–2029), and $83 million for long-term (2030–
2039) expenses, for a total of $206.9 million (ESA 2021).
Page 210 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 6-36 Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan
6.6 Future Funding Opportunities
It’s important to recognize that the LRTP Cost Feasible
Plan is dynamic and subject to frequent changes. It is
updated every 5 years to reflect evolving priorities, con-
ditions, and funding realities. Therefore, the proposed
Cost Feasible Projects outlined in this chapter are not an
exhaustive list. As additional funding becomes available,
other roadway, bicycle/pedestrian, transit, freight, and air
transportation projects may be considered and incorpor-
ated into future updates.
Page 211 of 397
7
Implementation
Page 212 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 7-1 Chapter 7 Implementation
7.Implementation
The Collier MPO is responsible for implementing the
investments and strategies included in this LRTP. This
chapter describes how the MPO will implement the LRTP
investments in coordination with federal, state, and local
partners. Major planning partners for the Collier MPO
2050 LRTP update include the Collier MPO Board and
committees; Collier County, the cities of Naples, Marco
Island, and Everglades City; FDOT; MPO Adviser Network;
local tribal governments; and Lee County (through the
Lee County MPO Interlocal Agreement).
7.1 Implementation Framework
The LRTP reflects and guides Collier MPO’s commitment
to ensuring the priority projects, programs, and policies
are carried out successfully, while complying with trans-
portation planning and requirements as described in
federal authorizing legislation. As noted in Chapter 1, the
MPO carries out a Continuing,Cooperative, and
Comprehensive long-range planning process that
establishes a countywide vision for the transportation
system. As part of this process, FHWA and FTA jointly
issued a Planning Rule1 requiring MPOs to establish
targets for federally developed performance measures to
evaluate the regional transportation system presented in
their LRTPs. Performance-based planning ensures the
most efficient investment of transportation funds by
increasing accountability, providing transparency, and
1 The Final Rule modified 23 CFR Part 450 and 49 CFR Part 613.
linking investment decisions to key outcomes related to
the seven national goals outlined in Chapter 1.
Under this framework, the three FHWA performance
measures (PMs) rules and the FTA transit asset manage-
ment and transit safety rules established various perfor-
mance measures to assess roadway safety (PM1), pave-
ment and bridge condition (PM2), system performance
and freight movement (PM3), transit asset management,
and transit safety. The Planning Rule and the PM rules
also specify how MPOs should set targets, report perfor-
mance, and integrate performance management into
their LRTP and TIP.Table 7-1 presents the federal PMs
and the targets adopted by the Collier MPO Board.
7.2 System Performance Report
FHWA requires that MPOs prepare a System Performance
Report (SPR) every 5 years and include PMs required for
all MPOs across the country, which allows for planning
consistency. FDOT developed an SPR template for each
Florida MPO that evaluates the condition and perfor-
mance of the transportation system with respect to re-
quired performance targets, and reports on progress in
meeting the targets in comparison with baseline data and
previous reports. The SPR includes five categories of
system performance.
Page 213 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 7-2 Chapter 7 Implementation
Table 7-1.Collier MPO Adopted Performance Measures
and Targets
ULB = Useful Life Benchmark
VRM = Vehicle Revenue Miles
Measure Target
Safety (PM1)Fatalities 0
Serious Injuries 0
Fatality Rate 0
Injury Rate 0
Nonmotorized
Fatalities & Serious
Injuries
0
Pavement(PM2)Condition of NHS
Interstate
Pavements
≥60% in good condition in 2 & 4 years
≤5% in poor condition in 2 & 4 years
Condition of NHS
Non-Interstate
Pavement
≥40% in good condition in 2 & 4 years
≤5% in poor condition in 2 & 4 years
Bridge(PM2)NHS Bridge Deck
Area Condition
≥50% in good condition in 2 & 4 years
≤10% in poor condition in 2 years
≤5% in poor condition in 4 years
System Performance &Freight Reliability(PM3)% of Person-Miles
on the Interstate
that are reliable
≥75% in 2 & 4 years
% Person-Miles on
Non-Interstate NHS
that are reliable
≥50% in 2 years
≥60% in 4 years
Truck Travel Time
Reliability Index
≤1.75 in 2 years
≤2.0 in 4 years
Measure Target
Transit Asset ManagementTransit
Rolling
Stock
Over the road bus (30): ≤4% have met or
exceeded ULB
Cutaway bus (28): ≤4% have met or exceeded
ULB
Mini van (5) : ≤25% have met or exceeded ULB
Automobiles (1): ≤100% have met or exceeded
ULB
Transit
Facilities
≥25% of facilities <3.0 on FTA's Transit
Economic Requirements Model scale (1 [Poor]
to 5 [Excellent])Transit Safety PerformanceSafety Performance
Target Category
Motor Bus
(Fixed Route)
Demand Response
(Paratransit)
Total No. of Fatalities 0.0 0.0
Fatality Rate/100,000
(VRM)
0.0 0.0
Total No. of Injuries 3.67 3.0
Injury Rate/100,000
VRM
0.27 0.23
Total No. of Safety
Events
4 3
Safety Event
Rate/100,000 VRM
0.29 0.23
System Reliability
(mean distance
between major
mechanical failures in
miles)
13,234.98 64,510.32
Page 214 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 7-3 Chapter 7 Implementation
The following measures are focused largely on the
highway and major roadway network receiving the
majority of federal transportation funding:
Highway Safety
Bridge and Pavement
System Performance, Freight, Congestion Mitigation,
and Air Quality
Transit Asset Management
Transit Safety (planning only)
MPO partners and constituents can review current and
past SPRs by visiting the respective MPO website and by
attending public MPO meetings in which the reports are
reviewed and adopted.
The Collier MPO SPR is included in this 2050 LRTP update
as Appendix F. The SPR is comparable to the Collier MPO
Fiscal Year 2024 Annual Report, which also presents
ongoing improvements and monitoring.
7.2.1 Federal Planning Factor Consistency
The LRTP goals and objectives discussed in Chapter 3
incorporate the federal planning factors required for all
MPOs to address through planning.Table 7-2 illustrates
which 2050 LRTP goals meet the federal planning factor
requirements.
7.3 Planning Programs
The Collier MPO implements the LRTP through short- and
long-term transportation plans and through programs
and projects, which is done in partnership with the County
and associated municipalities that design, develop, and
deliver policies, programs, and infrastructure projects
identified in the LRTP.
As noted previously, this LRTP update incorporates other
plans by reference including the BPMP, TDP, CMP, TSPR,
and SAP. Each plan creates foundations for the LRTP by
containing in-depth analysis and public processes from
which the long-range planning builds a comprehensive
and coordinated regional, multimodal vision. The LRTP
reflects the needs and prioritized strategies identified in
these plans in the needs and cost feasible project lists.
Planning partners will look to these plans for implemen-
tation analysis and guidance.
Figure 7-1 presents the plans that are incorporated by
reference into the LRTP, their update cycle, and how they
ultimately inform the TIP and UPWP.Figure 7-1 also
presents a timeline of Collier MPO’s programs and plans
from the 2045 LRTP adoption to the 2050 LRTP update
and adoption.
Page 215 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 7-4 Chapter 7 Implementation
Table 7-1.LRTP Goals and Federal Planning Factors
Federal
Planning
Factors
Goal 1:
Ensure the
Security of the
Transportation
System for
Users
Goal 2:
Protect
Environmental
Resources
Goal 3:
Improve
System
Continuity and
Connectivity
while
Maintaining
Existing
Facilities
Goal 4:
Reduce
Roadway
Congestion
Goal 5:
Promote
Freight
Movement
Goal 6:
Increase the
Safety of the
Transportation
System for
Users
Goal 7:
Promote
Multimodal
Solutions
Goal 8:
Promote the
Integrated
Planning of
Transportation
and Land Use
Goal 9:
Promote
Sustainability and
Equal Access in
Transportation
Planning and Land
Use for Transit
Dependent
Communities
Goal 10:
Promote Agile,
Resilient, and
Quality
Transportation
Infrastructure in
Transportation
Decision-
Making
Goal 11:
Promote
Emerging
Mobility and its
Influential Role
on the
Multimodal
Transportation
System
Safety
Security
Accessibility &
Mobility
Multimodal
Connectivity
System
Preservation
Economic
Vitality
Environmental
Quality
System
Efficiency
Resiliency &
Reliability
Transit &
Tourism
Page 216 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 7-5 Chapter 7 Implementation
Figure 7-2.Collier MPO Plans and Programs Timeline
Page 217 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 7-6 Chapter 7 Implementation
7.3.1 Other Implementing Programs
Collier MPO provides six programs to implement
planning and development strategies identified in the
LRTP. These programs typically result in the plans that
are incorporated by reference into the LRTP, but may also
include funding grant programs, initiatives, data col-
lection, public information, and other activities and
resources for local and partner agencies. Each is
described briefly in the text that follows.
7.3.1.1 Traffic Safety
Collier MPO leads initiatives and planning processes to
continually improve motorized and nonmotorized trans-
portation safety on federal, state, and local facilities. The
MPO produced the SAP, which will support the MPO’s and
FDOT’s Target Zero goals, provide a framework to elimin-
ate fatalities and serious injuries on roadways, and im-
prove the safety, health, and wellbeing of residents and
visitors. The SAP replaces the Local Roads Safety Plan.
7.3.1.2 Bicycle and Pedestrian
In addition to developing the BPMP, the MPO also has
completed multiple walkable community studies as well
as the Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Study that analyzed
travel trends and crashes to better plan for future invest-
ments. Critical information gathered during the course of
these studies is shared with its planning partners.
7.3.1.3 Congestion Management
Collier MPO convenes the CMC to oversee implementation
of the CMP and related planning activities. The CMP along
with the TSPR inform multimodal traffic safety concerns
within the County and its municipalities. The MPO coor-
dinates with state partners to update data and modeling
tools to better understand traffic demand and safety
conditions.
7.3.1.4 Transit
Collier MPO works with the County to ensure that CAT
plans are coordinated with partner agencies’ plans and
comply with federal and state requirements that ensure
sustainable operations and maintains compliance with
state and federal funding program requirements. The
MPO also coordinates with CAT to produce transit-related
plans and studies, including comprehensive operational
analyses, transit impact analyses, Public Transit-Human
Service Transportation Plan (referenced as the Collier
MPO Transportation Disadvantaged Service Plan), a Park-
and-Ride Study, a Regional Service and Regional Fare
Study, a Zero Emission Vehicle Transition Plan, and the
TDP.
Page 218 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 7-7 Chapter 7 Implementation
7.3.1.5 Freight
Collier MPO works to enhance the integration and con-
nectivity of transportation systems and the movement of
goods and commodities through freight. The Collier MPO
staff participate in regional meetings with freight industry
representatives hosted by the FDOT District One Freight
Coordinator. The FDOT District One Freight Mobility &
Trade Plan (FDOT 2023a) notes that Collier County’s top
import commodity is furniture or fixture, while the top
export commodity is instruments, photo, and optical
equipment. Additionally, Collier County is the third
largest producer of vegetables in District One.
7.3.1.6 Aviation
As noted in Chapter 4, four public airports serve the
Collier MPO planning area. The Collier MPO coordinates
with airport authorities for off-airport transportation
needs. Further, the Naples and Collier County Airport
Authorities submit annual aviation project priorities to the
MPO via Joint Automated Capital Improvement Programs
for each airport within the Collier MPO’s planning area.
Page 219 of 397
8
References
Page 220 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 8-1 Chapter 8 References
8.References
ACUNE. n.d. “ACUNE Overview.” Accessed June 10, 2024.
https://aces.coastal.ufl.edu/ACUNE_public/
Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA).
n.d. “Airport Infrastructure Funding.” Accessed July 9,
2024.https://airportscouncil.org/advocacy/airport-
infrastructure-funding.
City of Everglades City. 2019.Everglades Town Trail
Master Plan. January.
City of Everglades City. 2020.Everglades City
Bike/Pedestrian Master Plan.August.
City of Everglades City. 2022.City of Everglades City 2045
Comprehensive Plan.Adopted July 5.
City of Marco Island. 2021.2040 Comprehensive Plan.
Adopted October 4.
City of Marco Island. 2024.2024 Marco Island Bike Path
Master Plan. Adopted March 18.
City of Marco Island. 2025.Marco Island Bike Path Master
Plan.
City of Marco Island. n.d. “Present Day Marco Island.”
Accessed July 9, 2024.
https://www.cityofmarcoisland.com/
community/page/present-day-marco-island.
City of Naples 2019.Naples Vision Assessment Data
Summary Report.May 15.
City of Naples. 2019.City of Naples Vision.Accessed July
9, 2024.
City of Naples. 2022.City of Naples 2022 Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan Update.
City of Naples. 2023.Adopted Budget City of Naples,
Florida Fiscal Year 2023-2024. Adopted October 1.
City of Naples. 2024.Critical Assets and Facilities
Adaptation Plan.August.
City of Naples. 2025.“Comprehensive Plan.” June 10.
https://library.municode.com/fl/naples/codes/
comprehensive_plan?nodeId=15468
City of Naples. n.d. “Resiliency and Sustainability.”
Accessed July 2, 2025.
https://www.naplesgov.com/naturalresources/
page/resiliency-and-sustainability
Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller. 2023. “Update
on the County Infrastructure Sales Surtax.”Accessed July
5, 2024.https://collierclerk.com/update-on-the-county-
infrastructure-sales-surtax/
Collier Area Transit (CAT) and Collier Metropolitan
Planning Organization (Collier MPO). 2020.Park & Ride
Study. November.
Collier Area Transit (CAT) and Collier Metropolitan
Planning Organization (Collier MPO). 2024.Regional
Transit and Regional Fare Study.March.
Page 221 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 8-2 Chapter 8 References
Collier Area Transit (CAT). n.d. “PTAC.” Accessed May 21,
2024.https://www.ridecat.com/inside-cat/ptac/
Collier County. 2005.Wilson Boulevard Extension Study.
Collier County Airport Authority. 2019.Immokalee
Regional Airport Layout Plan Update. August. Accessed
July 9, 2024.
https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/Home/ShowDocument?i
d=75385.
Collier County. 2017.Collier County Community Housing
Plan.October 24.
Collier County. 2019. Immokalee Area Master Plan.
Adopted December 10.
Collier County. 2021a.Comprehensive Emergency
Management Plan – 2021. March 16.
Collier County. 2021b.Immokalee Road Corridor
Congestion Study. Approved October 12.
Collier County. 2022.Collier Boulevard Bridge Location
Study Memorandum.May.
Collier County. 2023a. “Immokalee Regional Airport.”
Updated September 27.Accessed July 9, 2024.
https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/government/transportati
on-management-services/airport-authority/immokalee-
regional-airport
Collier County. 2023b. Coastal Urban & Inventory
Report/Capital Improvement Element Schedule Update
on Public Facilities. Prepared for Collier County Board of
County Commissioners. December 12.
Collier County. 2023c.Collier County Growth
Management Plan Capital Improvement Element.
Prepared by Collier County Planning and Zoning
Department Comprehensive Planning Section. Prepared
for Collier County Board of County Commissioners.
Amended November 14, 2023.
Collier County. 2023d.Collier County Growth
Management Plan Future Land Use Element. Prepared by
Collier County Planning and Zoning Department
Comprehensive Planning Section. Prepared for Collier
County Board of County Commissioners. Amended
November 14, 2023.
Collier County. 2023e.Collier County Growth
Management Plan Transportation Element. Prepared by
Collier County Planning and Zoning Department
Comprehensive Planning Section. Prepared for Collier
County Board of County Commissioners. Amended
November 14, 2023.
Collier County 2024.Immokalee Transportation Network
Plan. January.
Collier County. 2025a. “Planning Projects and Studies.”
Updated January 1. Accessed June 19, 2025.
https://www.collier.gov/County-
Development/Transportation-Management/Traffic-
Operations/Transportation-Planning/Transportation-
Planning-Studies
Collier County. 2025b.Draft Vulnerability Assessment.
Prepared by WSP.
Page 222 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 8-3 Chapter 8 References
Collier County. 2025c. 2024 Collier County Annual
Update and Inventory Report/Capital Improvement Plan.
Prepared for Collier County Board of County
Commissioners. Approved January 28, 2025.
Collier County. n.d.a. “Collier County Planning
Communities [map].” Accessed May 21, 2024.
https://www.colliercountyfl.
gov/home/showdocument?id=28844.
Collier County. n.d.b. “Growth Management Plan.”
Accessed May 22, 2024.https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/
government/growth-management/divisions/planning-
and-zoning-division/comprehensive-planning-
section/growth-management-plan
Collier County. n.d.c. “Wilson Boulevard Extension
Corridor Project.” Accessed November 4, 2025.
https://www.collier.gov/files/assets/county/v/1/transpor
tation/documents/planning-studies/display-boards.pdf
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
2020a.Collier 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan.
December 11. Amended December 8, 2023.
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
2020b.Long Range Transportation Plan. Prepared by
Jacobs. Adopted December 11.
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
2020c.Transportation System Performance Report &
Action Plan, Baseline Condition Report.Prepared by
Tindale Oliver Associates, Inc. September 11.
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
2022a. Congestion Management Process 2022 Update.
Adopted April 8.
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
2022b.Congested Corridor Factsheets. Adopted April 8.
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
2023.Transportation Improvement Program FY2024-
FY2028.Adopted June 9.
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
2024.Unified Planning Work Program Fiscal Years (FY)
2024/25-2025/26 July 1,2024-June 30, 2026.Adopted
May 10.
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
2025a.2050 LRTP Update Project Cost Development
Methodology Technical Memorandum.
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
2025b.Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Prepared by
Capital Consulting. October 10.
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
2025c.Safe Streets and Roads for All Comprehensive
Safety Action Plan. Prepared by TY Lin. October 10
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
2025d.Transportation Improvement Program FY2026-
FY2030.Adopted June 14.
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
2025e.System Performance Report Template for MPO
Long-Range Transportation Plans.Published February 24,
2025.
Page 223 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 8-4 Chapter 8 References
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO)
and Collier Area Transit (CAT). 2025f.Ten-Year Transit
Development Plan 2026-2035. Prepared by Stantec.
December.
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
n.d.Federal Fiscal Year 2023 Annual Report. Accessed
July 9, 2024.https://www.colliermpo.org/wp-
content/uploads/FY2023-Annual-Report-v2.pdf
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization (Collier MPO).
n.d.The Bylaws of Collier Metropolitan Planning
Organization.Accessed May 21, 2024.
https://www.colliermpo.org/wp-content/uploads/MPO-
Bylaws-2024.pdf
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization. (Collier
MPO). n.d. “Traffic Safety.” Accessed July 9, 2024.
https://www.colliermpo.org/other-programs-
documents/traffic-safety/
David Plummer & Associates, Inc., Spikowski Planning
Associates, David Douglas Associates, Inc., HDR
Engineering, Inc., and RMI Midwest. 2013.Lee County Rail
Corridor Feasibility Study. October 25.
Environmental Science Associates (ESA). 2021.Naples
Airport Master Plan. February.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2011.
Congestion Management Process: A Guidebook. Accessed
May 21, 2024.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2017.Resilience
and Transportation Planning. Accessed June 12, 2024.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/sustainability/re
silience/publications/ratp/index.cfm.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA). 2018.Federal Strategies for
Implementing Requirements for LRTP Updates for the
Florida MPOs.January. Accessed August 2020.
https://www.fdot.gov/docs/default-
source/planning/Policy/metrosupport/Resources/LRTP-
Expectations-2018.pdf.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA). 2021.2021 Planning
Emphasis Areas.December 30.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2014.
“Complete Streets.” September 17.
https://fdotwww.blob.core.
windows.net/sitefinity/docs/default-
source/roadway/completestreets/000-625-017-
a.pdf?sfvrsn=5f76a980_2
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2018a.
Guidance for Assessing Planning Impacts and
Opportunities of Automated, Connected, Electric and
Shared‐Use Vehicles. September.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2018b.
Strategic Intermodal System Long Range Cost Feasible
Plan, FY 2029-2045.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2019.
Florida’s Connected and Automated Vehicles Business
Plan.January.
Page 224 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 8-5 Chapter 8 References
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2020.
2045 Florida Transportation Plan Policy Element.
December.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2021.
Florida Strategic Highway Safety Plan.March.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2021.
Technical Memorandum 21-02 Fiscal Constraint of the
Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). December.
https://fdotwww.blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity/docs/d
efault-
source/planning/policy/metrosupport/resources/florida-
fy21-fiscal-constraint-white-paper-final-
062821.pdf?sfvrsn=fd4e660f_1
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2022a.
FDOT Strategic Intermodal System Policy Plan.March.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2022b.
2045 Florida Transportation Plan Implementation
Element.July.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2023a.
FDOT District One Freight Mobility and Trade Plan.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2023b.
First Five-Year Plan Multi-Modal FY 2023/2024 through
FY 2027/2028.July.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2023c.
Florida Triennial Highway Safety Plan 2024-2026 Federal
Fiscal Year.July.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2023d.
Housing Coordination Quick Guide.April.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2023e.
MPO Program Management Handbook.Revised August 4,
2023.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2023f.
Resilience Quick Guide:Incorporating Resilience in the
MPO Long Range Transportation Plan. April.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2023g.
Second Five Year Plan Multi-Modal FY 2028/2029
through FY 2032/2033.July.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2023h.
2050 Revenue Forecast Handbook.June.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2023i.
Resilience Action Plan.June.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2023j.
Intermodal Logistics Centers Serving Florida Seaports.
June.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2024a.
Five-Year Work Program, Fiscal Years 2025-2029. Collier
County. February 7.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2024b.
Context Classification Guide.October.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2024c.
FDOT Traffic Online. Accessed May 29, 2025.
https://tdaappsprod.dot.state.fl.us/fto/.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2024d.
Freight Mobility and Trade Plan.October.
Page 225 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 8-6 Chapter 8 References
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2024e.
“D1RPM 3.0 Landing Page.” Accessed June 5, 2025.
https://trafodata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/portfolio
/index.html?appid=6a0e5aa3b7404f92886da6c3c8242
cdb
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2024f.
Advanced Air Mobility Land Use Compatibility and Site
Approval Guidebook. September.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2024g.
FDOT Strategic Intermodal System 2030-2050 Long
Range Cost Feasible Plan. July.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2025a.
Draft 2055 Florida Transportation Plan Performance
Report. January
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 2025b.
FDOT Districtwide Bus Rapid Transit Feasibility Study.
February.
Florida Department of Transportation. 2025c. FDOT Plan
of Action for AAM: Leading the Highway in the Sky’s
Development.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). n.d.a.
“Collier Countywide Connector Traveler Information
System (CTIS).” Accessed June 4, 2025.
https://www.fdot.gov/traffic/teo-divisions.shtm/cav-ml-
stamp/cv/maplocations/ctis
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). n.d.b.
“Complete Streets Implementation”.Accessed May 21,
2024.
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/f0123d7bb9d
d4b96a36c5d7951b75193/
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). n.d.c. “Cost
Per Mile Model Reports.” Accessed February 4, 2025.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). n.d.d.
“Florida’s Connected and Automated Vehicles (CAV)
Program.” Accessed June 18, 2024.
https://www.fdot.gov/traffic/its/home
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). n.d.e.
“Regional Model Downloads.” Accessed June 12, 2024.
https://www.fdot.gov/forecasting/fl-transportation-
forecasting-resource-hub/models
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). n.d.f.
Shared-Use Nonmotorized (SUN) Trail Program. Accessed
June 18, 2024.
https://www.fdot.gov/planning/systems/SUNTrail.shtm.
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). n.d.g.
“Moving Florida Forward Infrastructure Initiative.”
Accessed June 18, 2025.
https://www.fdot.gov/movingfloridaforward/landing
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). n.d.h.
“Freight Intensive Areas Web Map.” Accessed June 23,
2025.
https://fdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.ht
ml?webmap=473f96d0b13b4f74828363c8bda4921b
Page 226 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 8-7 Chapter 8 References
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). n.d.i.
“Advanced Air Mobility.” Accessed July 24, 2025.
https://www.fdot.gov/aviation/advanced-air-mobility
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). n.d.j. “SR
29 Immokalee PD&E Study.” Accessed October 3, 2025.
https://sr29collier.com/index.php
Florida Legislature Office of Economic and Demographic
Research (EDR). 2024.Collier County.Accessed May 22,
2024.http://edr.state.fl.us/content/area-
profiles/county/collier.pdf
Florida Office of Economic & Demographic Research
(EDR). 2024. “Population and Demographic Data –
Florida Products.” March 22.
http://edr.state.fl.us/Content/population-
demographics/data/index-floridaproducts.cfm
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs). 2024. Collier
MPO 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan: Public
Involvement Plan. Prepared for Collier Metropolitan
Planning Organization. July.
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs). 2025. Collier
MPO 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan: Goals,
Objectives and Decision‐Making Framework. Prepared for
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization. September.
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (Jacobs). n.d.Golden Gate
City Walkable Community Study. Prepared for Collier
Metropolitan Planning Organization. Accessed July 9,
2024.https://www.colliermpo.org/wp-
content/uploads/GoldenGate-Walk-Comm-Study-
Adopted.pdf.
MPOAC Freight and Rail Committee. n.d. “Passenger Rail
Priorities Program Project Submission Form.” Accessed
July 28, 2025.https://ccpgmpo.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2024/BPAC/03%2007%202024%20B
PAC%20Meeting/
16%20Attachment%203%20Application-MPOAC-
FreightRail-PRPP-2023%20DH.pdf
Naples Airport Authority. 2024.City of Naples Airport
Authority Operating and Capital Budget – Fiscal year
2025.Adopted September 19.
Naples Airport Authority. n.d. “About Naples Airport.”
Accessed May 29, 2025.
https://www.flynaples.com/about-naples-airport/.
National Archives and Records Administration. 2024.
“Code of Federal Regulations (23 C.F.R. 450.306(a) and
(b)).”Updated July 5. Accessed June 10, 2024.
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-23/chapter-
I/subchapter-E/part-450/subpart-C/section-450.306
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) Office for Coastal Management. 2025a. “Sea
Level Rise Viewer.” Accessed June 10, 2025.
https://coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/tools/slr.html
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) RESTORE Science Program. 2025b. “A Web-
Based Interactive Decision-Support Tool for Adaptation of
Coastal Urban and Natural Ecosystems (ACUNE) in
Southwest Florida.” Accessed July 10, 2025.
https://restoreactscienceprogram.noaa.gov/projects/loca
l-coastal-tool
Page 227 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 8-8 Chapter 8 References
Renaissance Planning. 2015.Technical Memorandum:
Freight Congestion Considerations for the Collier 2040
Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP).Prepared for the
Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization. November.
RWA, Inc. 2011.Immokalee Walkable Community Study.
Prepared for the Collier Metropolitan Planning
Organization. December 9.
RWA, Inc. 2012.Collier MPO 2012 Comprehensive
Pathways Plan. Prepared for Collier Metropolitan
Planning Organization. December.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2024. “Collier
County Coastal Storm Risk Management Feasibility
Study.” Accessed July 10, 2024.https://colliercsrm-
usacenao.hub.arcgis.com/
U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). n.d.a. “2016-2020 5-Year
ACS Commuting Flows.” Accessed June 7, 2024.
https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2020/demo/metro
-micro/commuting-flows-2020.html
U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). n.d.b. “Annual Estimates of
the Resident Population: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2019.”
Accessed May 22, 2024.
https://data.census.gov/table/PEPPOP2019.PEPANNRES
?q=Collier%20County,%20Florida
U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). n.d.c. “Collier County,
Florida.” Access April 21, 2025.
https://data.census.gov/profile/Collier_County,_Florida?
g=050XX00US12021
U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). n.d.d. “Everglades City,
Florida.”Accessed April 21, 2025.
https://data.census.gov/profile/Everglades_city,_Florida?
g=160XX00US1221425
U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). n.d.e. “Immokalee CDP,
Florida.” Accessed April 21, 2025.
https://data.census.gov/profile/
Immokalee_CDP,_Florida?g=160XX00US1233250
U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). n.d.f. “Marco Island city,
Florida.” Accessed April 21, 2025.
https://data.census.gov/profile/
Marco_Island_city,_Florida?g=160XX00US1243083
U.S. Census Bureau (USCB). n.d.g. “Naples city, Florida.”
Accessed April 21, 2025.https://data.census.gov/profile/
Naples_city,_Florida?g=160XX00US1247625
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). 2019.
“Preparing for the Future of Transportation: Automated
Vehicles 3.0.”Accessed July 17, 2024.
https://www.transportation.gov/av/3.
U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT). 2021. Letter
from Nuria Fernandez, Federal Transit Administration
Administrator, and Stephanie Pollack, Federal Highway
Administration, to FHWA Division Administrators and FTA
Regional Administrators.2021 Planning Emphasis Areas
for use in the development of Metropolitan and Statewide
Planning and Research Work programs.December 30.
University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business
Research (BEBR). 2022.Population Projections by Age,
Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin for Florida and Its Counties,
2025-2050, with Estimates for 2022. April 1.
Page 228 of 397
Collier MPO 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan 8-9 Chapter 8 References
University of Florida Center for Landscape Conservation
Planning and 1000 Friends of Florida. n.d. “County Maps,
Collier County.” Accessed July 18, 2024.
https://1000fof.org/sealevel2040/collier/#:~:text=10.44
%25-,Protected%20Natural%20Land,67.35%25,-
778%2C243
University of South Florida Center for Urban
Transportation Research (CUTR). 2019.Autonomous
Vehicle (AV) and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Florida
Market Penetration Rate and VMT Assessment Study.
Prepared for Florida Department of Transportation. Final.
October.
Page 229 of 397
2050 Long Range
Transportation Plan
Collier MPO Board Meeting
November 14, 2025
Page 230 of 397
Agenda
LRTP Schedule Update
Needs Plan
D1RPM Update
Cost Feasible Plan
Public Outreach
Next Steps
2Page 231 of 397
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
MPO Board,
Committees, Lee MPO,
Public, Cities, & Others
MPO Board,
Committees, Lee MPO,
Public, Cities, & Others
MPO Board &
Committees
MPO Board &
Committees
Board Adoption
December 2025
Start
March 2024
MPO Board, Committees,
Public, Cities, & Others
LRTP Schedule & Process
Project
Kick Off
Establish Goals &
Objectives and
Financial Resources
System Needs Project Rankings Final Cost Feasible
Plan & LRTP
2024 2025
3Page 232 of 397
4
Chapter 4 - Needs Plan includes:
–Roadway Needs
•Safety – MPO SS4A Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (2025)
•Freight – FDOT D1 Freight Mobility and Trade Plan (2023) & FDOT Freight Mobility and Trade Plan (2024)
•MPO Congestion Management Process
•Transportation System Management & Operations & Emerging Technologies (FDOT)
•Resilience – FDOT Resilience Action Plan (2023), City of Naples/ Collier County Climate Adaptation Plan (ongoing)
–Bicycle & Pedestrian Needs – MPO Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan (2025)
–Transit Needs – MPO Transit Development Plan (2025)
–Air Transportation Needs
•Naples Airport Master Plan (2020)
•Immokalee Regional Airport Layout Plan (2017)
•Marco Island Executive Airport
•Everglades Airpark
2050 LRTP Needs Plan
Draft Chapter 4 Needs Plan is
provided for review and comment!
Page 233 of 397
5
FDOT D1RPM Travel Model Alternatives
Alternative 6: Final Cost Feasible Alternative Complete
Alternative 5: Transit Complete
Alternative 4: Cost Feasible Refinement 2 Complete
Alternative 3: Cost Feasible Refinement 1 Complete
Alternative 2: Lee County Connectivity Complete
Alternative 1: Roadway Needs Complete
Page 234 of 397
6
2050 E+C Network
Deficiency Map
Page 235 of 397
7
Alternative 6 Results
Final Cost Feasible
Alternative Model Run
E+C Network Deficiencies
Randall Blvd
SR 82
Collier Blvd
I-75
New Market Rd E
Old US 41
Golden
Gate Blvd
Page 236 of 397
8
Identifies multimodal transportation
projects that can be funded through 2050
based on estimated revenues.
Similar to the Needs Plan, the CFP
incorporates bike/ped, safety/congestion
management, and transit cost feasible
projects by reference
2050 Draft Cost Feasible Plan
Draft Chapter 6 Cost Feasible Plan is
provided for review and comment!
Page 237 of 397
9
2050 Final Draft Cost Feasible Roadway Projects
Page 238 of 397
10
2050 Final Draft Cost Feasible
Roadway Projects
FDOT SIS Projects 2026-2050
*Project included in 2028 E+C Network
Map ID Facility
(FPID)From To Description
28*SR 29
(417540-5)from CR 846 N of New
Market Rd
New Road
Construction
29*SR 29
(417540-6)
from N of
New Market
Rd
SR 82
Add Lanes and
Reconstruct (2 to -
lanes)
30*SR 82
(430848-1)
from Hendry
County Line
Gator
Slough Ln
Add Lanes and
Reconstruct (2-
lanes to 4-lanes)
17*
I-75
(445296-
1/2)
at Pine Ridge
Rd Modify Interchange
16*I-75
(425843-2)at SR 951 Modify Interchange
101 I-75
(425843-3)
from
Immokalee
Rd
Bonita
Beach Rd
Add Lanes and
Reconstruct (6 to 8
lanes)
102 I-75
(452544-4)
at
Immokalee
Rd
Modify Interchange
103 I-75
(452544-5)
from
Immokalee
Rd
Pine Ridge
Rd
Add Lanes and
Reconstruct (6 to 8
lanes)
104 I-75
(452544-6)
from Pine
Ridge Rd
Golden
Gate Blvd
Add Lanes and
Reconstruct (6 to 8
lanes)
Page 239 of 397
11
2050 Final Draft Cost Feasible Roadway Projects
Plan Period 2031-2035 Map
ID Facility From To Description
In
2045
Needs
In
2045
CFP
75 Bridge at
13th St NW
North End
at
Vanderbilt
Beach Rd
Ext
New Bridge
over Canal Y N
12 Collier Blvd
South of
Manatee
Rd
North of
Tower Rd
Widen from 4
to 6 lanes Y N
47 Logan Blvd Green Blvd Pine
Ridge Rd
Widen from 4
to 6 lanes Y N
61
Santa
Barbara
Blvd
Painted
Leaf Ln
Green
Blvd
Widen from 4
to 6 lanes Y N
81
Bridge at
Wilson
Blvd, South
End
New Bridge
over Canal Y N
100 Immokalee
Rd
Camp Keais
Rd
Roundabout
/Intersection
Improvement
N N
79
Bridge at
62nd Ave
NE
West of
40th St NE
New Bridge
over Canal Y N
Page 240 of 397
12
2050 Final Draft Cost Feasible Roadway Projects
Plan Period 2036-2040
Map
ID Facility From To Description In 2045
Needs
In
2045
CFP
74 Wilson
Blvd
Golden
Gate Blvd
Immokalee
Rd
Widen from
2 to 4 lanes N N
21
Golden
Gate
Pkwy
Livingston
Rd
Overpass
(GGP over
Livingston)
Y Y
56
Pine
Ridge
Rd
Logan
Blvd Collier Blvd Widen from
4 to 6 lanes Y Y
Page 241 of 397
13
2050 Final Draft Cost Feasible Roadway Projects
Plan Period 2041-2050
Map
ID Facility From To Description
In
2045
Needs
In
2045
CFP
94 Airport
Pulling Rd
Orange
Blossom
Dr
Intersection
Innovation/
Improvements
Y N
106 Bridge at
16th St SE
South of
Golden
Gate Blvd
New Bridge over
Canal Y N
Page 242 of 397
14
2050 Final Draft Cost Feasible Roadway Projects
Partially Funded Map
ID Facility From To Description Partial
Funding
In
2045
Needs
In
2045
CFP
29 I-75
Vicinity of
Everglades
Blvd
New Partial
Interchange
EB Off-Ramp
and WB On-
Ramp
27.5% of
CST
Funded
Y Y
67 US 41 Greenway
Rd 6 L Farm Rd Widen from
2 to 4 lanes
26% of
CST
Funded
Y Y
16 Everglades
Blvd I-75 Golden
Gate Blvd
Widen from
2 to 4 lanes
55% of
CST
Funded
N N
18 Everglades
Blvd Oil Well Rd Immokalee
Rd
Widen from
2 to 4 lanes
7.5% of
CST
Funded
Y N
37 Immokalee
Rd
Camp
Keais Rd Carver St Widen from
2 to 4 lanes
Pre-Eng
and
ROW
Funded
Y Y
Page 243 of 397
15
Interactive Cost Feasible Projects Map
Public Outreach Pop-Up Events
–Golden Gate Farmers Market (10/4/25)
–Immokalee Pioneer Pumpkin Palooza
(10/11/25)
Cost Feasible Public Outreach
Scan to view the interactive Cost
Feasible Roadway Projects Map!
Page 244 of 397
16
Performance Measures and
Targets are provided through
the MPO’s System Performance
Report (SPR)
Implementation Framework Draft Chapter 7 Implementation is
provided for review and comment!
Page 245 of 397
17
Review/Comment on Draft LRTP
–Draft Chapters 1-8
–Draft Appendices
–Draft Technical Compendium
Next Steps: Items for Review/Comment
Page 246 of 397
18
Incorporate comments into Draft
LRTP
Present Final LRTP to TAC/CAC
on 11/24/25
Final LTRP MPO Board Adoption –
December 11, 2025
Next Steps
Page 247 of 397
Thank you!
Page 248 of 397
11/14/2025
Item # 9.B
ID# 2025-4697
Executive Summary
Recommendation to Provide Additional Staff Direction Regarding the MPO Executive Director Recruitment Process
OBJECTIVE: To review the progress made since September 12, 2025, to recruit candidates interested in the Collier
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Executive Director position and determine candidate finalists for in-person
presentations/interviews for December 11, 2025.
CONSIDERATIONS: During the September 12, 2025, MPO meeting, the Commissioners and Council Members
provided direction to staff on recruitment of candidates for the Executive Director position. The position was posted
from September 19, 2025, through October 30, 2025, with a total of eleven (11) interested individuals submitting
applications and supplemental materials to the County. Commissioners and Council Members completed an evaluation
of the candidate submissions. At the time the MPO agenda was due for submission, rankings from all board members
had not been received. The final ranked list will be presented during the November 14, 2025, meeting for discussion.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the MPO Board review, discuss, and collectively determine candidate finalists
to be invited to give presentations/interviews regarding their candidacy at the December 11, 2025, meeting, as well as
determine the travel expenditure costs to be covered for any candidate invited to participate from outside the local area.
PREPARED BY: Amy Lyberg, Division Director, Human Resources
ATTACHMENTS:
1. MPO Director Applicant Summary
Page 249 of 397
Candidate First
Name
Candidate Last
Name Residence Highest Level of
Education Certifications/ Licenses Current Employer and Functions Public Sector-Related Titles/ Employers Private Sector Titles/Employers
Coach B Andi Naples, FL Nothing listed USTA The Pickleball Angels - FUN-raising (6/2022 - Present) and Pickleball Director (2/2022 -
Present)
Led ongoing planning and fundraising efforts for homeless college students, resulting in over
$100K in donations. Relationships to secure donated equipment and resources for success. *
Promotional influencer, leveraging a network of 500K+ clients to create a lasting impact.
Professional Pickleball Director (Private Country Club * Contract) - Built a thriving Pickleball
Community for 250+ private members and guests. Through personalized attention and
instruction, confidence building, competitive and social Pickleball, and a ratings system based on
testing, catering to players of all levels, from beginners to professionals. Organized corporate
pickleball functions and events, fostering a positive environment of trust and respect.
N/A Executive Director - Planet Pickleball
Management Services (4/2017 - Present)
Founder - ABC Health & Fitness Center
(2/1986 - 2/2017)
Anne Barrett Westlake, OH Master's in Policy/Law 1. FTA Transit Planning course
2. GIS
Specialized transit courses
sposored by ODOT and RTAP
Board Menber - Westside Community House (3/2025 - Present)
Administration duties for the agency as a board member and providing information and help as
needed and when possible
Elections Official, Administrative Officer, Teacher -
Cuyahoga County OH Board of Elections and DCFS (3/2015 -
12/2024)
Test Administrator - US Army/MEPS (4/2022 - 8/2023)
Area Manager - Department of Commerce, Census Bureau
(3/2009 - 3/2021)
Elected Official - Cuyahoga County OH General Committee
(1/2006 - 1/2010)
Administrator/Planner - Northeast OH Areawide
Coordinating Agency (3/1989 - 3/1999)
Proctor/Test Administrator/IT Support -
Matlen Silver, Inc. (5/2023 - 3/2024)
Nicholas Danu Naples, FL Master's in Civil
Engineering
Florida Professional Engineer (PE)Senior Project Manager - Scalar Consulting Group, Inc. (8/2023 - 5/2025) - Senior Project
Manager for the Project Development & Environment (PD&E) projects. Provided marketing
assistance for Planning, Final Design, and Traffic Operational projects. Served client's need of civil
engineering and related physical science principals and practices, and adhere to Federal, State,
and County, and Local standards applicable to public works and private sector project design and
construction.
Project Development Manager - Florida Department of
Transportation (11/2020 - 5/2023)
Transportation Engineer - City of Ft. Myers, FL (9/2014 -
6/2015)
Senior Project Manager - Florida Department of
Transportation (1/2008 - 2/2014)
Project Manager - Florida Department of Transportation
(9/1995 - 1/2008)
Engineer II - Florida Department of Transportation (8/1993 -
9/1995)
Engineer I - Florida Department of Transportation (6/1991 -
8/1993)
Senior Project Manager - Scalar Consulting
Group, Inc. (5/2019 - 11/2020)
Senior Project Manager - Keith & Schnars
(9/2015 - 4/2017)
Senior Project Manager - HBC Engineering
Company (4/2014 - 1/2015)
Anthony DiCristofano Brookfield, WI Vocational certification
in electrical
AVP Operations - Sacramento (CA) Regional Transit (6/2024 - Present) - Manage Rail vehicle
maintenance; bus maintenance, ROW, signal and track maintenance; overhead Catenary Power
maintenance; sub station maintenance; train operations/transportation; Bus
operations/transportation; New Railcar Project; New Hydrogen Bus and Facility Project;
TBTC/CBTC Project
Chief Maintenance Officer - Madison (WI) Metro (12/2022 -
2023)
Manager New Vehicle Team - Bay Area Rapid Transit
(10/2018 - 5/2020)
Regional Streetcar Maintenance Manager - Transdev
(9/2017 - 5/2018)
CMO/Mechanic Department Superintendent - SMART
Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (2/2015 - 9/2017)
Supervisor - Chicago Transit Authority (4/1984 - 5/2011)
Consultant - ADP Consulting (1/2022 -
9/2022)
Field Service Manager, North America -
Nippon Sharyo (2/2013 - 2/2015)
Technical Consultant - Lecip, Inc. (1/2011 -
7/2012)
Roger Leonard St. Augustine, FL Master's in Public
Administration/Mgmt
N/A Principal Managing Director - RSG, LLC (1/2023 - Present) - Managing Principal to provide State
and Federal level finance and regulatory support as contracted.
Contract with Arizona Governor's Office as a SME for the
Arizona ARPA/SLFRF Covid-19 Pandemic Recovery Project
(2/2021 - 1/2023)
US Navy (submarines) - 21 years (time frame undisclosed)
Tetra-Tech Team Lead/Senior PM - CDBG-
DR Team-Lead: November 2019 – May 2021
Recovery Consulting - Focus: CDBG
Disaster Recovery (HUD Programs)
Carmen Monroy Ft. Myers, FL Master's in Public
Administration
N/A Senior Planning Manager - CTS Engineering, Inc. (8/2023 - Present) - Lead to a collaborative
team developing community-oriented transportation solutions, delivering long-range and short-
term plan development with implementable solutions. Southwest Florida lead serving various
Metropolitan Planning agencies including the Collier MPO, Lee County MPO, and the Palm Beach
TPA.
Director of Policy Planning - Florida Department of
Transporation, Office of Policy Planning (4/2015 - 3/2019)
Director of SW Area Office - Florida Department of
Transportation District One (6/2013 - 4/2015)
Financial Business Manager - Lee County Transit (10/2003 -
5/2013)
Contracts Administrator - Miami Dade County/Port of Miami
(2/1983-10/1999)
Senior Transportation Consultant - Stantec
Consulting, Inc. (10/2019 - 9/2024)
Executive Director - Cape Coral Housing
Rehab & Development Corp (4/2001 -
10/2003)
MPO Executive Director Candidates - 2025
1 of 3
Page 250 of 397
Candidate First
Name
Candidate Last
Name Residence Highest Level of
Education Certifications/ Licenses Current Employer and Functions Public Sector-Related Titles/ Employers Private Sector Titles/Employers
MPO Executive Director Candidates - 2025
Vinod Sandanasamy Lake Worth, FL Master's in Community
and Regional Planning
Master's in Civil
Engineering/
Transportation
Engineering
1. Professional Transportation
Planner (expired 11/2024)
2. American Institute of Certified
Planners (AICP)
3. Engineer Intern
Strategic Transportation Planner - Miami Dade County Regulatory and Economic Resources
Department (11/2016 - Present)
Managing the Transportation Planning Section of Miami-Dade County (team lead for 6 staff), to
develop efficient multi-modal systems; Administering County’s Transportation Concurrency
Program; update of federal functional classification of state and county roadways based on
Highway Capacity Manual 7th edition; increasing transit ridership post-covid by the
implementation of the Better Bus Network resulting in fare adjustments, termination of many loss-
making routes and improving multiple over-crowded routes; oversee review of project traffic
studies, identifying impacts and recommending mitigations for Traffic Concurrency,
Comprehensive Development Master Plan (CDMP) Amendments, Site Plans and PD&E studies;
testified as an expert Transportation Witness for the Kendall Parkway/ SR-836 Extension
Challenge Case; Project Advisory Committee member for the ‘MDT10Ahead’ Transit Development
Plan; managed/coordinated with various stake holders to develop the 'Mobility Fee Study' which
replaced the roadway impact fee with the broad-based multi-modal fee; study and report with
recommendations to alleviate safety and mobility issues (responding to safety and congestion in
Biscayne Gardens neighborhood); updated transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan
and the Zoning Code to align with state statutes; Managed and coordinated traffic review of major
projects (American Dream Miami, Kendall Parkway, and Smart Plan Corridors; managed &
administered contracts including writing scopes, requirements in RFPs, consultant selection and
supervision; Committee member on the TPO’s Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
Development Committee and Long-Range Transportation Plan Steering Committee; prepared
annual budget for the transportation section in coordination with the department’s administration
division and the budget office.
Senior Transportation Planner - Broward County/Planning &
Development Division (8/2016 - 11/2016)
Transportation Planning Engineer - City of Boca Raton/
Traffic Division (12/2014 - 6/2016)
Senior Transportation Planner - Palm Beach MPO (4/2007 -
11/2014)
Senior Planner - Palm Beach County/Planning Department
(3/2003 - 4/2007)
Regional Planner - Roanoke Valley Allechany Regional
Commission, VA (1/2003 - 3/2003)
N/A
Julian Stokes, Jr.Naples, FL Master's in Real Estate
and Construction
Management
1. General Appraiser (DBPR)
2. Real Estate Broker (DBPR)
3. General Appraiser - Trainee/
Supervisor Education (DBPR)
Real Estate Appraiser and Consultant - Integra Realty Resources (1/2008 - 3/2025)
Steer efforts as acting member of the appraisal institute, while conducting comprehensive real
estate valuations across Florida, with specialized expertise in Southwest, West, South Florida,
and the Florida Keys. Provide comprehensive valuations for a diverse range of property types,
including community shopping centers, power centers, office buildings (CBD and suburban),
warehouse/distribution facilities, multi-family properties, condominiums, hotels, motels, vacant
land, and special-purpose properties (e.g., event centers, marinas, boat yards). Perform
valuations for various purposes such as estate planning, financing, equity participation, HUD
approval, insurance, and litigation support. Provide going concern valuations and asset
breakdowns (real estate, FF&E, and intangible business value) for various property types. Offer
consultation services covering feasibility studies, budget analysis, rental rate expectations, unit
mix, vacancy and concession rates, absorption timelines, construction costs, and
rezoning/approval potential; served broad client base, including federally insured lenders,
developers, investors, law firms, mortgage banking firms, local and federal agencies, and private
individuals; supported developers in understanding market trends, assessing project potential,
and making informed investment decisions by conducting market studies and feasibility analyses.
N/A N/A
Paul Upchurch Naples, FL Bachelor of Science N/A Investor and Hands-on Advisor - Paul Upchurch & Co, LLC (1/2023 - Present) - Capitalizing on
decades of building businesses, partnering with globally renowned and leading companies,
independent entrepreneurs, and fellow CEOs' to craft investment strategies, acquire and own
businesses, and drive invest-grade shareholder value.
N/A Global Leader - Prometric (1/2021 - Present)
Global Leader - Blackstone Group,
Luxembourg (8/2017 - 12/2020)
Global Leader and CEO - Blackstone Group,
NY, NY and Chicago, IL (8/2009 - 8/2020)
Executive Director Portfolio Operations -
Blackstone Group (5/2015 - 7/2017)
Partner - Management & Technology -
Nielsen (11/2004 - 8/2009)
Partner - Accenture (6/1991 - 9/2004)
2 of 3
Page 251 of 397
Candidate First
Name
Candidate Last
Name Residence Highest Level of
Education Certifications/ Licenses Current Employer and Functions Public Sector-Related Titles/ Employers Private Sector Titles/Employers
MPO Executive Director Candidates - 2025
Richard Walsh Webster, NY Master's in
Aeronautical
Science/Aerospace
Mgmt
American Association of Airport
Executives
NASA Aeronautics Subject Matter Expert - Metis Technology Solutions, LLC/NASA Ames
Research Center (1/2019 - 3/2025) - Collaboration with NASA, industry, and technology leaders
to explore innovative solutions addressing aviation challenges related to safety, environment, and
global air traffic growth. Led projects on Space-Based Solar Energy Collection, Zero Impact
Aviation, and Airport Microgrids for clean energy. Contributed to UAS Medical Support Systems
and Modular Heavy Lift Vehicles. Developed strategies for Urban Air Mobility (UAM) and eVTOL
adoption. Participated in NASA working groups and co-authored AIAA Journal article on synthetic
aviation fuels. Conceived a blockchain concept for aviation operations to enhance security.
Engaged in NASA's Imagine Aviation Cohort Mentorship Program. Proposed concepts like Rural
Airports as Healthcare Hubs and Airports as Energy Nodes. Developed integrated patient transfer
systems and sustainable airport infrastructure plans.
NASA Program Manager - Metis Technology Solutions/NASA
Ames Research Center (1/2017 - 1/2019)
Director of Aviation - City of Palm Springs/Palm Springs (CA)
International Airport (2/2004 - 4/2007)
Associate Deputy Airport Director - San Francisco Airport
Commission/SF International Airport (6/2000 - 2/2004)
Director of Planning & Environmental Affairs - Allegheny
County (PA) Airport Authority (7/1997 - 6/2000)
US Army (1983-1989)
Co-Founder/Managing Partner - a3i Global
Aeronautics Advisors, LLC (4/2007 - 1/2017)
Vice President - ATP (8/2014 - 12/2015)
Brian Wells Marion, KS Master's in Public
Administration
1. Certified Community Transit
Manager (expired 7/2021)
2. Advanced Transit Professional
Other technical trainings:
Intro to Incident Command
System (IS-00100.b) – FEMA
Disaster Mgmt for Public Services
(MGT317) – FEMA
Improvised Explosive Device
Search Procedures (17N-0265) –
FEMA
Joint Information Office (G291) –
State of Colorado
Basic Public Information Officer
(G290) – State of Colorado
Public Information Officer
Awareness (IS-00029) – FEMA
Citizen Policy Academy – Estes
Park Police Department
City of Marion, Kansas - City Administrator
Administer day-to-day activities under the direction of the City Council in the following areas:
Public Works, Utilities, Planning, Code Enforcement, Economic Development, Finance/Budget,
Airport, Police and Fire Departments. Also responsible for Public Information, liaison with
community organizations, and working with other local/county agencies; Worked with
departments to develop vehicle/equipment replacement plans; Increased communications with
local businesses; Raised public confidence level by vastly reducing response time to
concerns/work orders.
Collier County BOCC - Division Director PTNE (5/2023 -
6/2025)
RATP Dev USA - General Manager/VP (1/2019 - 5/2023)
Town of Estes Park, CO - Transit Program Manager/PIO
(5/2012-1/2019)
N/A
3 of 3
Page 252 of 397
11/14/2025
Item # 10.A
ID# 2025-4693
Executive Summary
Center for Urban Transportation Research Report and Presentation on Collier and Lee MPO Consolidation Feasibility
Study
OBJECTIVE: For the Board to receive a report on the work that the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR)
has completed thus far and next steps for the Collier and Lee MPO Consolidation Feasibility Study.
CONSIDERATIONS: FDOT contracted with the CUTR, University of South Florida, to conduct the first phase of a
Feasibility Study for the potential consolidation of Collier and Lee MPOs. Tech Memo #1 provides a summary of
“Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices.” (Attachment 1)
Tech Memo #2 summarizes federal and state regulations regarding MPO designation and redesignation. (Attachment 2)
CUTR has provided a Summary of Key Findings for Decision Makers (Attachment 3) to accompany a survey to gather
information on the perspectives of local elected officials regarding current coordination practices and a potential merger
of the two MPOs. (Attachment 4)
Next steps include reporting the results of the survey and preparing a draft high-level potential apportionment plan for a
consolidated Governing Board. The anticipated completion date for completing Phase One of the Feasibility Study is
April 9, 2026.
A representative of CUTR will give the presentation shown in Attachment 5 at the Board meeting.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Provided for informational purposes.
PREPARED BY: Anne McLaughlin, Executive Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
2. Tech Memo #2 Federal and State Regulations
3. Summary of Key Findings for Decision Makers
4. Draft Survey of Local Elected Officials
5. CUTR Presentation
Page 253 of 397
October 2025
cutr.usf.edu
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and
Regional MPO Planning and Business
Practices
Prepared by:
Jeff Kramer, AICP
Taylor Dinehart, AICP
Tia Boyd, AICP
Jennifer Flynn
Center for Urban Transportation Research
University of South Florida, College of Engineering
4202 E. Fowler Ave., CUT100
Tampa, FL 33620-5375
Page 254 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 2
1. Introduction
Purpose and scope of this memorandum
This technical memorandum has been prepared as part of Task 2 of the Collier and Lee County
MPO Consolidation Feasibility Study. The memorandum provides an overview and analysis of
current local and regional planning and business practices used by the Collier Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO) and the Lee County MPO. It is intended to inform Governing Board
members of both MPOs as they consider whether to pursue the formation of a consolidated
regional MPO.
This Task serves as an early step in the Phase I assessment process. The findings from this
memorandum will help establish a shared understanding of how each MPO currently operates,
both independently and in coordination with one another and regional partners, and will
highlight areas of similarity, difference, and existing collaboration. This shared understanding is
essential to future discussions about the advantages, disadvantages, trade-offs, and feasibility of
consolidating the two organizations.
The information presented in this memorandum was gathered through a review of MPO
documents and input provided by MPO staff and regional planning partners. The findings are
organized thematically to support comparison and will be used to guide the work of subsequent
Tasks, including the documentation of regulatory considerations, stakeholder perspectives, and
potential governance models.
It is important to note that this memorandum does not attempt to recommend specific
approaches for resolving identified differences or prescribe future actions. Instead, it is designed
to support informed decision-making by highlighting areas where alignment exists and where
future coordination efforts may require additional attention.
Finally, this document does not seek to provide an exhaustive inventory of MPO practices.
Rather, it focuses on those practices and structural elements that are most relevant to
discussions about potential consolidation and that will inform subsequent phases of the
feasibility study.
Background and context
The Collier MPO and Lee County MPO were originally established to serve distinct,
noncontiguous Urbanized Areas (UZAs) as defined by the U.S. Census.
• The Lee County MPO was established in 1977 to serve the Fort Myers UZA,1
encompassing the cities of Cape Coral, Fort Myers, and surrounding unincorporated
areas in Lee County.
• The Collier MPO was established in 1982 to serve the Naples UZA,2 covering the cities of
Naples and Marco Island, Everglades City, and adjacent unincorporated areas of Collier
County.
1 The Urbanized Area (UZA) served by the Lee County MPO was originally named ‘Fort Myers.’ In the 1990
U.S. Census, the name was changed to ‘Fort Myers—Cape Coral,’ and then to ‘Cape Coral’ in the 2000
Census, which remains the current designation.
2 The Urbanized Area (UZA) served by the Collier MPO was originally named ‘Naples.’ In the 2000 U.S.
Census, it was renamed ‘Bonita Springs—Naples,’ then ‘Bonita Springs’ in 2010, and ‘Bonita Springs—
Estero’ in the 2020 Census, which remains the current designation.
Page 255 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 3
These separate urbanized areas reflected the unique development patterns, population centers,
and transportation needs of each county at the time of MPO formation. As such, the MPOs
evolved with independent governance structures and planning responsibilities tailored to their
respective jurisdictions.
Over time, population centers shifted, and development intensified across both counties. The
result was a steady increase in cross-county trips and regional interdependence. After the 2000
Census, the UZA primarily in Collier County expanded into Lee County in the vicinity of Bonita
Springs. Meanwhile, the UZA primarily in Lee County continued to expand south. Then, in 2010,
the two UZAs met near Williams Road, making them officially contiguous UZAs (Figure 1). As of
the 2020 Census, the two UZAs are called the Cape Coral UZA and the Bonita Springs-Estero
UZA.
Figure 1. Growth of Urbanized Areas in Collier and Lee Counties, 1990–2020
Source: Florida Department of Transportation, FDOT Urban Area Boundary and Functional Classification Data Hub
https://urban-boundary-functional-class-update-2020-fdot.hub.arcgis.com/
Federal law and regulations establish clear guidelines for coordination among MPOs serving
shared or contiguous UZAs:
• 23 U.S.C. §134(d)(7) permits more than one MPO within a single UZA only if the
Governor and the MPOs determine that the area's size and complexity justify separate
entities.
• 23 U.S.C. §134(g)(4) mandates consistency in planning data and forecasts between
MPOs that cover the same UZA.
• 23 C.F.R. 450.310(e) discourages multiple MPOs for a single UZA or group of contiguous
UZAs, but allows them with formal justification and written agreements.
• 23 C.F.R. 450.312(h) requires written coordination agreements between MPOs where
part of an urbanized area served by one MPO extends into the planning area of an
adjacent MPO(s). Alternatively, the MPOs may adjust their existing boundaries so that
the entire urbanized area lies within the planning area of only one MPO.
Florida statute (s. 339.175, F.S.) reflects these federal requirements, allowing multiple MPOs for
single or groups of contiguous UZAs while mandating coordination on federally and state-
required planning products, including long-range transportation plans and priority project lists.
The transformation of Lee and Collier Counties’ population centers meant that the formerly
noncontiguous urbanized areas had grown together, creating increased cross-county travel and
shared transportation corridors. As a result of this change, and in accordance with federal
requirements described above, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) sent a letter in
Page 256 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 4
2002 to both MPOs recommending that they either consolidate into a single MPO or enter into a
formal coordination agreement. The MPOs opted not to merge and instead signed an interlocal
agreement in January 2004 to guide joint transportation planning and cooperation across the
region.
This agreement, amended in 2006 and 2009, called for:
• Reciprocal Technical Advisory Committee representation
• Joint MPO board and advisory committee meetings
• A regional travel demand model
• Coordination on regionally significant multimodal corridors and services
• Joint Transportation Regional Incentive Program (TRIP) priority-setting
• Shared public involvement mechanisms
• A regional webpage (hosted by the Lee County MPO)
The agreement also laid out cost-sharing responsibilities and a formal dispute resolution
process. Despite growing regional integration, the MPOs reaffirmed their independence in
March 2013, following the 2010 Census, by adopting a joint resolution stating that:
• Their metropolitan areas remained distinct, despite being contiguous
• Maintaining two MPOs served the public interest
• Continued coordination under the 2004 agreement was appropriate
This resolution remains in effect today. However, recent developments have prompted a formal
reassessment of regional MPO governance. Continued population growth, increased cross-
county travel, and planning across shared corridors have raised inquiries about administrative
coordination and long-term efficiency. These shifts, coupled with the complexities of serving
contiguous urbanized areas, led state and local stakeholders to revisit the region’s planning
structure.
Page 257 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 5
2. Organizational Structure and Governance
This section provides a comparison of how the Collier and Lee County MPOs are organized and
governed. It covers hosting arrangements, board and committee structures, staffing levels, and
key differences in administrative autonomy.
2.1. MPO hosting arrangements (hosted vs. independent)
Collier MPO
The Collier MPO operates under a ‘leaning independent’ structure (see Figure 2) through a
formal Staff Services Agreement with Collier County, which serves as the MPO’s fiscal and
administrative agent. The MPO Board is responsible for selecting the Executive Director, who
leads the organization’s transportation planning efforts. The Executive Director hires MPO staff,
but all MPO personnel, including the Executive Director, are considered employees of Collier
County for administrative and HR-related purposes. This includes payroll processing, benefits
administration, retirement enrollment, personnel records management, compliance with county
personnel policies, and use of the County’s HR systems and procedures for onboarding,
evaluations, and disciplinary actions.3
Figure 2. Collier MPO on the FDOT Program Management Handbook MPO Organizational Structure Continuum
While the MPO maintains responsibility for its transportation planning work and operates with
its own staff and governing board, many core administrative and operational functions (such as
fiscal management, procurement, legal support, and grants administration) are supported by
Collier County departments. Under this arrangement, MPO staff are able to access County
resources, including training, internal administrative systems, and professional development
opportunities that extend beyond what a small standalone organization might typically provide.
In addition, the MPO receives advisory support from County staff in areas such as transportation
planning and compliance with funding requirements.4
Lee County MPO
The Lee County MPO operates as a ‘freestanding independent’ organization (see Figure 3) and is
not hosted by a city, county, or other local government entity. The MPO manages its own
administrative, financial, and staffing functions directly. The Executive Director is employed
3 Collier Executed 2025 Staff Services Agreement.
4 Collier MPO Succession Plan
Page 258 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 6
under a contract with the MPO Board and is designated as the Chief Administrative Officer of
the MPO, responsible for day-to-day operations, personnel oversight, budget preparation, and
coordination with external partners.5
Figure 3. Lee County MPO on the FDOT Program Management Handbook MPO Organizational Structure Continuum
The Lee County MPO maintains its own personnel policies, budgeting procedures, procurement
processes, and systems for grant administration and reimbursement. This structure means that
all staff are employed directly by the MPO and not by a host agency, and the organization
maintains full control over its internal operations and administrative decisions. To support key
operational areas, the Lee County MPO rents office space from the City of Cape Coral and
contracts with external firms for specialized services such as legal, financial, and audit services.
More information about these contracted services can be found in Section 3. Business
Operations and Administrative Practices
The MPO coordinates with member jurisdictions and state and federal agencies for planning and
implementation purposes but carries out its organizational functions autonomously through a
structure that includes direct financial management, contract administration, and internal
infrastructure to support its operations.
2.2. Governing Board structure and membership
Collier MPO
The Collier MPO Governing Board is composed of all five members of the Collier County Board
of County Commissioners, two locally elected officials from the City of Naples, and one locally
elected official each from the City of Marco Island and Everglades City. In addition, one non-
voting adviser from FDOT participates in Governing Board discussions and activities. 6 There are
a total of 9 voting members and one non-voting adviser on the Collier MPO Governing Board.
Lee County MPO
The Lee County MPO Governing Board is composed of all five members of the Lee County Board
of County Commissioners; two elected officials from the City of Bonita Springs; five elected
officials from the City of Cape Coral; three elected officials from the City of Fort Myers; and one
5 Lee County MPO Employment Agreement with MPO Director
6 s. 339.175(4)(a) “Representatives of the department shall serve as nonvoting advisers to the M.P.O.
governing board.”
Page 259 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 7
elected official each from the City of Sanibel, the Town of Fort Myers Beach, and the Village of
Estero. In addition, one non-voting adviser from FDOT participates in Governing Board
discussions and activities. There are a total of 18 voting members and one non-voting adviser on
the Lee County MPO Governing Board.
2.3. Committee structure and advisory roles
Collier MPO
The Collier MPO Board is supported by five advisory committees: the Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC), Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee
(BPAC), Congestion Management Committee (CMC), and Local Coordinating Board (LCB). Each
committee operates under its own set of bylaws, with members consisting of citizen volunteers,
jurisdictional staff, or agency representatives, as specified in the respective bylaws.
Lee County MPO
The Lee County MPO Board is supported by six advisory committees: the Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC), Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), Bicycle Pedestrian Coordinating
Committee (BPCC), Transportation Disadvantaged Local Coordinating Board (LCB), Traffic
Management and Operations Committee (TMOC), and MPO Executive Committee (MEC), Each
committee operates under its own set of bylaws, with members consisting of citizen volunteers,
jurisdictional staff, or agency representatives, as specified in the respective bylaws.
2.4. Staffing levels and organizational charts
Collier MPO
The Collier MPO is staffed by an Executive Director and three team members: a principal
planner, a senior planner, and an operations support specialist. The Collier MPO may also
request additional Collier County staff support for temporary needs such as administrative
assistance or Geographic Information Systems (GIS) support. These services are arranged
through mutual agreement between the MPO Executive Director and County Manager and are
reimbursed based on actual documented costs.7 Additionally, the Collier MPO is supported by
Collier County staff for a broad range of administrative and legal services.
Lee County MPO
The Lee County MPO is staffed by an Executive Director and three additional team members: a
transportation planning administrator, a senior planner, and a planner who also serves as the
office manager, public information officer, and Title VI coordinator.
The Lee County MPO contracts with the law firm Gray Robinson, P.A. for legal services. Gray
Robinson has represented the MPO since 2014, following the transfer of its lead attorney from a
previous firm selected through a competitive contracting process. The MPO renewed this
arrangement for three-year terms in 2018 and again in 2021. Legal services include general
counsel, contract review, and other specified support under a $1,000 monthly retainer, with
additional hourly billing for certain activities. Services are directed by the MPO Governing Board,
its Chair, and the Executive Director. As previously mentioned, the Lee County MPO is supported
by staff with external private sector firms for specialized administrative services.
7 Collier Executed 2025 Staff Services Agreement. Pages 4-5
Page 260 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 8
2.5. Key similarities and differences
The Collier MPO is supported by Collier County under a Staff Services Agreement. While the
Collier MPO Board hires the Executive Director and the Director hires MPO staff, all personnel
are considered County employees for HR, payroll, and benefits administration. In contrast, the
Lee County MPO operates as a freestanding independent organization, with its own staff
directly employed by the MPO and in full control over agency administrative and fiscal
functions.
The Collier MPO relies on Collier County departments for key administrative support functions
like procurement, legal, and fiscal services, whereas the Lee County MPO manages these
functions internally or through the use of private sector contractors. All fiscal, procurement, and
grant-related tasks are handled by the Lee County MPO staff under the direction of the
Executive Director.
Both MPOs are governed by independent Governing Boards composed of local elected officials,
but the administrative autonomy varies. The Lee County MPO’s freestanding independent status
gives it full control over organizational decisions, while the Collier MPO operates in coordination
with Collier County for administrative matters, creating an interdependent relationship that
blends MPO oversight with County-provided support. See Table 1 for side-by-side comparison.
Table 1. Comparison of the Collier and Lee County MPO organizational structure
Category Collier MPO Lee County MPO
Organizational Structure Leaning Independent Freestanding Independent
Population of MPA 376,7068 (2019) 770,5779 (2019)
Staff - Total 4 (+ county support staff) 4
Staff – Positions - 1 x Executive Director
- 1 x Principal Planner
- 1 x Senior Planner
- 1 x Operations Support
Specialist
- 1 x Executive Director
- 1 x Senior Planner
- 1 x Planner/Office Manager
- 1 x Transportation Planning
Administrator
Board members - Total 9 voting + 1 non-voting
advisor
18 voting + 1 non-voting
advisor
Board - Composition - 5 x Collier County
Commissioners
- 2 x Naples City Council
- 1 x Marco Island Council
- 1 x Everglades City
Council
- 1 x FDOT (non-voting)
- 5 x Lee County
Commissioners
- 5 x City of Cape Coral
- 3 x City of Fort Myers
- 2 x City of Bonita Springs
- 1 x City of Sanibel
- 1 x Fort Myers Beach
- 1 x Village of Estero
- 1 x FDOT (non-voting)
Committees - Total 5 6
Committees – Names, total
voting members
- TAC, 13 – CMC, 10
- CAC, 13 – LCB, 18
- BPAC, 12
- TAC, 20 – TMOC, 21
- CAC, 26 – LCB, 19
- BPCC, 20 – MEC, 7
8 Collier MPO 2045 LRTP. Page 2-2
9 Lee County MPO 2045 LRTP. Page1-3
Page 261 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 9
3. Business Operations and Administrative Practices
This section outlines how the Collier and Lee County MPOs manage core business operations
and internal administrative practices. It covers personnel policies, budgeting procedures, grant
administration, office infrastructure, and technology platforms.
3.1 Personnel Policies and Benefits
Collier MPO
The Collier MPO operates under a Staff Services Agreement with Collier County, which serves as
its fiscal and administrative agent. As a result, MPO staff are considered employees of Collier
County for administrative and human resources purposes, even though their programmatic
work is directed by the MPO Executive Director and guided by the MPO Governing Board.10
Under this arrangement, all personnel policies, including hiring procedures, salary
administration, performance evaluations, disciplinary actions, leave accrual, and benefits
eligibility, follow Collier County’s established rules and procedures, as well as applicable State of
Florida requirements. MPO staff access benefits through the County’s human resources
infrastructure, including health insurance, retirement plans, training opportunities, and
professional development resources. Payroll, onboarding, and personnel recordkeeping are
handled by the County’s HR Department.11
The Executive Director is hired directly by the MPO Governing Board, which enters into an
employment agreement with the selected candidate. This agreement defines the terms of
employment, compensation, benefits, performance evaluation procedures, and severance pay.
Although the Executive Director is accountable to the MPO Governing Board, they are also
considered a county employee for administrative purposes, such as payroll, benefits, and
compliance with County HR policies. The Executive Director is responsible for hiring and
supervising other MPO staff, but all positions are subject to Collier County’s HR framework.12
For employee benefits, regular full-time and part-time employees of the Collier MPO are eligible
for paid leave benefits beginning on their first day of employment. Leave categories include
vacation, sick, personal, bereavement, and jury duty. Vacation accrual is based on years of
service: full-time employees earn 2 to 5 weeks annually, depending on tenure, while part-time
employees accrue vacation on a proportional basis per hour worked. In addition to vacation
leave, full-time employees receive 16 hours of personal leave each year (granted upon hire and
every January 1 thereafter), and part-time employees receive a pro-rated amount based on their
bi-weekly scheduled hours.
Sick leave is earned immediately upon hire. Full-time employees accrue 3.69 hours of sick leave
per pay period, totaling 12 days annually. Part-time employees accrue sick leave at a rate of
0.0462 hours per hour worked. After 12 months of employment (as of December 31), both full-
and part-time employees may convert unused sick days to vacation leave under the County’s
attendance incentive program: 0 sick days used = 3 vacation days; fewer than 1 sick day = 2
vacation days; fewer than 2 sick days = 1 vacation day.
10 Collier MPO 25-26 UPWP
11 Executed 2025 Staff Services Agreement. Page 4
12 Sixth Amendment to Collier MPO Executive Director Employment Agreement.
Page 262 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 10
Employees are eligible for 11 paid holidays each year, including major federal holidays and
select County-observed days such as Christmas Eve and the Friday after Thanksgiving. If a
holiday falls on a weekend, the observed day aligns with the County’s schedule.
Bereavement leave is available immediately upon hire. Employees may take up to 3 paid days
for in-state services or up to 5 paid days for out-of-state travel following the death of an
immediate family member. Collier MPO employees are also granted paid leave for jury duty,
effective immediately upon hire. Table 2 outlines the Collier MPO’s leave benefits further.
Table 2. Collier MPO Leave Benefits
Leave Type Full-Time Employees Part-Time Employees
Vacation - 1st Day–2nd Year: 2 weeks/year
- 3rd–6th Year: 3 weeks/year
- 7th–20th Year: 4 weeks/year
- 21st Year+: 5 weeks/year
- 1st Day–2nd Year: 0.0385
hrs./hour worked
- 3rd–6th Year: 0.0577 hrs./hour
worked
- 7th–20th Year: 0.0769 hrs./hour
worked
- 21st Year+: 0.0962 hrs./hour
worked
Sick Leave 12 days/year (3.69 hours per pay
period)
0.0462 hours per hour worked
Personal Leave 16 hours/year (granted upon hire
and again each January 1)
Pro-rated annually based on
scheduled bi-weekly hours
Holiday Leave 11 paid holidays annually 11 paid holidays annually
Bereavement
Leave
Up to 3 days (in-state) Up to 5 days
(out-of-state)
Up to 3 days (in-state) Up to 5
days (out-of-state)
Jury Duty Paid leave provided immediately
upon hire
Paid leave provided immediately
upon hire
Attendance
Incentive
After 12 months:
- 0 sick days used = 3 vacation days
- <1 sick day = 2 vacation days
- <2 sick days = 1 vacation day
Same eligibility and conversion as
full-time employees
Lee County MPO
The Lee County MPO is an independent organization and does not receive contracted support
services from a local government entity. It operates as a separate legal entity under Section
339.175, Florida Statutes. All staffing, administrative, and HR functions are managed directly by
the MPO itself. Staff hired by the MPO, including the Executive Director, are employees of the
MPO and are not governed by any external agency’s personnel system.13
The MPO has its own internal procedures for recruitment, hiring, salary administration,
performance evaluations, leave policies, disciplinary actions, and benefits administration. These
policies are developed and maintained by MPO leadership, and the Executive Director is
responsible for hiring and overseeing MPO staff.
The Executive Director is employed under a formal contract with the MPO Governing Board,
which defines duties, compensation, term of employment, performance review processes, and
severance provisions. The contract specifies that the Executive Director serves at the pleasure of
13 Lee County Lease Agreement 2015.
Page 263 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 11
the MPO Governing Board and may be terminated for cause or without cause, subject to the
conditions outlined in the agreement. The MPO Governing Board conducts annual performance
evaluations through its Executive Committee.14
For employee benefits, the Lee County MPO contracts with the Florida Municipal Insurance
Trust (FMIT) to offer health, dental, and vision insurance. Plans are administered by
UnitedHealthcare and Delta Dental, with employer-paid premiums for dental and vision
coverage. The MPO complies with the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation ACT
(COBRA) requirements through UnitedHealthcare Benefit Services and provides Medicare
Supplement and Advantage plans in partnership with the Florida League of Cities to support
eligible retirees. Retirement benefits are provided through the Florida Retirement System, with
the Executive Director eligible for the Senior Management Service Class.15
The MPO covers 100% of employee health insurance and 70% of dependent coverage, with
contribution rates evaluated annually.16 Employees are members of the Florida Retirement
System (FRS) pension plan.17 & 18
In 2012, the Lee County MPO established a Deferred Compensation Plan that allows employees
to save part of their income for future financial needs with tax benefits, at no cost to the MPO.
The plan supplements employees' retirement and Social Security and is managed by Nationwide
Retirement Solutions with support from the National Association of Counties.
Regular full-time and part-time employees of the Lee County MPO (working 24-39 hours/week)
earn paid time off (PTO), which can be used for vacations, illnesses, family emergencies, or
personal business. PTO accrues per bi-weekly pay period based on years of credible service in
the Florida Retirement System (FRS), as seen in
14 Lee County MPO Director Contract Extension January 2025.
15 Lee County MPO Director Contract Extension January 2025.
16 Lee County MPO Personnel Manual. Page 25.
17 Lee County MPO Payroll Process Memo 2024.
18 Lee County MPO Personnel Manual. Page 27.
Page 264 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 12
Table 3:19
19 Lee County MPO Personnel Manual. Page 28.
Page 265 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 13
Table 3. Lee County MPO Leave Benefits
Leave Type Full-Time Employees Part-Time Employees (24–39 hrs./week)
Paid Time Off
(PTO)
- Up to 5 years: 8 hrs. per pay
period = 26 days/year
- 5–10 years: 9 hrs. per pay period
= 29.25 days/year
- Over 10 years: 10 hrs. per pay
period = 32.5 days/year
- Up to 5 years: 4 hrs. per pay period =
13 days/year
- 5–10 years: 4.5 hrs. per pay period =
14.625 days/year
- Over 10 years: 5 hrs. per pay period =
16.25 days/year
Maximum
Accrual
May accrue up to 480 hours (60
days) annually Cap of 200 hours
paid upon retirement or death
Same as full-time
Holiday
Leave
10.5 paid holidays annually, as
approved by the MPO Board
Holidays falling on weekends
follow County's schedule
Same as full-time
Jury Duty Paid regular wages during jury
service
Paid regular wages during jury service
Employees can accrue up to 480 hours of PTO annually, with a cap of 200 hours paid upon
retirement or death.
Holidays occurring during PTO are counted as holidays, not PTO. The MPO Governing Board
approves holidays and determines when they will be observed. Ten and a half days are listed as
a holiday in the Lee County MPO Personnel Manual. If a holiday falls on a weekend, the
observed day off matches the county's schedule.
Employees called for jury duty are paid their regular earnings during their service.
Although the MPO does not meet the employee threshold for mandatory federal Family and
Medical Leave Act (FMLA) compliance, it grants unpaid leave in accordance with applicable state
and federal laws. Employees must have worked for at least 12 months and 1,250 hours in the
previous 12 months.20
3.2 Budgeting processes and financial controls
Collier MPO
The Adopted 2-Year Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) serves as the MPO’s financial plan
and identifies funding sources, participating agencies, and the scope of work to be completed.21
Once developed, the draft budget is reviewed by the MPO’s advisory committees and adopted
by the MPO Board. The MPO Executive Director is responsible for developing the MPO’s UPWP
budget and annual operating budget in coordination with Collier County’s Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).22
20 Lee County MPO Personnel Manual. Page 29.
21 Collier MPO Executed 2025 Staff Services Agreement. Page 4
22 Collier MPO Executed 2025 Staff Services Agreement. Page 4
Page 266 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 14
The Collier MPO operates under a structured framework for budgeting and financial controls, as
outlined in its Staff Services Agreement and supported by Collier County's centralized financial
administration processes.23 Collier County serves as the MPO’s fiscal agent, managing its
financial records, accounts, revenue receipts, and expenditures in accordance with County
procedures.
Lee County MPO
The Adopted 2-Year UPWP serves as the MPO’s financial plan and outlines the planning tasks
and corresponding funding sources for each fiscal year covered. The Lee County MPO staff is
responsible for preparing the UPWP, which outlines the transportation planning tasks and
funding sources for the two upcoming fiscal years. The draft UPWP is reviewed by the MPO’s
advisory committees with public comment opportunities provided in accordance with the
MPO’s Public Involvement Plan. Following revisions based on committee input, the final draft is
brought before the MPO Governing Board for public hearing and adoption.24
The MPO contracts with an external Certified Public Accounting (CPA) firm, Carr Riggs and
Ingram, to provide comprehensive financial management services, including monthly
bookkeeping, payroll processing, and preparation of interim financial statements. The firm’s
responsibilities include reviewing the reconciled bank statements from the MPO, recording
depreciation, managing payroll tax filings and retirement contributions, and generating financial
reports that support compliance with grant requirements. Financial statements are prepared in
accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), though the firm does not
provide audit or assurance services. The MPO retains responsibility for ensuring the accuracy
and completeness of the financial data provided.25
The Lee County MPO engages CliftonLarsonAllen LLP (CLA) to conduct an annual assertion-based
examination in accordance with Florida Statutes (s. 218.415, F.S) which governs the investment
of public funds. The purpose of this engagement is to obtain reasonable assurance that the MPO
is in compliance with applicable laws and regulations related to public fund investments. The
examination is conducted under Association of International Certified Professional Accountants
(AICPA) and government auditing standards and includes internal control assessments and risk
evaluations. CLA issues a report to management and the Florida Auditor General, contributing to
the MPO’s financial transparency and accountability.26
3.3. Procurement procedures
Collier MPO
The Collier MPO follows Collier County’s Procurement Manual and Procurement Ordinance for
all procurement activities.27 The MPO adopts these policies by reference, ensuring consistency
and legal compliance. The MPO independently approves procurement actions associated with
federal or state grant funds, though the administrative steps are carried out by the County.28
The Collier MPO reviews and approves Requests for Proposals (RFPs), Requests for Professional
Services (RPSs), and subsequent contracts, and actions taken within the MPO’s authority
23 Collier MPO Grant Management and Financial Management Policies and Procedures. Page 1
24 Lee County MPO UPWP 2025.
25 Lee County MPO Engagement Letter Accounting with Payroll
26 Lee County MPO Auditor Statement 2024.
27 Collier MPO Grant Management and Financial Management Policies and Procedures. Page 3
28 Collier MPO Executed 2025 Staff Services Agreement. Page 4
Page 267 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 15
regarding these matters are independent of the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approval.
However, contracts and bids for the purchase of materials and services using federal or state
grants funds allocated to the MPO and identified in the UPWP are also governed by County
policies, including the County's Purchasing Ordinance and administrative regulations.29
Lee County MPO
The Lee County MPO maintains its own internally developed procurement procedures. These
procedures are tiered based on purchase thresholds: transactions under $2,000 require a
Purchase Order Request Form approved by the Executive Director; those between $2,001 and
$10,000 require three verbal quotes and a Request for Quotations Form; purchases from
$10,001 to $25,000 necessitate three written quotes and Director approval; and purchases
exceeding $25,000 must be authorized by the MPO Governing Board. Each month, the MPO
Designee scans the Truist Transaction Activity report for accuracy, and bank reconciliations are
prepared and reviewed by designated staff. Non-routine purchases and any transaction over
$2,000 require additional documentation and formal approvals. 30
The MPO also enforces financial oversight protocols: checks must bear two signatures (the
Executive Director and one MPO Governing Board officer), while invoices are reviewed for
accuracy by both the MPO Designee and Project Manager. Emergency checks can be signed
solely by the MPO Executive Director but require retroactive MPO Governing Board officer
approval. Credit card purchases are reserved for specific needs and require prior PO approval. 31
Travel reimbursements follow FDOT’s Travel Form process.32
Assets (land, buildings, equipment, information technology equipment, and building
improvements) that cost $1,000 or more with a useful life over one year are capitalized, and
depreciation is calculated using the straight-line method according to asset type.33
3.4. Invoicing, grant administration, and reimbursement practices
Collier MPO
The majority of the Collier MPO’s funding comes from federal and state grants, which operate
on a reimbursement basis. Local jurisdictions, including Collier County, the City of Naples,
Everglades City, and Marco Island, contribute to the MPO’s funding through annual
assessments.34 These local contributions are used to supplement federal and state funding,
cover non-reimbursable expenses, and ensure that the MPO can operate effectively while
awaiting grant reimbursements.35 Local match funds are provided for specific programs, such as
the Safe Streets for All (SS4A) initiative, to meet grant requirements and support critical
planning activities. Additionally, as part of the Consolidated Planning Grant (CPG) program
operated by FDOT, state-level credits from toll revenue expenditures are used to meet non-
federal matching requirements for federal program funds (“soft match”).36
29 Collier MPO Grant Management and Financial Management Policies and Procedures. Page 1
30 AP Disbursements Process Memo 2023.
31 Operating Procedure for Equipment Purchase, Maintenance & Disposal (Internal Document)
32 AP Disbursements Process Memo 2023.
33 Operating Procedure for Equipment Purchase, Maintenance & Disposal (Internal Document) Pages 3-4
34 Collier MPO UPWP Fiscal Year 24/25 – 25/26. Page 1.
35 Collier MPO UPWP Fiscal Year 24/25 – 25/26. Pages 46 & 47.
36 Collier MPO UPWP Fiscal Year 24/25 – 25/26. Pages 8 and 73.
Page 268 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 16
The Collier MPO coordinates with local governments, particularly Collier County, to fulfill local
match requirements for federal and state grants. For example, in the current SS4A grant, Collier
County contributes 16% and the Collier MPO contributes 4% of eligible invoiced amounts, which
are applied consistently across reimbursement requests. In this instance, local match
contributions are shared between the MPO and county based on a structured, proportional
approach. Local match funds may be provided through interdepartmental transfers or other
internal mechanisms since the Collier MPO is administratively linked to Collier County. All
contributions are documented to ensure compliance with grant requirements and federal
regulations. These practices are integrated into the MPO’s planning and budgeting processes,
such as the UPWP, to ensure alignment between funding responsibilities and program
objectives.37
In addition to entering timesheets in the County’s SAP time and attendance recording system,
Collier MPO staff also track their work hours using an Excel-based time log organized by pay
period, with time coded to specific UPWP task numbers. Time is rounded to the nearest quarter
or half hour and submitted alongside signed timesheets to the MPO Executive Director.
Electronic versions of time logs, leave slips, and timesheets are stored on the MPO’s shared G:
drive. Staff are expected to prepare timesheets in advance for planned leave, and in the event of
an unplanned absence, the Executive Director or designee submits a draft based on available
records. Consistency across time logs, time sheets, and quarterly progress reports is maintained
through staff discussions, often during weekly meetings. Final timesheet oversight and approval
are the responsibility of the MPO Executive Director, in coordination with Collier County’s
administrative and payroll systems.38
Collier MPO staff are required to adhere to Collier County’s CMA 5330 (Grant Administration)
and the County Grants Administration Handbook.39
The Collier MPO submits quarterly invoices and progress reports to FDOT (or appropriate federal
agencies) for reimbursement. These reports are sufficiently detailed to meet federal audit
standards. Payments to the County for services rendered are only made after the MPO receives
funds from these agencies (FDOT, FHWA, FTA or Florida Commission for Transportation
Disadvantaged (CTD)). The MPO is responsible for ensuring that grant conditions are met, and
follows policies outlined in the County's Grant Administration Handbook and CMA 5330, which
comply with the applicable section of the Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR Part 200). 40
Collier MPO staff work with Collier County’s Grants Compliance Office (GCO) to make sure all
state and federal grant rules are followed. The GCO provides support and oversight to help
ensure that the MPO meets all necessary requirements and maintains strong financial controls.
This partnership includes regular reviews to make sure that the MPO follows auditing standards
and handles funds responsibly. A grants accountant from the GCO reviews important financial
activities, helping to prevent errors and ensure that no single person has undue control over the
grant process. Day-to-day grant management is also supported by a staff member from the
County’s Transportation Management Services Department. This person works directly with
MPO staff and coordinates with the GCO to help manage grant-related tasks.41
37 Collier MPO SS4A Local Match Agreement 2023.
38 Collier MPO Quality Assurance Plan.
39 Collier MPO Grant Management and Financial Management Policies and Procedures. Page 2
40 Collier MPO Executed 2025 Staff Services Agreement. Pages 5-6
41 Collier MPO Grant Management and Financial Management Policies and Procedures. Page 1-2
Page 269 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 17
Annual audits of the MPO program are performed as part of the single audit process under the
direction of the Clerk of Courts Finance Department.42 Additionally, the Florida Department of
Transportation’s Office of Inspector General conducts periodic audits of the Collier MPO’s
accounting and financial management policies, procedures, and processes to ensure compliance
with federal regulations, state statutes, and Department policies. For example, the 2023 audit of
Agreement G2821 confirmed that the MPO’s use of funds and submission of invoices adhered to
all applicable requirements, with no recommendations for improvement.43
Lee County MPO
The majority of the Lee County MPO’s funding comes from federal and state grants, such as
FHWA PL and SU funds, FTA 5305(d) funds, and other transportation-related grants. These
grants operate on a reimbursement basis, meaning the MPO completes the work outlined in the
UPWP and submits invoices for reimbursement.44 Local jurisdictions contribute to the MPO’s
funding through annual assessments, which are invoiced once per year. These contributions are
used to supplement federal and state funding, cover federally ineligible expenses, and ensure
that the MPO can operate effectively while awaiting grant reimbursements.45 Other income,
such as miscellaneous revenues, is typically minimal (less than $1,000 annually).46
The Lee County MPO handles grant reimbursements and financial administration in-house. The
MPO is responsible for preparing and submitting monthly progress reports, invoices, and related
documents as required.47
Invoices are date-stamped and reviewed by either the MPO Designee (for administrative
expenses) or the applicable project manager (for consultant invoices). Staff confirm that charges
are accurate, services have been received, and proper documentation is attached. Once signed
off, Task balances are verified in the UPWP, and a check request form is completed. The MPO
Designee compiles the check request, purchase order (if applicable), and supporting
documentation and submits them to the Executive Director for approval. After approval,
documents are scanned and sent to the MPO’s Accountant, who prepares checks for signature.48
The Lee County MPO utilizes Replicon timesheet software for tracking employee hours based on
task codes in the UPWP. This software ensures accurate grant reimbursement submissions by
calculating time allocations per employee rate. Employees submit leave requests electronically,
which are reviewed and approved by the MPO Executive Director. Payroll reports generated
biweekly are reviewed by the MPO Executive Director for accuracy and cross-checked against
the MPO’s financial records. The Executive Director’s timesheet and leave requests are reviewed
and approved by the MPO Treasurer for each timesheet period (bi-weekly). In the event that the
Treasurer is not available, the MPO Chair or Vice Chair reviews and approves the timesheet and
leave requests.49
The Lee County MPO’s financial management is supported by annual audits conducted by
CliftonLarsonAllen LLP. These audits include a review of the MPO’s financial statements, internal
42 Collier MPO UPWP Fiscal Year 24/25 – 25/26. Page 17.
43 Lee County MPO FDOT Office of Inspector General Audit Report 2023. Page 1.
44 Lee County MPO UPWP Fiscal Years 24/25 – 25/26.
45 Lee County MPO UPWP Fiscal Years 24/25 – 25/26. Pages 17 and 40.
46 Lee County MPO Cash Receipts & Cash Management Process 2024.
47 Lee County MPO UPWP Fiscal Years 24/25 – 25/26. Page 22.
48 Lee County MPO Accounts Payable Disbursements Process 2024.
49 Lee County MPO Payroll Process Memo 2024.
Page 270 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 18
controls, and compliance with federal and state regulations, such as the Uniform Guidance (2
CFR Part 200) and Florida Statutes. The auditors assess the MPO’s use of funds, including
expenditures of federal awards, to ensure that they align with grant requirements and financial
reporting standards.50 Additionally, the audits evaluate the MPO’s internal controls to identify
any deficiencies and ensure proper financial management practices.51
3.5. Office infrastructure and technology platforms
Collier MPO
The Collier MPO maintains ownership of its own office equipment, software, and IT assets,
although these are supported by Collier County's Information Technology department. Annual
interdepartmental charges may apply for IT services. Equipment and software purchases funded
through grants must comply with federal regulations, specifically 2 CFR Part 200. MPO staff
must also follow all County IT policies and procedures. The MPO has access to County motor
pool vehicles for official travel and complies with all County fleet use policies, with
reimbursement as outlined in the County budget.
The MPO pays direct operational costs such as purchasing office furniture and supplies, phone
and cell phone services, printing and copying expenses.
The Collier MPO leases office space from Collier County under the terms of a formal Lease
Agreement originally executed on October 23, 2012. The lease outlines that the MPO occupies
dedicated office space located at 2885 South Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida. The original
space was 663 square feet; however, per the Fourth Amendment to the Lease Agreement,
effective July 1, 2025, the MPO will occupy a reduced space of 555 square feet. Under the lease
terms, the MPO pays quarterly rent, with the rate adjusted periodically through amendments.
As of the latest amendment, the rent is set at $25.00 per square foot, resulting in an annual
rental cost of $13,875, payable in quarterly installments of $3,468.75. The lease is currently
extended through June 30, 2028.52
The Lease Agreement includes a co-location requirement, ensuring that the MPO remains
housed with Collier County's Transportation Management Services Department to promote
interdepartmental collaboration and reduce operational disruption. Relocation of MPO offices is
discouraged and only to occur under reasonable necessity. The lease further specifies that the
MPO must use the premises strictly for MPO-related business and operations deemed to be in
the public interest. Any unauthorized use or alterations to the premises requires prior written
consent from the County.
The term of the lease is tied to the duration of the Staff Services Agreement between the MPO
and Collier County. As long as this Staff Services Agreement remains active and is extended with
concurrence from FDOT and FHWA, the lease is automatically renewed to match the service
dates of that agreement.
Lee County MPO
The Lee County MPO office is located within the City of Cape Coral's City Complex at 815
Nicholas Parkway. The MPO leases approximately 900 square feet of office space for general
administrative and planning purposes. In addition to its dedicated office, ostensibly, the MPO
50 Lee County MPO UPWP Fiscal Years 24/25 – 25/26. Page 22.
51 Lee County MPO Audit 2024. Page 35.
52 Collier 2025 Amendment to Lease Agreement.
Page 271 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 19
has access to shared meeting spaces, including City Council Chambers, through a scheduling
system with Cape Coral.
The lease agreement, originally signed in December 2011, provides for automatic one-year
renewals and can be terminated by either party with six months' notice. Rent is set at $300 per
month ($4.00/sq. ft. annually). The MPO is responsible for routine repairs and personal property
taxes, while the City of Cape Coral covers major maintenance (e.g., HVAC, plumbing, roof),
property/building upkeep, pest control, janitorial services, and utilities (excluding internet and
telephone service, which are paid by the MPO). The MPO also maintains its own general liability,
workers’ compensation, and property insurance.
The Lee County MPO manages its own budget and financial operations, including rent payments
and insurance coverage. It is also responsible for paying for technology and communications
services installed at the leased premises. As with other administrative expenses, these costs are
reflected in the MPO's UPWP. Any lease-related costs or liabilities are managed directly by the
MPO and not shared with the City of Cape Coral. 53
Key similarities and differences
Despite their different administrative structures, the Collier MPO and Lee County MPO share
several core operational practices. Both rely primarily on federal and state grants for funding,
use a two-year UPWP as their financial and planning framework, and follow reimbursement-
based invoicing processes. They also offer comparable employee benefits and paid leave
structures. However, differences exist in how each MPO manages personnel systems, budgeting,
procurement, grant administration, and office infrastructure. The main difference between the
two MPOs in this regard is that the Collier MPO operates under a staff service agreement with
Collier County and therefore benefits from the county’s business operations and administrative
services whereas the Lee County MPO is self-managed and must provide its own business
operations and administrative services. The table below summarizes these key operational
distinctions (Table 4).
Table 4. Comparison of key business and administration functions of Collier MPO and Lee County MPO.
Category Collier MPO Lee County MPO
Organizational
Structure
Operates under a Staff Services
Agreement with Collier County
Independent legal entity, self-
managed
Personnel System Uses Collier County HR system,
benefits, policies
Manages its own HR, contracts
with FMIT for insurance
Budget & Financial
Controls
County OMB and GCO support
financial management
Contracts with CPA firm and
undergoes external audits
Grant
Administration
Administered through Collier
County systems and policies
Handled in-house by MPO staff
Procurement Follows Collier County’s
procurement policies
Develops and administers own
procurement policies
Office & IT
Infrastructure
Leases space from the County;
County provides IT support
Leases from City of Cape Coral;
maintains own IT systems
53 Lee County MPO 2015 Lease Agreement.
Page 272 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 20
4. Planning Functions and Responsibilities
This section provides a comprehensive comparison of the Collier MPO and Lee County MPO’s
planning practices, including their core documents, goal-setting frameworks, project evaluation
and selection processes, performance-based planning practices, and financial forecasting. While
both MPOs operate under the same federal and state requirements and share many
foundational planning elements, the section highlights key distinctions in planning detail,
prioritization methodologies, investment strategies, and specialized local plans.
4.1. Core Planning Documents
Both MPOs are federally mandated to engage in transportation planning processes that are
continuing, comprehensive, and cooperative (the 3C process). This shared fundamental
approach ensures that transportation decisions are made within a broad context, considering
long-term needs and involving various stakeholders. They have similar core functions and
responsibilities, including the requirement to develop and maintain the following essential
planning documents/processes:
• Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP):54 Updated every five years, it integrates multi-
modal components, land use data, and projected revenues to produce a 20+ year
outlook on transportation needs and funding priorities. The LRTP also serves as the
foundational document for project selection and prioritization in the Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP).
• Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP): A two-year work plan of action detailing the
transportation planning and related activities to be undertaken by an MPO, serving as
the basis for allocating federal, state, and local funds for these purposes, while outlining
the work scope, expected products, responsible parties, timeframes, deadlines, costs,
and funding sources.
• Transportation Improvement Program (TIP): Updated annually, this fiscally constrained,
five-year program identifies all federally funded, regionally significant, and locally
prioritized multimodal transportation improvements and is consistent with the MPO’s
adopted LRTP.
• Public Participation Plan/Public Involvement Plan (PPP/PIP):55 A documented
framework that outlines the strategies and procedures for proactively informing and
engaging the public and various interested parties in the metropolitan transportation
planning process.
• Congestion Management Process (CMP): A required element for Transportation
Management Areas (TMAs) in federal law and all Florida MPOs in state statute, the CMP
involves monitoring transportation system performance, identifying congestion, and
proposing remedial measures.
• Transportation Disadvantaged Service Plans (TDSPs): A tactical plan, jointly developed
by the planning agency, Community Transportation Coordinator (CTC), and Local
Coordinating Board (LCB; a function served by both the Collier and Lee County MPOs),
54 The 2050 LRTP update is currently underway for both MPOs, with adoption targeted for December
2025.
55 Collier MPO uses PPP; Lee County MPO uses PIP.
Page 273 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 21
that outlines and coordinates cost-effective, efficient, and accessible transportation
services for transportation disadvantaged persons (including persons with disabilities,
senior citizens, and low-income individuals), and is subject to oversight by the Florida
Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged (FCTD). The TDSP is updated
annually, with major updates occurring every five years.
In addition to key mandatory documents, each MPO produces a range of supplementary plans
and studies to address unique priorities and regional contexts. Notable additions include:
Collier MPO
• Zero Emission Fleet Transition Plan, 2025: Evaluates the potential impacts, benefits,
and feasibility of a deployment plan to incorporate battery electric vehicles into the
Collier Area Transit’s (CAT) services and facilities.
• Federal Fiscal Year 2024 Annual Report: Addresses federal transportation performance
measures (TPMs) and the performance measures the MPO Governing Board has
adopted in its Strategic Plan, Bicycle/Pedestrian Master Plan (2019) and Congestion
Management Process (CMP) 2022 Update.
• Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP), 2021: Developed through data analysis, public outreach,
and the formulation of recommendations, the plan provides a framework for reducing
fatalities and serious injuries on highways and local public roads.
• Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP), 2019: Plan for developing comprehensive
bicycle and pedestrian networks, influencing facility improvement priorities, and
coordinating projects across various levels of government.
• Transportation System Performance Report (TSPR) and Action Plan: A document that
evaluates the condition of the transportation system and progress toward targets. The
TSPR is updated every 5 years (included with the LRTP).
It should be noted that the Collier MPO’s LRTP incorporates other plans by reference, including
the BPMP, Collier County TDP, CMP, TSPR and Action Plan, and LRSP.
Lee County MPO
• Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (CSAP), 2025: Developed to reduce fatalities and
serious injuries on roadways, aligning with Vision Zero goals.
• Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (BPSAP), 2020: Provides a roadmap for
improving pedestrian and bicycle safety by analyzing crash data to identify high-risk
locations and recommending effective safety countermeasures.
• Transportation Systems Management & Operations (TSM&O) Plan, 2019: Identifies
strategies to address safety and congestion systemwide and at the corridor level in Lee
County.
• System Performance Report (SPR): A document that evaluates the condition of the
transportation system and progress toward meeting federally required performance
targets. The SPR is updated every 5 years (included with the LRTP).
It should be noted that the Lee County MPO’s LRTP incorporates other plans by reference,
including the TSM&O Plan, LeeTran’s TDP, the SPR, the Bicycle/Pedestrian Element, and a
Regional Freight Study.
Page 274 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 22
4.2. Planning Visions and Long-Range Goals56
Collier MPO
The Collier MPO’s 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) is guided by a vision for “an
integrated multimodal transportation system” that supports the safe and efficient movement of
people and goods while protecting environmental quality and community character. This vision
is supported through the following 11 distinct planning goals:
1. Ensure transportation system security for users.
2. Protect environmental resources.
3. Improve system continuity and connectivity.
4. Reduce roadway congestion.
5. Promote freight movement.
6. Increase the safety of the transportation system for users.
7. Promote multimodal solutions.
8. Promote the integrated planning of transportation and land use.
9. Promote sustainability in the planning of transportation and land use.
10. Consider climate change vulnerability and risk in transportation decision-making.
11. Consider Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CAV) technology in the future.
Each goal is supported by evaluation criteria57 and associated numerical weighting factors,
which guide project prioritization.
Lee County MPO
The Lee County MPO’s LRTP articulates a vision for a balanced, multimodal transportation
system that improves long-term mobility and access for people and goods. Consistent with this
vision, the MPO identifies eight long term goals that guide the development and maintenance of
the county’s transportation system. These goals are:
1. Enhance the safety and security of the transportation system for both motorized and
non-motorized users,
2. A transportation system that offers meaningful transportation choices for existing and
future residents, visitors, and businesses,
3. A transportation system that is financially feasible and uses the best available
technology to improve the efficiency of the system,
4. A transportation system that is sensitive to the community’s health, the community’s
character, and the changing environment,
5. A sustainable transportation system that supports the economic competitiveness of the
region,
6. A transportation system that manages congestion, enhances connectivity between
modes, and improves the resiliency and reliability of the system to keep people and
goods moving,
7. A transportation system that is coordinated through local, regional, and state agencies
and encourages quality growth and sustainable land development practices, and
56 Both MPOs are adopting new LRTPs in December 2025. The information presented in this section is
subject to change based on the contents of the soon to be adopted LRTP updates.
57 The evaluation criteria are discussed further in section 4.3: Project Prioritization and Funding
Page 275 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 23
8. A transportation system that supports the development and implementation of
Autonomous, Connected, and Mobility on Demand options for our residents and
visitors.
The Lee County MPO identifies safety as a top priority, citing negative trends in recent safety
performance measures as a justification for greater emphasis.
While the Lee County MPO uses evaluation criteria for roadway and transit projects, including
weighted scoring for transit needs, it does not apply a comprehensive set of numerical weights
across all LRTP goals, as Collier does.
4.3. Project Prioritization and Funding
Both MPOs follow federal and state requirements for prioritizing and funding transportation
projects. While their processes reflect local context and policy priorities, each organization uses
similar tools, such as long-range needs assessments, data-driven evaluation criteria, and annual
Lists of Project Priorities (LOPP), to guide transportation investment decisions. This section
summarizes and compares their approaches.
Collier MPO
Needs Plan Development
The Collier MPO's 2045 LRTP Needs Plan identifies multimodal transportation projects needed
to address current and future deficiencies, regardless of funding availability. This process is the
initial step in understanding and prioritizing the region's overall transportation needs. Key
components include:
• Modal and Thematic Focus Areas:
o Roadways: Draws on prior unfunded needs identified in previous LRTP, corridor
studies, the County’s Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), and
integrates freight and analysis of congested roadways.
o Environmental: Applies the ETDM process and wetland/wildlife analysis, with
negative scoring for impacts.
o Resiliency: Scores projects based on sea level rise vulnerability using NOAA
tools. This focus area was added in response to FDOT and FHWA expectation
letters.
o Technology: Prioritizes ITS and potential for CAV deployment. CAV
considerations were also included in response to FDOT and FHWA expectation
letters.
o Bicycle & Pedestrian: Based on crash data and gap analysis from the MPO’s
Master Plan.
o Transit: Informed by the TDP, ridership forecasts (T-BEST), and public input.
o Airports: Reviews plans for off-airport access improvements.
• Comprehensive Plan Review: Collates needs from past LRTPs, TIPs, CMPs, TDPs, safety
plans, FDOT programs, and airport layout plans.
• Partner and Public Engagement: Involves FDOT, Collier County agencies, advisory
committees (TAC, CAC, BPAC, etc.), and the general public through surveys and virtual
meetings.
• Travel Demand Modeling: Uses the FDOT District One model with 2045 socioeconomic
data to identify congestion and deficiencies.
Page 276 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 24
Project Evaluation and Prioritization
To prioritize projects within the LRTP's Needs Plan (financially unconstrained list of projects
needed by 2045) and then its Cost Feasible Plan (financially constrained list), the Collier MPO
uses a detailed framework that links specific criteria to each of the LRTP’s 11 goals and scores
projects accordingly to produce a ranked list. Each goal is assigned a weighting factor to
emphasize certain areas deemed more crucial for the transportation system (e.g., "Reduce
Roadway Congestion" – 18%, "Consider CAV Technology – 4%). Projects are scored based on
how well they meet the criteria, with negative scores for environmental impacts (Collier County
contains more protected, environmentally sensitive lands relative to many other MPOs, e.g.,
panther habitat, wetlands) and positive scores for resiliency. The scoring results are used to rank
projects in both the Needs Plan and the fiscally constrained Cost Feasible Plan.
Transit needs are evaluated and prioritized using a quantitative/qualitative methodology that
weighs the benefits of each service improvement against the others. Three categories were
identified to determine the criteria for evaluation: public outreach, transit markets, and
productivity/efficiency.
Bicycle and pedestrian projects follow a two-step evaluation process: an initial staff screening
for eligibility (timeliness, constructability, right-of-way availability, utility costs, and overall cost)
followed by evaluation, scoring, and ranking by staff and advisory committees based on criteria
outlined in the adopted Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
Project Selection
The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) serves as the MPO’s short-range (5-year)
project implementation tool, advancing a subset of projects from the LRTP’s Cost Feasible Plan.
Every project included in the TIP must be consistent with the LRTP, ensuring that near-term
investments reflect the MPO’s long-term vision.
Project selection for the TIP is based on each project’s potential to improve transportation
safety and/or performance, increase capacity or relieve congestion, and preserve existing
infrastructure. These criteria are direct reflections of the broader goals and objectives
established in the LRTP, reinforcing the linkage between long-range planning and near-term
decision-making.
Each year, the MPO adopts a List of Project Priorities (LOPP), derived from the LRTP, which is
submitted to FDOT for funding consideration. The LOPP is reviewed by key advisory committees
(TAC, CAC, BPAC, and CMC), and safety-related criteria are specifically applied to bicycle and
pedestrian, congestion management, and bridge projects.
Allocation of Funds
While most TIP funding decisions are derived directly from the LRTP-Roadway CFP, the MPO
applies a separate policy to allocate its federal Surface Transportation Block Grant – Urban (SU)
and Transportation Alternative – Urban (TALU) “Box Funds.” Incorporated in the 2045 LRTP CFP,
this policy assigns 100 percent of the available SU & TALU funds (roughly $6 million/year in the
2045 LRTP) to specific project categories on a five-year rotating basis:
• Year 1: Pedestrian and Bicycle
• Year 2: Bridges
• Year 3: Congestion Management
• Year 4: Pedestrian and Bicycle
• Year 5: Congestion Management
Page 277 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 25
Even within this rotation, project selection is still grounded in LRTP goals and supporting plans.
Bicycle and pedestrian projects are evaluated using safety and connectivity criteria consistent
with the LRTP and BPMP. Congestion management projects reflect priorities identified through
the MPO’s Congestion Management Process. Bridge projects are selected based on the County E
of 951 Bridge Report, using criteria that emphasize emergency response, mobility, and system
preservation.
Lee County MPO
Needs Plan Development
The Lee County MPO's Needs Assessment aims to identify projects that support long-term
mobility goals and meet future transportation demands without initial regard for cost or
available funding.
• Strategic Focus Areas:
o Roadways: Informed by a TSM&O Plan to enhance system performance and
connectivity across all modes.
o Freight: Plans for future freight growth, including rail and air cargo, as economic
priorities.
o Constrained Corridors: Identifies roadways that cannot be widened, encouraging
Complete Streets and environmental preservation.
o Transit: Guided by the TDP and community input, including BRT, commuter
express, feeder networks, and microtransit services. Capital and tech needs such
as signal priority and branded infrastructure are also considered.
o Bicycle & Pedestrian: Aims to close network gaps, drawing from local plans and
existing infrastructure assessments.
• Plan Review and Stakeholder Coordination: Builds from previous LRTPs, LeeTran’s TDP,
and jurisdictional bike/ped plans, in collaboration with agency staff and the public.
• Travel Demand Forecasting: Applies the same D1RPM model used by Collier MPO to
evaluate long-range needs across jurisdictional boundaries.
Project Evaluation and Prioritization
The Lee County MPO, in collaboration with its Technical Advisory Committee, developed 12
project evaluation criteria to guide the selection of transportation projects. Roadway projects
are prioritized based on their performance against these evaluation criteria, public input, and
the availability of projected revenues.
For transit needs specifically, a hybrid qualitative/quantitative methodology is employed, with
four weighted evaluation categories:
• Community Support (35% weight),
• Ridership Potential (20% weight),
• Key Activity Center/Regional Connectivity (20% weight), and
• Funding Potential (25% weight).
The Lee County MPO's approach to prioritizing bicycle and pedestrian projects is multifaceted,
drawing from projects identified in the 2045 Cost Feasible Plan, MPO bicycle/pedestrian
priorities, and high-priority projects from local jurisdiction bicycle pedestrian plans or project
lists. A significant component of the prioritization for non-motorized safety improvements
comes from the 2020 update of the MPO’s 2013 Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan
which analyzes crash data and recommends high-impact safety projects across Lee County.
Page 278 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 26
Additionally, “Provides bicycle, pedestrian, or transit improvement” is included as a specific
evaluation criterion in the overall prioritization of transportation projects.
Project Selection
The Lee County MPO’s LRTP provides the foundation for selecting projects for the TIP. Every
project programmed in the TIP must be consistent with the LRTP, ensuring that short-term
investments support the region’s long-term transportation goals.
Project selection is guided by criteria reflecting the LRTP’s goals: improving safety and
performance, relieving congestion, and preserving infrastructure. Safety is heavily weighted.
Projects located at sites with prior fatalities, for instance, receive higher scores.
Project-specific selection processes include:
• Highway Projects: Selected from LRTP candidate projects and prioritized by the MPO in
coordination with FDOT.
• Transit Projects: Drawn from the Transit Element of the LRTP, with emphasis on asset
condition, safety, and annual bus replacement commitments.
• Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects: Screened for feasibility, then ranked based on criteria
including environmental impact, connectivity, traffic characteristics, and facility type.
• Congestion Management Projects: Identified through the Congestion Management
Process and the TSM&O Plan.
• Highway Safety Projects: Submitted by the MPO and local partners to FDOT, which
applies its own evaluation and programming criteria.
Each year, the MPO adopts a List of Project Priorities (LOPP), developed through this selection
process and reviewed by advisory committees (TAC, CAC, BPCC). The LOPP is finalized after a
public hearing and transmitted to FDOT for use in programming state and federal funds.
Allocation of Funds
While many TIP funding decisions are project-specific, the Lee County MPO also allocates funds
by category to support multimodal and operational improvements, referred to as the
Multimodal Enhancement “Box” Funds. These allocations focus on projects not tied to major
capacity expansion projects but still essential to safety, connectivity, and system efficiency.
Key funding allocations include:
• Congestion Management Projects: Supported by an annual $5 million set-aside of SU
funds, including $1 million reserved specifically for traffic operations and transit
enhancements.
• Bus Replacement: In accordance with the LRTP, the TIP programs $1.5 million annually
in suballocated federal funds for bus replacement. These expenditures are treated as
recurring multimodal priorities and typically funded through TALU (Transportation
Alternatives Program (TA) allocations for urbanized areas over 200,000) and SU
allocations.
• Multimodal Enhancement “Box” Funds: Over $28 million in the current TIP has been
dedicated to bicycle, pedestrian, and traffic operations improvements through this
flexible funding source, supported by SU, TALU, and additional federal and local funds.
This includes approximately $4.5 million from the Shared-Use Non-motorized (SUN) Trail
and Safe Routes to School programs.
Page 279 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 27
• Highway Safety Program (HSP): The TIP includes $12.3 million in HSP-funded projects,
supplemented by other sources (SU, SA, DS, DDR, local funds) to deliver improvements
such as RRFBs, traffic separators, medians, and roundabouts.
• Local Funds: Local contributions exceed $97 million over the five-year TIP period and
are often used as match funding for state and federal programs. These funds support
projects both on and off the state highway system.
The TIP presents each project with estimated costs by phase—PD&E, Design, Right-of-Way,
Construction—and identifies the source and year of each funding commitment. Because
projects progress through different stages, annual funding levels vary according to scope and
readiness.
4.4. Performance-Based Planning
Both the Collier MPO and the Lee County MPO operate under federal requirements for
Transportation Performance Management (TPM), a framework that links investment and policy
decisions to measurable outcomes. TPM requires MPOs to track performance measures, set
data-driven targets, and align their planning processes with national performance goals. The
objective is to improve accountability and transparency in transportation decision-making. As
part of this process, both MPOs coordinate closely with FDOT and local public transportation
providers when establishing performance targets.
Collier MPO
Performance targets are used to inform the Collier MPO’s investment decisions through the
LRTP and TIP processes and are embedded throughout its planning documents, including the
Strategic Plan, the 2019 Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan, and the 2022 update to the
Congestion Management Process (CMP). The Strategic Plan, which is updated annually, serves
as an internal guide for MPO staff priorities and work activities.
The Collier MPO supports and integrates federal and state performance management
requirements into its TIP and LRTP, often by agreeing to program projects that support
statewide targets. It also supports transit asset management (TAM) and transit safety
performance measures by agreeing to program projects that aim to achieve the targets set by its
transit provider, CAT. Key performance areas include:
• Highway Safety (PM1): The MPO has adopted FDOT’s Vision Zero safety performance
targets, which aim for zero fatalities and serious injuries, both in total numbers and
rates per 100 million Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), including for non-motorized users.
The MPO plans and programs TIP projects specifically designed to contribute to these
targets and actively monitors and reports on traffic safety data trends annually.
• Pavement and Bridge Condition (PM2): The MPO supports FDOT’s targets for the
condition of pavement and bridges on the National Highway System (NHS), including
both Interstate and non-Interstate facilities.
• System Performance and Freight (PM3): The MPO supports FDOT’s targets for reliability
of travel time on NHS routes and for freight movement using the Truck Travel Time
Reliability (TTTR) index. CMAQ performance measures are not applicable, as Collier
County meets national air quality standards.
Page 280 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 28
• Transit Asset Management (TAM): The MPO supports the performance targets set by
Collier Area Transit (CAT), which is a Tier II provider managed by the Collier County
Board of County Commissioners. CAT does not participate in the FDOT Group TAM Plan
but maintains targets for rolling stock, equipment, infrastructure, and facilities.
• Transit Safety: In September 2020, the MPO adopted CAT’s transit safety targets, which
address fatalities, injuries, safety events, and system reliability.
Beyond federal requirements, the Collier MPO also employs a range of locally adopted and
internal/operational performance measures, including:
• Congestion Management Process (CMP): The 2022 CMP update implemented a
Performance Monitoring Plan, and the MPO issued a call for congestion management
projects, with reporting scheduled to occur after project completion.
• Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP): The 2019 BPMP specifies a facility
inventory by June 2025 to establish a comparison with 2020 baseline conditions and
monitor progress.
• Local Roads Safety Plan (LRSP): Focuses on incorporating high crash
corridor/intersection locations into project prioritization, encouraging safety coalitions,
and endorsing enhanced safety practices. The MPO monitors and reports on LRSP
implementation as part of its safety performance report.
• Strategic Plan Performance Measures: Includes internal performance indicators related
to resource efficiency, staff retention, and consistent public engagement.
Lee County MPO
The Lee County MPO maintains a performance-based planning process aligned with federal
requirements and FDOT targets. The 2045 LRTP includes a System Performance Report that
details the MPO’s support for required performance areas and targets, and the MPO periodically
updates its commitments through formal resolutions.
Performance measures tracked by the Lee County MPO include:
• Highway Safety (PM1): The Lee County MPO has adopted FDOT’s Vision Zero safety
performance targets, using five-year rolling averages of crash data and vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) for trend analysis and to estimate the effectiveness of its transportation
investments.
• Pavement and Bridge Condition (PM2): The MPO formally supported FDOT’s statewide
targets for NHS pavement and bridge conditions in January 2023 and reaffirmed this
support in November 2024 in response to adjusted targets for poor NHS bridge
conditions.
• System Performance, Freight, and Air Quality (PM3): The MPO supports FDOT’s targets
for travel time reliability and the TTTR index. Notably, the MPO’s baseline data for PM3
in 2017 was reported as “Not Available,” which may limit the MPO’s ability to track long-
term trends for this performance area. CMAQ performance measures are not
applicable, as Lee County meets national air quality standards.
• Transit Asset Management (TAM): LeeTran, the public transit provider in the Lee
County MPO area, is a Tier II agency and develops its own TAM Plan and targets, which
are supported by the Lee County MPO.
Page 281 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 29
• Transit Safety: The MPO supports safety targets set in LeeTran’s 2025 Public
Transportation Agency Safety Plan (PTASP), which covers key metrics such as fatalities,
injuries, and reliability.
Beyond federally mandated measures, the Lee County MPO aligns its CMP objectives with
SMART criteria (Specific, Measurable, Agreed, Realistic, Time-bound) and sets quantitative
goals—such as reducing the percentage of roadways with a volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio
above 1. It also follows a formal eight-step CMP process as recommended by the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA), utilizing comprehensive multimodal performance measures for
evaluation.
4.5. Financial Forecasting
The Collier and Lee County MPOs both undertake comprehensive financial planning and
forecasting as a critical component of their LRTPs, ensuring that anticipated transportation
improvements are fiscally feasible and aligned with long-term regional needs.
It should be noted that the financial forecasts presented below are based on the 2045 LRTP
cycle and reflect assumptions available at that time. However, preliminary guidance for the 2050
LRTP indicates a significant reduction (approximately 75%) in state non-SIS revenues available
for MPO programming. This shift will affect future cost-feasible planning, particularly for non-SIS
capacity projects. Both MPOs are actively reviewing updated forecasts and adjusting their
financial strategies accordingly.
Collier MPO
The Collier MPO’s financial plan serves as the foundation for developing its Cost Feasible Plan,
which prioritizes projects identified through the Needs Assessment based on available funding.
The plan incorporates all revenues reasonably expected through the 2045 horizon year, with
costs and revenues expressed in Year of Expenditure (YOE) dollars. Financial forecasts are
organized into four multi-year periods: FY 2021–2025, FY 2026–2030, FY 2031–2035, and FY
2036–2045.
Revenue Forecasting Assumptions
Collier MPO’s revenue projections draw from federal, state, and local sources:
Federal and State Revenues: FDOT’s 2045 Revenue Forecast provides estimates based solely on
existing revenue sources, allocating funds for LRTP development after meeting statewide
maintenance and safety objectives.
• Federal revenues are drawn from FDOT’s Federal Aid Forecast for FYs 2018–2027.58
• State revenues are based on the September 2017 Revenue Estimating Conference (REC)
forecast for FYs 2019–2028, which assumes 2.5 percent–3.0 percent annual growth
across taxes such as fuel, tourism-related, vehicle-related, and documentary stamp
taxes.
• Turnpike revenue forecasts assume a nominal annual growth of 1.93 percent in 2029,
decreasing to -0.44 percent by 2045. With a constant 2.60 percent inflation rate, this
58 As the 2045 LRTP was developed prior to 2020, federal and state revenue forecasts were based on
FDOT’s Federal Aid Forecast for FYs 2018–2027 and the September 2017 Revenue Estimating Conference
(REC), respectively.
Page 282 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 30
translates into a real annual decline of approximately 0.65 percent. MPOs do not
program Turnpike capital projects.
• A 2.60 percent annual inflation rate is applied indefinitely to all nominal figures.
• FDOT reserves sufficient funds at the statewide level for non-capacity programs (e.g.,
safety, maintenance, product support), eliminating the need for county-level estimates
for those categories.
Local Revenues: Collier County and its municipalities rely on a mix of impact fees, fuel taxes, and
general fund transfers.
• Transportation Impact Fees (TIF): Projected through 2045 based on historical collections,
permitting trends, and medium-level 2045 population projections from UF’s Bureau of
Economic and Business Research (BEBR). Assumes constant adopted fee rates and
accounts for pre-payment adjustments.
• Fuel Taxes: Existing local fuel taxes (12 cents local option fuel tax (LOFT) plus 3 cents of
state fuel tax for local use) are assumed to continue through 2045. Due to declining fuel
use, revenues are projected to fall by 1.5 percent annually.
• General Fund Transfers (Ad Valorem): Assumed to continue with a 1.2 percent annual
adjustment to reflect population growth.
• Sales Tax: A 1-cent infrastructure surtax approved in 2018 is expected to generate $490
million over seven years, with $191 million allocated to transportation projects through
2026. While this surtax is not assumed beyond 2026, its short-term impact is
recognized.
Transit Costs: Operating and capital cost projections for Collier County’s transit services are
based on CAT’s TDP, which is incorporated into the LRTP, and validated National Transit
Database data. An annual inflation rate of 1.8 percent is applied to both operating and capital
costs beginning in TDP year 2030.
Airport Funding: Sourced from FAA grants, user fees (e.g., Passenger Facility Charges), and
tenant rents, with capital revenues projected for airports within the MPO's jurisdiction.
Total projected revenues for roadway projects through 2045 are approximately $1.5 billion
across federal, state, and local sources. Cost estimates incorporate environmental mitigation
and use FDOT’s 2045 LRTP Cost Estimation Tool. Planning-level costs include 5 percent for PD&E
and 15 percent for preliminary engineering (PE) based on construction costs. The remaining
funds support transit capital and operations, bicycle and pedestrian improvements,
maintenance, and other multimodal system needs.
With respect to environmental mitigation cost estimates for the 2045 LRTP, the Collier MPO
used the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Panther Habitat Assessment Methodology to
calculate Panther Habitat Units (PHUs). These units quantify the amount of mitigation required
to offset the conversion of panther habitat for other uses, as mandated by federal permitting
requirements. To fulfill these obligations, an equivalent PHU value must be acquired elsewhere
within the Panther Focus Area to secure and permanently preserve replacement habitat.
Lee County MPO
The Lee County MPO’s 2045 LRTP presents a 25-year vision for a balanced multimodal
transportation system, including highway, transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and trail projects. All
revenue and cost estimates are in Year of Expenditure (YOE) dollars. The MPO collaborates with
Page 283 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 31
FDOT and local partners to identify and forecast available funding sources to ensure a cost-
feasible plan.
Revenue Forecasting Assumptions
Lee County MPO’s financial strategy incorporates federal, state, and local revenues:
Federal and State Revenues: FDOT’s 2045 Revenue Forecast provides estimates based solely on
existing revenue sources, allocating funds for LRTP development after meeting statewide
maintenance and safety objectives.
• Core state programs, such as pavement maintenance, bridge repair, and operations, are
prioritized at the district level before funds are directed toward capacity expansion.
• FDOT maintains performance targets (e.g., 80 percent of state highway pavement and
90 percent of FDOT-maintained bridges meeting standards).
• Aviation and seaport development revenues are forecast separately and not available to
the MPO for LRTP programming.
Local Revenues: Fuel taxes are a primary local revenue source, supplemented by other local
revenue sources such as impact fees and toll revenues.
• Lee County levies 12 cents of local option fuel taxes (LOFT). Additionally, 4 cents of State
Fuel Tax are distributed to local governments, including Lee County, for transportation-
related expenditures.
• The toll revenue collected at the Sanibel, Cape Coral and Mid-Point Bridges are first
used to repay the bonds on the bridges.
• Impact fees are assessed by the county and represent a proportional share of the cost of
new facilities needed to serve new development. In the case of transportation, impact
fees are used for widening existing roads or constructing new roads made necessary by
growth. The revenue collected from impact fees cannot be used for operations,
maintenance, or repair of capital facilities.
• Future revenue projections assume continued local growth and sustained investment in
operations and maintenance.
Transit Costs: Operating and capital forecasts for LeeTran services are based on the agency’s
TDP and National Transit Database data. A 1.8 percent annual inflation rate is applied to both
operating and capital costs starting in TDP year 2030.
Total projected revenues available from federal, state, and local sources through 2045 are
approximately $6.5 billion. Of this amount, $1.62 billion (25 percent) is allocated to roadway
projects in the cost feasible plan. The remaining funds support transit capital and operations,
bicycle and pedestrian improvements, maintenance, and other multimodal system needs. Cost
estimates for roadway projects are developed using FDOT District 1’s Costing Tool, with right-of-
way (ROW) costs estimated on a per-acre basis by area type. The remaining funds support
transit capital and operations, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, maintenance, and other
multimodal system needs.
4.9. Key Similarities and Differences
Core Planning Documents
Both MPOs develop and maintain the following core planning documents mandated under 23
U.S.C. §134 and 49 U.S.C. §5303, and corresponding federal regulations:
Page 284 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 32
• Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP)
• Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
• Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP)
• Public Participation Plan (PPP or PIP)
• Congestion Management Process (CMP)
• Performance-Based Planning and Programming (PBPP)
• Transit Asset Management (TAM) Coordination
• Transit Safety Performance Measures
Both MPOs also develop and maintain the following state-required documents as outlined in s.
339.175, F.S:
• Transportation Disadvantaged Service Plan (TDSP)
• List of Project Priorities (LOPP)
In addition to these federally and state-mandated documents, each MPO develops and
maintains a variety of specialized plans and reports tailored to local priorities, system needs, and
regional planning contexts (Table 5).
Table 5. Non-Federally or State-Required MPO Plans
Plan/Document Type Collier MPO Lee County MPO
System Performance
Monitoring
Transportation System
Performance Report (TSPR) &
Action Plan
System Performance Report (SPR)
Safety Plans Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP)
(2021)
Comprehensive Safety Action Plan
(CSAP) (2025)
Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Action
Plan (BPSAP) (2020)
Bicycle & Ped Plan Bicycle and Pedestrian Master
Plan (BPMP) (2019)
Countywide Bicycle & Pedestrian
Action Plan (2013/2020 update)
TSM&O Plan - Transportation Systems Management
& Operations (TSM&O) Plan (2019)
Annual Performance
or Activity Report
Federal Fiscal Year 2024 Annual
Report
-
Zero Emission Plan Zero Emission Fleet Transition
Plan (2025)
-
Planning Vision and Goals
Both MPOs develop their LRTPs in alignment with federal and state mandates, including the
FAST Act’s 10 planning factors, Florida’s Transportation Plan, and FDOT policies. As a result, both
LRTPs emphasize multimodal integration, land use coordination, safety, resiliency, and emerging
technologies such as Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CAVs). Additionally, the Collier MPO
coordinates with Collier County Public Transit & Neighborhood Enhancement Division (PTNE)
and Collier Area Transit (CAT) staff to identify transit studies for inclusion in each new UPWP.
While each MPO structures its goals slightly differently, the underlying priorities are broadly
consistent. The Collier MPO identifies 11 distinct, goal-specific categories tied to project
evaluation criteria and associated weighting factors, while the Lee County MPO outlines eight
broader goals without applying a formal weighting system.
Page 285 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 33
Needs Assessment and Project Prioritization
Both MPOs follow a federally guided, data-driven, and multimodal approach to project
prioritization. Each begins its LRTP development with an unconstrained Needs Plan, identifying
long-term transportation demands. These needs are then refined into a Cost Feasible Plan,
which prioritizes projects based on available revenue forecasts. Both MPOs use FDOT’s District
One Regional Planning Model (D1RPM) to support travel demand forecasting and long-range
needs identification.
Key differences
• Goal Alignment and Evaluation Criteria: The Collier MPO uses 11 clearly defined LRTP
goals, each paired with multiple project evaluation criteria and an associated numerical
weighting factor. Projects receive scores based on how well they meet these criteria,
including negative scores for significant environmental impacts (e.g., intrusion into
panther habitat or wetlands) and bonuses for resiliency features. The Lee County MPO
applies 12 roadway evaluation criteria but does not assign weights to its overarching
LRTP goals. Its approach is more flexible, with fewer explicit scoring penalties for
environmental impacts. Both MPOs are currently updating their goals and evaluation
frameworks for the 2050 LRTP cycle to reflect evolving federal and state planning
guidance.
• Transit Prioritization: Both MPOs use hybrid qualitative/quantitative methods to
evaluate transit needs. However, the Collier MPO relies more heavily on public input
and service efficiency data, while the Lee County MPO weights categories such as
community support and regional connectivity.
• Bicycle and Pedestrian Project Scoring: The Collier MPO incorporates jurisdictional plans
and evaluates bike/ped projects through its Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP),
using crash data, and network gap analysis. The Lee County MPO pulls from multiple
sources: its 2040 Cost Feasible Plan, jurisdictional plans, and its own BP Action Plan. It
includes bike/ped/transit improvements as a general scoring criterion within broader
project evaluation.
• Travel demand forecasting: Both MPOs use District 1 Regional Planning Model (D1-RPM)
for travel demand forecasting and to identify transportation needs. For its 2045 LRTP,
the Collier MPO analyzed two socioeconomic growth scenarios (high and moderate)
based on the CIGM forecast and BEBR medium projection, ultimately submitting the
BEBR medium projection to maintain consistency with Collier County’s Growth
Management Plan. The Lee County MPO does not specify a similar dual-scenario
approach in its 2045 LRTP. Both MPOs use the same GIGM forecasting firm to develop
future projections for consistency. For the 2050 LRTP cycle, the Collier and Lee County
MPOs are exploring alternative network and system scenarios, including a transit-
focused scenario developed in coordination between the two agencies.
Project Selection and Programming
After project evaluation and prioritization, both MPOs select projects based on similar core
objectives, including the potential to improve safety and performance, relieve congestion, and
preserve infrastructure. In both cases, candidate projects are reviewed by advisory committees
and adopted annually through the LOPP process for FDOT consideration. Stakeholder
engagement and public involvement are integral to both MPOs’ prioritization processes.
Additionally, both use the FDOT District One Regional Planning Model (D1RPM) to identify long-
range system needs.
Page 286 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 34
Key differences:
• Safety emphasis and funding submissions: The Lee County MPO gives significant weight
to safety, awarding higher scores to projects located at sites with a history of fatalities.
It sometimes submits candidate projects for FDOT’s discretionary Highway Safety
Program (HSP) funding without assigning specific MPO priorities, deferring instead to
FDOT’s independent evaluation process for these funds. The Collier MPO also
emphasizes safety in its scoring systems, particularly within its Bicycle and Pedestrian
Master Plan (BPMP), Congestion Management Process (CMP), and SU box fund
allocations. However, Collier’s injury and fatality statistics do not make it competitive for
discretionary HSIP funding compared to larger metropolitan areas.
• Use of advisory committees and public input: Both MPOs rely on advisory committee
review and public involvement, but their processes differ slightly. For example, the
Collier MPO applies tailored criteria for certain project types (e.g., bike/ped, congestion
management, and bridge projects), while the Lee County MPO uses a more consolidated
scoring approach.
Funding Allocation Strategies
Both MPOs allocate federal suballocated Surface Transportation Block Grant (SU/TALU) funds
using strategies that emphasize alignment with their LRTP goals, support multimodal
improvements, and prioritize safety and congestion management. Each MPO uses its List of
Project Priorities (LOPP) to guide funding decisions and maintains dedicated funding for bicycle,
pedestrian, transit, and operational projects.
Key differences:
• Approaches to allocating SU/TALU funds: The Collier MPO uses a five-year rotating policy
established in the 2045 LRTP in which 100 percent of SU/TALU funds are allocated to a
specific project category each year (such as bicycle and pedestrian projects in Year 1, bridges
in Year 2, and congestion management in Year 3). This approach provides focused, year-
specific investments across multiple modes while maintaining alignment with LRTP goals.
The draft 2050 LRTP CFP is considering adjustments to the categories, rotation schedule and
funding amounts. In contrast, the Lee County MPO allocates funds across categories each
year through its Multimodal Enhancement “Box” Funds. This includes recurring set-asides of
$5 million annually for congestion management, with a portion reserved for traffic
operations and transit projects, and a separate $1.5 million annual allocation for bus
replacement. These funds support projects not tied to major capacity expansion, including
bicycle, pedestrian, safety, and operational improvements. Funding is distributed based on
project readiness, eligibility, and alignment with LRTP priorities.
Performance-Based Planning
Both Collier and Lee County MPOs operate under federally required Transportation
Performance Management (TPM) frameworks. They:
• Coordinate with FDOT and transit agencies to set and support statewide performance
targets.
• Integrate performance measures into their LRTP and TIP processes.
• Submit a System Performance Report (SPR) as part of their LRTP.
Page 287 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 35
• Adopt and support targets for PM1 (Safety), PM2 (Pavement and Bridge Condition),
PM3 (System Performance and Freight Reliability), and Transit Asset Management
(TAM) and Transit Safety.
• Align investments in the TIP with performance goals.
Key differences:
• Safety data reporting and analysis: Both utilize crash data to analyze trends and assess
investment effectiveness; however, while the Collier MPO provides raw crash statistics
for the county and highlights areas of concentration, the Lee County MPO demonstrates
more detailed safety data trend analysis using five-year rolling averages and individual
year comparisons, as well as differentiating between state highways and off-system
roadways.
• System performance baseline data (PM3): While the Collier MPO reported 2017
baseline performance for Interstate Level of Travel Time Reliability (LOTTR), non-
Interstate NHS LOTTR, and Truck Travel Time Reliability (TTTR), further analysis is
included in Collier’s Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) and Comprehensive Safety Action Plan
(CSAP). The Lee County MPO's 2017 baseline performance for these PM3 measures was
stated as "Not Available" in its System Performance Report, which may limit its ability to
track long-term trends for this performance area. CMAQ performance measures are not
applicable for either MPO, as both Collier and Lee County meet national air quality
standards.
• TIP investment reporting: the Lee County MPO provides specific dollar figures for
various investment categories within its TIP that directly contribute to specific
performance measures, while the Collier MPO categorizes its TIP funding into broad
percentages and notes total funding for the TIP.
• Local performance measures: The Collier MPO details a broad range of locally adopted
performance measures with defined monitoring plans for its CMP, BPMP, and LRSP. It
also tracks internal strategic performance measures related to staffing and public
outreach in its strategic plan. While the Lee County MPO uses comprehensive
multimodal performance measures to evaluate its CMP, it does not outline a
comparable breadth of other local, non-federal performance measurement and
monitoring.
• Target adoption timing: While both align with FDOT, their precise adoption or re-
adoption dates for supporting statewide targets for PM1, PM2, PM3, TAM, and Transit
Safety measures differ, reflecting their independent board meeting schedules and
review processes.
Financial Forecasting
Both the Collier MPO and Lee County MPO use standardized practices for long-range
transportation financial forecasting that align with federal and state expectations. Specifically,
both MPOs rely heavily on FDOT’s 2045 Revenue Forecast for projecting federal and state
funding over the LRTP horizon, prioritize safety and system preservation funding before
identifying capacity-expansion resources (consistent with FDOT policy), use Year of Expenditure
(YOE) dollars to reflect inflation-adjusted cost estimates, and they both rely on a mix of federal,
state, and local revenues, with fuel taxes and impact fees playing key roles.
Key differences:
Page 288 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 36
• Overall financial scale and reporting scope: The Lee County MPO presents a significantly
larger "Total Revenues" figure for 2021-2045 at approximately $6.5 billion, with $3.8
billion coming from local sources. The Collier MPO's reported total for "Roadway
Projects" is around $1.5 billion for 2026-2045, implying a narrower scope of what's
included in that specific total, or a smaller overall total budget relative to Lee County.
• Inflation rate assumptions: The Collier MPO explicitly states a constant annual inflation
rate of 2.6 percent applied indefinitely for all nominal growth figures and uses this to
calculate real decline for Turnpike revenues. The Lee County MPO, while using YOE
dollars, specifies a 1.8 percent annual inflation rate specifically for transit operating and
capital cost projections but does not provide a single, overall explicit inflation rate for all
YOE figures in the same manner as the Collier MPO.
• Local fuel tax forecasting: The Collier MPO provides a detailed breakdown of different
local fuel tax types (e.g., Constitutional Fuel Tax, 9-Cent Fuel Tax, 6-Cent 1st Local
Option Fuel Tax, 5-Cent 2nd Local Option Fuel Tax) with specific revenue projections for
each. The Lee County MPO provides a more general statement about charging 12 cents
LOFT plus 4 cents state fuel tax.
Page 289 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 37
5. Financial Overview
This section contains a breakdown of the budgets, funding sources, and fiscal practices for the
Collier and Lee County MPOs, as outlined in their FY 2024/25–2025/26 Unified Planning Work
Programs (UPWPs), as well as insights into how each MPO allocates federal, state, and local
contributions across operational tasks, consultant contracts, and special initiatives like the
federal Safe Streets for All (SS4A) program. The section also explains how both MPOs manage
liabilities, reserves, and cash flow, highlighting the role of carryover funds, soft match credits,
and reimbursement mechanisms. Finally, it compares their respective TIP investment strategies
and financial structures to show commonalities and key differences in how transportation
funding is prioritized and deployed.
5.1. MPO Budgets and Funding Sources
Collier MPO
The Collier MPO's total budget for the two-year UPWP covering FY 2024/25 and FY 2025/26 is
$3,641,158 (Table 6). This total includes funding from federal, state, and local sources, as well as
allocations across various tasks and activities managed by the MPO and its consultants. Soft
match support from FDOT (toll revenue credits) and non-cash in-kind contributions help meet
federal match requirements, while local governments (Collier County, City of Naples, City of
Marco Island, and Everglades City) contributed $66,000 over the two-year period, 1.8% of the
total UPWP budget.59 Standard annual contributions total $8,000 per year, typically including
$5,000 from Collier County, $2,000 from the City of Naples, and $1,000 from the City of Marco
Island, with no contribution from Everglades City. These funds are held in reserve if not spent
and may be used in future years.
The Collier MPO’s local funding share appears higher in FY 2024/25 due to the use of $50,000 in
local carryover funds to support its SS4A Safety Action Plan.60 Of that amount, Collier County
contributed $40,000, and the MPO contributed $10,000 from its accumulated local funds—
marking the first time in recent history that the MPO itself provided match funding for a special
grant program.
Table 6. Collier MPO UPWP Funding Sources
Funding Source FY 2024/25 Total FY 2025/26 Total Combined Total
FHWA PL $1,107,825.00 $828,086.00 $1,935,911.00
FHWA SU $379,416.00 $350,000.00 $729,416.00
FTA Section 5305 (Carry Over) $116,585.00 – $245,271.00
FTA Section 5307 (Carry Over) $158,550.00 – $158,550.00
USDOT SS4A $200,000.00 – $200,000.00
FDOT Soft Match $223,501.00 $149,635.00 $373,136.00
State TD Trust $30,780.00 $30,780.00 $61,560.00
Local Funding $58,000.0061 $8,000.00 $66,000.00
Total Funding Source $2,274,657.00 $1,366,501.00 $3,641,158.00
59 Collier MPO 2024/25-2025/26 UPWP
60 Collier MPO FY2022 SS4A Project-Specific Agreement
61 $10,000 of this is local carryover and $40,000 was provided by Collier County as match for the SS4A
Safety Action Plan 2024/25. Collier MPO 2024/25-2025/26 UPWP. Page 49
Page 290 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 38
The table below provides a breakdown of the Collier MPO’s two-year budget by Task. It shows
how funds are allocated across core planning activities, administrative functions, and special
projects for fiscal years 2024/25 and 2025/26 (Table 7).
Table 7. Collier MPO UPWP Budget Breakdown by Tasks
Task Description FY 2024/25
Budget
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total
Budget
% of Total
Budget
Administration $482,977 $501,089 $983,066 27%
Data Collection/Development $47,228 $47,228 $94,456 2.6%
Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP)
$53,132 $64,939 $118,071 3.2%
Long Range Planning $586,039 $255,493 $841,532 23.1%
Special Projects and Systems
Planning
$496,489 $251,540 $748,029 20.5%
Transit and Transportation
Disadvantaged
$548,842 $182,720 $731,562 20.1%
Regional Coordination $51,951 $55,493 $107,444 2.8%
Locally Funded Activities $8,000 $8,000 $16,000 0.4%
All Tasks $2,274,657 $1,366,501 $3,641,158 100%
In the Collier MPO UPWP, consultant costs are distributed across individual tasks rather than
consolidated under a single line item. The total consultant funding identified across all tasks in
the UPWP is $1,317,731 for FY 2024/25 and $511,686 for FY 2025/26.62
In terms of expenditures, the Collier MPO’s cost structure reflects most operational spending
devoted to staff salaries and fringe, followed by office expenses and consultant-supported
planning work. Table 8 summarizes the Collier MPO’s recurring operational and consultant costs
for FY 2025, as detailed in internal budget tracking documents. 63
Table 8. Collier MPO Estimated Operating and Planning Costs for FY 2025
Operational Costs Monthly Cost Annual Cost
MPO Staff Salaries/Fringe $45,441 $545,286
Website Maintenance/Hosting $318 $3,810
Building Lease/Rental $1,156 $13,875
Insurance: GL/E&O $296 $3,553
Cell Phones (4) $154 $1,848
Printer/Copier Lease/Usage $360 $4,319
Office Supplies $58 $700
Legal Ads (LCB Meetings) $71 $854
Shipping/Postage $100 $1,200
Landline/Office Phones $83 $1,000
Travel/Business Development $589 $7,073
Total $48,627 $583,518
62 Collier MPO 2024/25-2025/26 UPWP. Pages 49 &51
63 Collier MPO Monthly Carry Cost Estimate April 2025
Page 291 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 39
Costs for FY2026 follow a similar structure, with moderate increases reflecting inflation
adjustments and the continuation of multi-year consultant contracts, such as for the Congestion
Management Process (CMP) update (being performed jointly with the Lee County MPO).
Lee County MPO
The total budget for the Lee County MPO’s two-year UPWP covering FY 2024/25 and FY 2025/26
is listed as $4,445,939, which includes funding from federal, state, and local sources. Allocations
are distributed across various tasks and activities managed by the MPO and its consultants. Soft
match support from FDOT (toll revenue credits) helps meet federal match requirements, while
local governments contributed $146,382 over the two-year period, accounting for
approximately 3.3% of the stated UPWP budget.64 Local contributions are based on a dues rate
of 0.112 cents per capita, a practice that originated when the MPO was affiliated with the
Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (RPC). The dues structure was last updated in
2014–2015 when Estero was added to the MPO Governing Board. Since then, the dues paid by
each jurisdiction has remained static to allow for more predictability in budgeting processes. The
current annual contributions total $73,191, distributed as follows: Lee County contributes
$37,212.90; Cape Coral, $18,323.09; Bonita Springs, $5,131.73; Fort Myers, $7,776.94; Estero,
$3,318.78; Sanibel, $726.88; and Fort Myers Beach, $700.00.65
The UPWP also includes a $250,000 discretionary grant from USDOT’s Safe Streets for All (SS4A)
program, explicitly allocated under Task 4.4 for FY 2024/25.66 While this funding is not
separately itemized in the UPWP’s summary tables, it is included in the table below to reflect
the MPO’s full financial capacity. When SS4A funds are incorporated, the total budget rises to
$4,945,938 (Table 9).
Table 9. Lee County MPO UPWP Funding Sources
Funding Source FY 2024/25 Total FY 2025/26 Total Combined Total
FHWA PL $1,317,805 $1,069,652 $2,387,457
CPG $329,922 $329,922 $659,844
FHWA SU - - $0
USDOT SS4A* $250,000 - $250,000
FDOT Soft Match $363,753 $309,022 $672,775
State TD Grant $39,740 $39,740 $79,480
Local Contributions $73,191 $73,191 $146,382
Local Cont. Carry Over - - $250,000*
Total Funding Source $2,374,411 $1,821,527 $4,445,938
*Note: The $250,000 in Local Contribution Carry Over reflects a recurring unspent balance retained across UPWP
cycles. While included in the Combined Total to capture available funding, it is not newly appropriated each fiscal
year.
The Lee County MPO’s two-year UPWP budget is organized into four primary task categories, as
shown below. These categories reflect the MPO’s core planning functions and consultant-
supported activities for FY 2024/25 and FY 2025/26 (Table 10).
64 Lee County MPO 2024/25-2025/26 UPWP. Page 41
65 Personal communication with the Lee County MPO Executive Director, Don Scott, on July 25, 2025.
66 Lee County MPO 2024/25-2025/26 UPWP. Page 41
Page 292 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 40
Table 10. Lee County MPO UPWP Budget Breakdown by Tasks
Task Description FY 2024/25
Budget
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total
Budget
% of Total
Budget
Administration $1,084,054 $1,084,054 $2,168,108 54.9%
Data
Collection/Development
$40,279 $40,279 $80,558 2.0%
Systems Planning $52,484 $52,484 $104,968 2.7%
Special Projects Planning $947,595 $644,710 $1,592,305 40.4%
All Tasks $2,124,412 $1,821,527 $3,945,939* 100.0%
*Note: The total in Table 10 does not include the $250,000 in unallocated local carryover funds shown in Table 9.
These funds are retained for contingency purposes and are not assigned to a specific planning task within the current
UPWP cycle.
To enable a more meaningful comparison between the Collier and Lee County MPOs, the
original four task categories in the Lee County MPO’s UPWP have been reclassified into eight
categories that mirror the Collier MPO’s structure (Table 11). This reclassification was based on
a review of the UPWP narrative and budget allocations:
• Transit, Regional Coordination, and Locally Funded Activities were
disaggregated from the broader “Administration” category.
• Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), Long Range Planning, and Freight
Planning were extracted from “Systems Planning,” with Long Range and Freight
Planning combined to match Collier’s categorization.
• Transportation Disadvantaged Planning was pulled from “Special Projects
Planning” and combined with Transit to reflect Collier’s treatment of these
functions.
Table 11. Lee County MPO UPWP Budget Reformatted to Align with Collier MPO Task Categories
Task Description FY 2024/25
Budget
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total
Budget
% of Total
Budget
Administration $574,880 $574,880 $1,149,760 29.1%
Data Collection/Development $40,279 $40,279 $80,558 2.0%
Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP)
$12,206 $12,206 $24,412 0.6%
Long Range Planning $40,278 $40,278 $80,556 2.0%
Special Projects Planning $907,855 $604,970 $1,512,825 38.3%
Transit & Transportation
Disadvantage
$451,312 $451,312 $902,624 22.9%
Regional Coordination $24,411 $24,411 $48,822 1.2%
Locally Funded Activities $73,191 $73,191 $146,382 3.7%
All Tasks $2,124,412 $1,821,527 $3,945,939* 100.0%
Note: The total in Table 11 does not include the $250,000 in unallocated local carryover funds shown in Table 9.
These funds are retained for contingency purposes and are not assigned to a specific planning task within the current
UPWP cycle.
Page 293 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 41
TIP development, LRTP updates, and freight planning activities for the Lee County MPO are
primarily supported through consultant contracts funded under Task 4.4 (Special Project
Planning). The total consultant funding identified under Task 4.4 in the UPWP is $670,805 for FY
2024/25 and $422,652 for FY 2025/26.67 By pulling out individual items from Task 4.4, we can
approximate total expenditures specifically related to the LRTP, TIP, and regional planning
efforts. For TIP-all related activities, the Lee County MPO allocated approximately $45,000
across both years. For LRTP and related elements (including freight and bicycle-pedestrian
updates), the MPO allocated approximately $608,000 across both years. For regional planning
activities such as congestion management coordination with Collier MPO and regional model
alternatives, the MPO allocated approximately $169,000 across both years.68
The Lee County MPO’s operational costs are primarily driven by staff salaries and fringe
benefits, followed by office expenses such as building rental, equipment leases, and
communications services. Table 12 summarizes the MPO’s estimated recurring monthly and
annual operational costs as outlined in internal budget tracking documents.69
Table 12. Lee County MPO Estimated Operating and Planning Costs for FY 2025
Operational Costs Monthly Cost Annual Cost
MPO Staff Salaries/Fringe $39,052 $468,622
Website Maintenance/Hosting $200 $2,400
Building Lease/Rental $667 $8,000
Insurance: GL/E&O $1,433 $17,200
Printer/Copier Lease/Usage $667 $8,000
Office Supplies $167 $2,000
Shipping/Postage $150 $1,800
Landline/Office Phones $308 $3,700
Travel/Business Development $1,000 $12,000
Meeting Security $667 $8,000
Audit $3,333 $40,000
Accounting/Payroll $1,475 $17,700
IT/Computer Equipment Maint./Replacement $275 $3,300
Attorney $1,000 $12,000
Computer Software $833 $10,000
Internet $208 $2,500
Advertisements $367 $4,400
Total $51,802 $621,622
In addition to covering staff and office operations, the Lee County MPO’s planning budget
allocates funds to external agencies and project-specific activities. Funds were allocated to
LeeTran each year for transit-related program management and support, including staff salaries
($249,922 for FY 2024/25 and $259,922 for FY 2025/26), consultant services for updates to the
LRTP Transit Element ($80,000 for FY 2024/25 and $70,000 for FY 2025/26).70
67 Lee County MPO 2024/25-2025/26 UPWP. Pages 67-70
68 Lee County MPO 2024/25-2025/26 UPWP. Pages 67-70 and Pages 73-79
69 Lee County MPO Operating Budget 2025
70 Collier MPO FY 2024/25–2025/26 UPWP. Page 39
Page 294 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 42
5.2. Liabilities and Reserves
Collier MPO
The Collier MPO’s financial management framework includes several components that reflect
liabilities and reserves, primarily documented in its FY 2024/25–2025/26 UPWP.
Carryover and unexpended funds: the Collier MPO incorporates carryover amounts from prior
fiscal years into its planning budget. This includes Consolidated Planning Grant (CPG) funding
and FTA Section 5305(d) funds, with $116,585 carried forward from prior years. These funds are
applied to ongoing and planned activities but are not reflected as formal reserve balances. The
Collier MPO UPWP also lists $10,000 in carryover for SS4A match-MPO local funds from prior
FYs.71
Non-federal match requirements: To meet non-federal match requirements, the Collier MPO
utilizes state toll revenue credits as soft match. For FY 2024/25, soft match reserves total
$200,184 for FHWA funding and $23,317 for FTA 5305(d) funding. These soft match amounts are
applied by FDOT to fully leverage federal funds and do not represent cash reserves held by the
MPO.72 In addition to the soft match, the Collier MPO has committed local funds to meet the
non-federal match requirements for the Safe Streets for All (SS4A) grant. For FY 2024/25, the
MPO has allocated $40,000 in local funds provided by Collier County as a match for the SS4A
program, supplemented by $10,000 carried forward from prior fiscal years.73
Outstanding consultant contracts: The MPO has active multi-year consultant agreements for
planning efforts including the LRTP, Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP), SS4A Action
Plan, Transit Development Plan (TDP), and Congestion Management Process (CMP). 74
Pending reimbursements: The Collier MPO actively manages reimbursement requests across
multiple funding sources, including Public Transit Grant Agreements (PTGAs), Transportation
Disadvantaged (TD) Planning Grants, and other federal and state programs such as FHWA
Planning (PL) funds, FTA Section 5305(d) funds, and Safe Streets for All (SS4A) grants.75
Locally funded non-reimbursable activities: The MPO sets aside $8,000 per year in local funds
for administrative activities not eligible for federal or state reimbursement.76
Capital float and cash reserves: As outlined in the Staff Services Agreement between the Collier
MPO and Collier County, Collier County provides funding for the operations of the Collier MPO
ahead of federal and state reimbursement for eligible expenditures. Payment for services
rendered by the County is contingent upon the MPO reflecting sufficient federal and state funds
in their UPWP for those specific purposes.77 The Collier MPO also pays for expenses that are not
eligible for federal and state reimbursement using modest local contributions from member
governments.
71 Collier MPO FY 2024/25–2025/26 UPWP. Pages 10, 50, & 67
72 Collier MPO FY 2024/25–2025/26 UPWP. Page 8
73 Collier MPO FY 2024/25–2025/26 UPWP. Page 49
74 Collier MPO FY 2024/25–2025/26 UPWP. Pages 32-39
75 Collier MPO FY 2024/25–2025/26 UPWP. Pages 22-25 & 38-39
76 Collier MPO FY 2024/25–2025/26 UPWP. Pages 45-47
77 Executed 2025 Staff Services Agreement. Page 6
Page 295 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 43
Lee County MPO
The Lee County MPO’s financial management framework includes several components that
reflect liabilities and reserves, as outlined in its FY 2024/25–2025/26 UPWP.
Carryover and unexpended funds: The Lee County MPO incorporates carryover amounts from
prior fiscal years into its planning budget. This includes local contribution carryover funds
totaling $250,000 per two-year UPWP period, as well as $269,718 in unexpended FHWA PL in
the 2024/25 budget carried over from prior years. These carryover amounts are applied to
active planning efforts but are not documented as formal reserve balances.78
Non-federal match requirements: To meet non-federal match requirements, the Lee County
MPO utilizes state toll revenue credits as soft match through FDOT. For FY 2024/25 the FDOT
soft match total was $403,493 and for FY 2025/26 soft match was $348,762, applied specifically
to leverage FHWA planning funds. These amounts do not represent cash reserves held by the
MPO.79
Outstanding consultant contracts: The Lee County MPO manages multi-year consultant
agreements for key planning activities, including development of the LRTP, Congestion
Management Process (CMP), Freight and Bicycle/Pedestrian Element updates, TIP-related tools,
and safety and regional coordination efforts. Consultant funding is primarily concentrated under
Task 4.4 (Special Projects Planning), representing planned financial obligations managed directly
by the MPO.80
Pending reimbursements: The Lee County MPO submits reimbursement requests for various
funding sources, including Public Transit Grant Agreements (PTGAs), Transportation
Disadvantaged (TD) Planning Grants, FHWA Planning Funds (PL), FTA Section 5305(d) funds as
part of CPG, and SU funds. These reimbursements support a wide range of transportation
planning activities, such as program management, public involvement, regional coordination,
transit planning, and specialized projects like SS4A.81
Locally funded non-reimbursable activities: The Lee County MPO allocates approximately
$73,191 per year for activities not eligible for federal or state reimbursement, as reflected under
Locally Funded Activities in the UPWP. These funds may support administrative functions,
board-related expenses, or policy development activities outside the scope of grant-funded
work.
Capital Float and Cash Reserves: the Lee County MPO operates as an independent organization
and does not maintain formal capital reserves. However, it does retain a capital float in the form
of unspent local funds carried forward from previous years. While not officially labeled as a
“reserve,” this carryover is documented in the UPWP as $250,000 and is used to cover upfront
costs, such as salaries, rent, and other expenses, prior to reimbursement from federal and state
grant sources. According to the MPO, the actual available float is closer to $400,000 if all current
obligations were settled, providing essential liquidity to operate under a reimbursement-based
funding model.
78 Lee County MPO 2024/25-2025/26 UPWP. Pages 73-78
79 Lee County MPO 2024/25-2025/26 UPWP. Pages 10, 73, 77, & 108
80 Lee County MPO 2024/25-2025/26 UPWP. Pages 67-70
81 Lee County MPO 2024/25-2025/26 UPWP. Pages 73-78
Page 296 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 44
5.3. Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Funding and Programmatic Investments
Collier MPO
The Collier MPO TIP for FY2025–FY2029 outlines a budget of $500 million in planned
investments over the next five years. Based on the latest TIP, 25% of total funding comes from
federal sources, 65% from state sources, and 10% from local contributions provided by Collier
County (Figure 4).
Figure 4. Collier MPO FY25-29 TIP Funding Sources
Budget allocation in the Collier MPO TIP is distributed across five categories, with the largest
shares dedicated to capacity enhancements (49%), multimodal improvements (25%), and FDOT
maintenance and operations (22%). Smaller portions of the budget support bridge projects, and
MPO planning activities, as shown in the TIP’s budget allocation pie chart (Figure 5). The
multimodal category includes investments in both transit and bicycle-pedestrian infrastructure,
with transit-related projects representing approximately $63 million (roughly 12.6% of the total)
in programmed funding across the TIP period. In addition, aviation projects account for an
estimated $22 million (roughly 4.4% of the total), as reflected in the current TIP project listings.
Federal
25%
State
65%
Local
10%
Page 297 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 45
Figure 5. Collier MPO FY25-29 TIP Investment by Project Type82
While the overall TIP illustrates the Collier MPO’s full range of funding sources and investment
categories, the summary below includes only funding codes that represent formula-based
allocations specifically designated for urbanized areas under federal programs. This approach
allows for a more consistent comparison of UZA specific funding across both agencies.
The funding codes included in this summary are SU (Surface Transportation Block Grant Program
(STBG) Urban Allocations) and TALU (Transportation Alternatives Program (TA) allocations for
urbanized areas over 200,000) (Table 13).
Funding codes that were excluded from this analysis include CARB, which refers to Carbon
Reduction Any Area funds that are state-controlled rather than suballocated by formula to
urbanized areas; TALT, which represents Transportation Alternatives Any Area funds that are
also state-controlled or competitively awarded; as well as all other federal, state, and local
funding codes used in the TIP that reflect discretionary programs, statewide initiatives, or local-
only funding sources.
Table 13. Urban Suballocation Funding Summary for Collier MPO TIP (FY 2025–2029)83
FISCAL YEAR SU TALU TOTAL PER YEAR
2025 $6,213,750 $1,998,515 $8,212,265
2026 $6,970,631 $1,032,488 $8,003,119
2027 $6,790,631 $1,032,488 $7,823,119
2028 $6,756,476 $702 $6,757,178
2029 $6,468,815 $1,032,488 $7,501,303
TOTAL (FY25–29) $33,200,303 $5,096,681 $38,296,984
Lee County MPO
The Lee County MPO TIP for FY2025–FY2029 outlines a budget of $798 million in planned
investments over the next five years. Based on the latest TIP, 56% of total funding comes from
federal sources, 32% from state sources, and 12% from local contributions It should be noted
that these percentages are temporarily elevated due to a single high-cost bridge project, which
82 Collier MPO FY 2025 - 2029 TIP. Page 25
83 Collier MPO FY 2025 - 2029 TIP. Pages 49-135 & 344-354
Capacity
Enhancement
49%
FDOT M&O
22%
Multimodal
25%
UPWP
1%
Bridge
3%
Page 298 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 46
accounts for approximately 26% of the total TIP budget. Historically, Lee County’s federal share
has ranged between 25–30%, similar to the Collier MPO. (Figure 6).84
Figure 6. Lee County MPO FY2025/26-2029/30 TIP Funding Sources
Budget allocation in the Lee County MPO TIP is distributed across eight categories, with the
largest shares dedicated to highway (41%), transit (22%), aviation (19%) and routine
maintenance (13%). Smaller portions of the budget support bicycle pedestrian activities, safety,
planning, and traffic systems management and operations, as shown in the TIP’s budget
allocation pie chart (Figure 7).85
Figure 7. Lee County MPO FY2025/26-2029/30 TIP Investment by Project Type
While the overall TIP illustrates the Lee County MPO’s full range of funding sources and project
categories, this summary applies the same approach used for the Collier MPO by including only
funding codes that represent formula-based allocations specifically designated for urbanized
areas under federal programs.
84 Lee County MPO FY2025/26-2029/30 TIP. Page 49
85 Lee County MPO FY2025/26-2029/30 TIP. Pages 61-149
Federal
56%
State
32%
Local
12%
Transit
22%
Safety
1%Planning
1%
Bicycle Pedestrian
Activities
3%
Traffic Systems
Management and
Operations
>1%
Aviation
19%
Highway
41%
Routine
Maintenance
13%
Page 299 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 47
For the Lee County MPO, the funding codes included in this summary are SU (Surface
Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG) Urban Allocations) and TALU (Transportation
Alternatives Program (TA) for urbanized areas over 200,000). Funding codes excluded from this
analysis include CARB, TALT, and all other federal, state, and local funding codes that reflect
discretionary programs, statewide initiatives, or local-only funding sources (Table 14).
Table 14. Urban Suballocation Funding Summary for Lee County MPO TIP (FY 2025–2029)86
FISCAL YEAR SU TALU TOTAL PER YEAR
2025 $15,412,873 1,453,481 $16,866,354
2026 $9,812,873 1,453,481 $11,266,354
2027 $9,812,873 1,453,481 $11,266,354
2028 $9,812,873 1,453,481 $11,266,354
2029 $9,812,873 1,453,481 $11,266,354
TOTAL (FY25–29) $54,664,365 $7,267,405 $61,931,770
5.4. Key similarities and differences
MPO Budgets and Funding Sources
Both MPOs follow federal and state requirements for developing a UPWP, maintain similar core
task areas, and rely on a combination of federal, state, and local funding sources, including FDOT
soft match. Both organizations also use consultant services to support major planning activities
such as LRTP updates, TIP development, and regional coordination efforts. Notable differences
include:
• Task and budget structure alignment: The Collier MPO organizes its UPWP using
eight detailed task categories with consultant costs distributed across those
tasks. The Lee County MPO uses 4 broader categories, with most consultant
costs consolidated under a single Special Projects Planning task.
• Consultant services management: Both MPOs depend on consultant services for
major planning products, but they manage and account for these services
differently. The Collier MPO integrates consultant work directly into individual
tasks, while the Lee County MPO consolidates it under one category.
• Local contribution expectations: The Collier MPO’s local funding share is
approximately 1.8% of its total UPWP budget (note: this percentage does not
reflect the value of staff support and operational services provided through the
MPO’s staff services agreement with Collier County). The Lee County MPO’s
local funding share is approximately 3.3%.
• Differences in budget size and focus areas: The Lee County MPO’s UPWP is
larger overall, with a greater proportion directed toward Special Projects
Planning and Transit & Transportation Disadvantaged Planning. While both
MPOs allocate a significant amount of money to update and develop their
planning documents, the Collier MPO allocates a larger share of its UPWP to
Long Range Planning and TIP development.
The table below provides a side-by-side comparison of key elements from the Collier MPO and
Lee County MPO UPWPs for FY 2024/25–2025/26 (Table 15).
86 Lee County MPO FY2025/26-2029/30 TIP. Pages 49-60
Page 300 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 48
Table 15. Collier MPO and Lee County MPO UPWP Funding and Structure Comparison
Category Collier MPO Lee County MPO
UPWP Timeframe FY 2024/25–2025/26 FY 2024/25–2025/26
Total UPWP Budget $3,641,158 $4,695,938 (includes
$250,000 SS4A grant)
Local Contribution (Share) $66,000 (1.8%) $146,382 (3.3%)
FDOT Soft Match $373,136 $672,775
Consultant Funding $1,829,417 $1,093,457
Consultant Funding Location Distributed across
individual tasks
Primarily under Special
Projects Planning
Primary Task Categories 8
(Administration, Data, TIP,
LRTP, Special Projects,
Transit & TD, Regional
Coordination, Locally
Funded)
4
(Administration, Data,
Systems Planning, Special
Projects Planning)
Administration (Share) $983,066 (27%) $1,149,760 (29.1%)
Data (Share) $94,456 (2.6%) $80,558 (2.0%)
LRPT (Share) (23.1%) $608,000 (15.4%)*
TIP (Share) $118,071 (3.2%) $45,000 (1.1%)*
Special Projects Planning (Share) $748,029 (20.5%) $844,615 (21.4%)*
Transit & TD (Share) $731,562 (20.1%) $902,624 (22.9%)
Regional Coordination (Share) $107,444 (2.8%) $169,000 (4.3%)*
Locally Funded Activities (Share) $16,000 (0.4%) $146,382 (3.7%)
* Percentages marked with an asterisk reflect approximate values. These figures were calculated by
combining funds allocated in Tasks 1, 2, and 3 in the Lee County MPO UPWP, combined with consultant
funding identified under Task 4.4 (Special Projects Planning) that match the activities in Task 1, 2, and 3.
They are provided for comparison purposes only and represent an estimate of total funding directed
toward those specific activities.
Liabilities and Reserves
Both the Collier MPO and Lee County MPO manage their financial operations primarily through
reimbursement-based funding from federal and state sources, supplemented by local
contributions and soft match credits provided by FDOT. While neither agency maintains a
formally designated cash reserve, each uses different mechanisms to manage short-term
financial needs and maintain continuity of planning activities. The Collier MPO relies on Collier
County to front expenses, such as staff salaries, rent, and operational costs, until reimbursement
is received. Because the County serves as the MPO’s fiscal and administrative agent, this
arrangement effectively eliminates the need for a separate capital float.
In contrast, the Lee County MPO operates independently and retains a carryover of unspent
local funds, listed in its UPWP as $250,000, to serve as working capital. While not formally
labeled as a reserve, this local fund balance functions as a capital float to cover upfront costs
during reimbursement cycles. According to the MPO Director, if operations ceased and all
obligations were paid today, the total working capital on hand would be closer to $400,000.
Both MPOs use FDOT-applied toll revenue credits as soft match to meet non-federal match
requirements and incorporate unexpended funds from prior fiscal years into their planning
Page 301 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 49
budgets. The Collier MPO’s carryover typically includes federal planning funds and modest
amounts of locally contributed match, while the Lee County MPO’s carryover includes both
federal funds and a substantial retained balance of local contributions. A key difference is in the
scale and structure of local contributions. The Collier MPO’s locally funded non-reimbursable
activities are budgeted at approximately $8,000 per year, with Collier County covering most
upfront costs for reimbursable expenditures. This arrangement minimizes the MPO’s need for a
financial cushion. In contrast, the Lee County MPO allocates approximately $73,191 per year in
local contributions and maintains a significant carryover of unspent local funds, which functions
as working capital to bridge reimbursement cycles. This larger financial buffer supports greater
flexibility in managing cash flow.
Both MPOs hold outstanding consultant contracts for core planning products like the LRTP, TIP
development, and regional coordination activities, though consultant funding is managed
through different UPWP structures.
TIP Funding and Programmatic Investments
Both MPOs rely on a combination of federal, state, and local funding to support their TIPs and
both program federal funds tied to reimbursement cycles through FDOT. Also, each TIP supports
a mix of multimodal investments including transit, bicycle-pedestrian, maintenance, and
capacity projects; however, the distribution of funding by mode and the presence of certain
program types, such as aviation investments in Lee County, reflect differences in regional
priorities and transportation infrastructure.
Both MPO TIPs include projects funded using urbanized area formula allocations, including STBG
Urban (SU) and Transportation Alternatives Urban (TALU)
Despite these structural similarities, the scale and distribution of funding differs. The Lee County
MPO’s TIP for FY2025–FY2029 includes approximately $798 million in planned investments,
compared to $500 million in the Collier MPO’s TIP. While Lee County’s current TIP shows a
higher proportion of federal funding (56% versus 25% in Collier MPO) this is largely due to a
single high-cost bridge project, which accounts for roughly 26% of the Lee County MPO’s total
TIP budget. Historically, both MPOs have received 25–30% of their TIP funding from federal
sources. These percentages fluctuate from year to year based on project mix, discretionary
awards, and available state funding.
According to the FDOT Work Program Instructions for FYs 2026 through 2030, the Cape Coral
Urbanized Area (UZA) which lies entirely within the Lee County MPO’s planning jurisdiction, is
expected to receive approximately $49.1 million in SU funds and $7.3 million in TALU funds. The
Bonita Springs–Estero UZA, which spans jurisdictions served by both the Lee County and Collier
MPOs, is expected to receive roughly $34.9 million in SU funds and $5.2 million in TALU funds.
However, the division of these funds between the two MPOs is not clearly defined in current
documentation. For geographic context, Figure 8 illustrates the 2020 boundaries of the Cape
Coral and Bonita Springs–Estero Urbanized Areas, highlighting their proximity and overlap.
Page 302 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 50
Figure 8. 2020 U.S. Census-designated boundaries of the Cape Coral and Bonita Springs–Estero UZAs.
Source: Florida Department of Transportation, FDOT Urban Area Boundary and Functional Classification Data Hub
https://urban-boundary-functional-class-update-2020-fdot.hub.arcgis.com/
The table below provides a side-by-side comparison of key elements from the Collier MPO and
Lee County MPO FY2025/26-2029/30 TIPs (Table 16).
Table 16. Collier MPO and Lee County MPO TIP Funding and Structure Comparison
Category Collier MPO Lee County MPO
Total TIP Budget $500 million $798 million
Federal Share of TIP Funding 25% 56%
State Share of TIP Funding 65% 32%
Local Share of TIP Funding 10% 12%
Urban Suballocation Total (SU,
TALU, CARU)
$43.8 million $61.9 million
Programmed SU Funds $33,200,303 $54,664,365
Programmed TALU Funds $5,096,681 $7,267,405
Programmed CARU Funds $5,513,731 $0 (prior CARU funds
returned; projects
deferred)
Major Project Types Capacity (49%), multimodal
(25%), maintenance (22%)
Highway (41%), transit
(22%), aviation (19%)
Number of Investment Categories 5 8
Both MPOs program substantial investments in transit and aviation projects, though the
amounts and categorization differ. The Collier MPO includes transit within its broader
multimodal category, with estimated transit-related spending totaling approximately $63
million, or about 12.6% of its $500 million TIP. Aviation investments in the Collier MPO’s TIP are
listed separately and total roughly $22 million, or 4.4% of the overall program. In comparison,
the Lee County MPO presents transit and aviation as distinct categories, programming an
estimated $176 million for transit (22% of its $798 million TIP) and approximately $152 million
for aviation (19%).
Page 303 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 51
6. Regional Coordination Practices
This section offers an overview of how the Collier and Lee County MPOs collaborate on
planning, funding, and implementation issues between themselves and with other regional
transportation partners.
Examples of Existing Collaboration Between the Collier MPO and the Lee County MPO
Over the past several years, the Collier and Lee County MPOs have undertaken several
cooperative planning efforts, including efforts that are ongoing or planned. Examples of recently
completed, current, and upcoming regional coordination efforts include:
Joint planning documents
• The MPOs jointly developed their 2035 LRTPs using a single scope and consultant,
including a joint Goods and Freight Mobility Study, shared goals and objectives,
public meetings, projects, and a regional LRTP component.
• While their 2040, 2045, and 2050 LRTPs were developed independently, the MPOs
continue to coordinate planning and prioritization for regionally significant roadway,
bicycle, and pedestrian projects.
• They jointly adopted regional priorities for state and federal programs, including
TRIP, SIS, and the Transportation Alternatives program overseen by the FDOT.
Regional multimodal and active transportation coordination
Collier and Lee County MPOs routinely align efforts around pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and
shared-use trail planning.
• In 2024, they conducted a joint regional Transit Service and Fare Study evaluating
new intercounty routes and a shared fare structure.
• Interagency discussions on bicycle and pedestrian safety issues along Old US 41
resulted in coordinated LRTP amendments and funding for a Project Development
and Environment (PD&E) study and design phases from US 41 in Collier County to
Bonita Beach Road in Lee County.
• They completed a Bonita Estero Rail Trail (BERT) feasibility study, leading to its June
2025 inclusion on the Florida Forever Program’s Strategic Managed Area Lands List.
• They coordinated on the SR 82 Pathway Study, which FDOT implemented as part of
a roadway widening project.
• They continue to coordinate planning and funding for SUN Trail projects across the
two-county region.
Regional roadway coordination
• The Collier County is implementing Corkscrew Road safety projects developed in
collaboration with Lee County.
• The MPOs successfully redirected a $10 million federal earmark in the 2005 federal
authorization (Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users or SAFETEA-LU) for specific improvements at Coconut Road and I-
75 to undirected funding for I-75 improvements in Collier and Lee Counties.
• The MPOs advocated successfully for SR 82 to be added to the National Highway
System, a measure that increased eligibility for federal funding.
• The MPOs coordinated a regional rail study (led by Lee County MPO)
Page 304 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 52
• The MPOs are conducting a Joint Regional Congestion Management Process (CMP)
which will replace both existing MPO CMPs in FY 2025/2026. The joint regional CMP
will:
o Revise current goals, objectives, and performance measures
o Update the existing Joint Regional Roadway Network
o Identify congested corridors and hot spots on the regional roadway network
o Document potential solutions to improve traffic conditions
o Develop and prioritize projects to alleviate congestion along regional
corridors
o Recommend improvements to the MPO’s current monitoring practices
o Coordinating past and current long range plans to include roadways that
cross county lines, including Interstate 75, Old US 41, US 41, Logan Blvd.,
Corkscrew Road, Livingston/Imperial, SR 82, and CR 951 extension into Lee
County, and regional transit scenarios.
Shared technical tools and modeling
• The MPOs developed a joint travel model and are now coordinating on regional
travel modeling alternatives & scenarios pertaining to the broader regional planning
model that covers the entirety of FDOT District 1 (the D1RPM).
• They hosted three joint freight and goods movement workshops with industry
stakeholders to inform regional freight planning. The purpose of the workshops has
been to provide information on future transportation plans, industry-relevant issues
such as truck parking, freight projections, and to receive knowledgeable input from
interested stakeholders (freight users and shippers, trucking agencies and groups,
and relevant governmental agencies with knowledge of roadway network issues
related to freight and goods movement).
Shared policy development and data coordination
• The MPOs jointly review regional and statewide policy documents, technology
improvements, and other issues impacting both MPO areas, including updates to
the SIS plan, autonomous and connected vehicle technology, truck routing, and e-
scooters.
• They share future development data to identify potential impacts to the regional
transportation network.
• They coordinate and respond collectively to Census-driven changes that influence
planning and funding.
• Both MPOs are active participants in this consolidation feasibility study.
Collaboration with Regional Partners
The Collier and Lee County MPOs collaborate with a wide range of regional partners, including
FDOT District 1, local jurisdictions, the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (RPC), area
transit agencies (Collier Area Transit (CAT) and Lee County Transit (LeeTran)), area school boards
(the Collier and Lee County School Boards), the Lee County bridge toll management/operations
agency (LeeWay), area airport and port authorities (the Collier County Airport Authority and the
Lee County Port Authority (overseeing the Southwest Florida International Airport and Page
Field)), and area MPOs (the Charlotte County-Punta Gorda MPO, the Heartland Regional TPO,
the Polk TPO, and the Sarasota/Manatee MPO).
Page 305 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 53
Regional roadway planning and advocacy
• Both MPOs have coordinated with FDOT, county governments, and formerly active
regional bodies like SWFTI87 and the SWFL Expressway Authority88 to advance critical
highway projects. These efforts contributed to major improvements along I-75, SR 82,
and SR 29, driven by anticipated population growth and congestion challenges.
• The MPOs and their respective school boards jointly adopted a resolution requesting
that FDOT widen the SR 82 corridor between Lee Boulevard and SR 29 to improve safety
and reduce congestion.
• The MPOs have jointly explored long-term eastern corridor alternatives, including the
proposed CR 951 extension. While the roadway has not been constructed, both
agencies have collaborated for over two decades to evaluate its feasibility and continue
to consider it as part of broader regional mobility planning.
Regional transit and service planning
• The MPOs worked cooperatively with each other and the two area transit agencies (CAT
and LeeTran) to plan for and fund intercounty bus service along US 41 from Bonita
Springs in Lee County to Immokalee Road in Collier County.
• The MPOs coordinated a transit study evaluating a potential future connection between
Lehigh Acres and Immokalee, supported by shared data analysis.
Regional rail planning
• The Collier and Lee County MPOs joined with the Charlotte County-Punta Gorda and
Sarasota/Manatee MPOs to support a Regional Passenger Rail Feasibility Study. In 2025,
the study was added as part of the Florida MPO Advisory Council Passenger Rail
Priorities Program (PRPP). The study would advance a Tier III conceptual intercity
passenger rail corridor connection to planned passenger rail service between Miami and
Tampa as identified in the Florida Rail System Plan.89 A letter supporting the study as a
regional priority was sent to FDOT District One, which acknowledged the proposal and is
currently reviewing it for potential funding.
Emergency preparedness and resilience
• The MPOs jointly supported or led hurricane and evacuation studies in the region,
collaborating with the RPC, FDOT, and local jurisdictions. The majority of the work
involved data collection that would help identify issues related to hurricanes and
evacuation routes. These joint activities took place multiple times over several years,
including a 2024 Cape Coral evacuation route study led by the Lee County MPO and
supported by the City of Cape Coral.
Bicycle and pedestrian facility planning
• The Lee County MPO is funding a downtown pedestrian mall and micromobility
feasibility study that will be conducted by the City of Ft. Myers. The study will consider:
o East-west and/or north-south street venues that offer the best opportunities for
providing connectivity between the Downtown and Midtown districts of the City
of Ft. Myers,
87 Southwest Florida Transportation Initiative—a local advocacy group formed in the early 2000s to focus
on a lack of funding for transportation improvements which has not met for several years.
88 Created in the midd-20002 to consider tolling options on I-75 and has since been disbanded
89 Florida Rail System Plan, 2023.
Page 306 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 54
o The potential conversion of a state roadway (SR-82/Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Boulevard) from a state- maintained to city-maintained facility and converted
that segment into a Complete Street (in partnership with the Florida
Department of Transportation), and
o Evaluating multimodal opportunities to recommend infrastructure changes and
new regulations that will help guide new and emerging micromobility
technologies.
Multiregional planning
• The MPOs participate in quarterly Coordinated Urban Transportation Studies (CUTS)
Group meetings which include staff from FDOT District One and all District One MPOs
(Charlotte County-Punta Gorda MPO, Collier MPO, Heartland Regional TPO, Lee County
MPO, Polk TPO, and Sarasota/Manatee MPO). The quarterly CUTS meetings cover a
wide range of planning, policy, and administrative issues of importance to the District
MPOs.
• Both MPOs engage in statewide coordination through the Florida MPO Advisory Council
(MPOAC), contributing to discussions on regional and statewide transportation funding
that have included reviewing fair share calculations and recommendations on revenue
studies.
• The MPOs also participate in the Florida Metropolitan Planning Partnership (FMPP), a
statewide forum convened by FDOT that brings together MPOs, state agencies, and
transportation stakeholders to address planning consistency, performance measures,
and implementation strategies across regions.
Agreements with neighboring MPOs and transit agencies
In addition to collaborating on planning activities, the MPOs have formalized their coordination
through interlocal agreements, both with their respective transit agencies and with neighboring
MPOs.
The Lee County MPO has a formal agreement with Lee County, which operates LeeTran, to fund
transit planning activities carried out by LeeTran. The agreement calls for the following:
• The County may use up to 80% of the MPOs Consolidated Planning Grant (CPG)
Funding that equals the 5305 allocation provide by the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) each year to undertake planning activities identified in the
MPOs Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP)
• The MPO and LeeTran mutually develop the transit tasks in the MPO UPWP
• LeeTran participates in the MPO transportation planning process by appointing a
member to the MPO Technical Advisory Committee, the Bicycle Pedestrian
Coordinating Committee, and the Traffic Management and Operations Committee
• LeeTran must also provide staff representation at the Local Coordinating Board and
attend MPO Governing Board and Citizens’ Advisory Committee meetings to help
address transit related items
• The MPO and LeeTran must be actively engaged in the development of the MPO
LRTP and the LeeTran Transit Development Plan (TDP)
• LeeTran must support the MPO to meet the requirements in it’s Public Involvement
Plan (PIP)
• LeeTran accepts the transit element of the MPO LRTP as the twenty-year planning
document and vision for transit in Lee County
Page 307 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 55
• The MPO and LeeTran shall ensure that the first two 5-year blocks in the MPO LRTP
be consistent with the 10-year LeeTran TDP in terms of project needs and costs
As a result of cross-county growth and shared UZAs, 90 in compliance with federal and state laws
and rules91 the Lee County MPO entered into an interlocal agreement in 2024 with the Charlotte
County-Punta Gorda MPO and the Sarasota/Manatee MPO. The agreement formalizes
coordination across Charlotte, Lee, Sarasota, and Manatee Counties (covering the areas of
Charlotte, Lee, Manatee, and Sarasota Counties that share UZAs). The May 2024 interlocal
agreement replaced a similar interlocal agreement between the Charlotte County-Punta Gorda
MPO and the Lee County MPO approved in 2013. Like the interlocal agreement between the
Collier and Lee County MPOs, this agreement clearly identifies areas of coordination and the
division of transportation planning responsibilities among and between the three MPOs. As it
pertains to the Lee County MPO, the interlocal agreement calls for the following:
• The creation of the Southwest Florida Transportation Alliance as a separate
administrative entity serving as the forum for transportation planning, coordination
and communication among the four MPOs (subject to approvals by the individual
MPOs), though the Alliance will be used as administrative conduit to decision-
making and will not meet as an organization.
• The coordination of updates to the regional traffic forecasting model, including the
exchange of necessary data.
• The coordination of LRTP updates, including a joint regional LRTP component for
each individual MPO LRTP and a joint regional multi-modal transportation system.
• Joint adoption of annual regional project priorities for components of the joint
regional multi-modal transportation system.
Staff services and costs associated with joint regional products and activities identified in both
interlocal agreements are to be shared equitably between the associated MPOs. The interlocal
agreements also outline a conflict resolution process for any issues related to activities covered
by the interlocal agreements.
As a result of the previous interlocal agreement between the Lee County MPO and the Charlotte
County-Punta Gorda MPO, the Governing Boards of both MPOs have been meeting jointly on an
annual basis since 2013 to consider issues of mutual concern and benefit.
90 Cross-county growth in the Cape Coral-Ft Myers UZA (including portions of Charlotte and Lee Counties),
the Port-Charlotte-North Port UZA (including portions of Sarasota and Charlotte Counties) and the
Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice UZA (including portions of Lee, Charlotte, Sarasota, and Manatee Counties)
91 23 U.S.C. §134(d)(7); 23 U.S.C. §134(g)(4); 23 C.F.R. 450.310(e); 23 C.F.R 450.312(h); 23 C.F.R.
450.314(e), (g), and (h), and Section 339.175(2)(a), (7)(a), 7(b), (8)(a), (8)(b), and (8)(c), Florida Statues
Page 308 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 56
7. Preliminary Observations and Synthesis of Findings
Key Areas of Alignment Between the Two MPOs
The Collier and Lee County MPOs operate under the same federal and state planning
requirements and share many foundational practices. The following areas of alignment suggest
strong institutional compatibility and opportunities for expanded collaboration or potential
consolidation.
Governance and Staffing
Both MPOs are governed by Governing Boards composed of local elected officials and supported
by advisory committees with similar structures (e.g., TAC, CAC, BPAC), and several have similar
functions. They maintain comparable staffing levels (four staff members each) and rely on
external consultants to support specialized planning tasks, although the Collier MPO also relies
on Collier County staff to perform a variety of administrative tasks. Both MPOs also have robust
public participation plans and engage a broad range of stakeholders through advisory
committees, public hearings, and surveys. Their outreach efforts are supplemented by
collaboration with regional partners, including FDOT, local jurisdictions, transit agencies, and
neighboring MPOs.
Core Planning Framework
Both MPOs develop and maintain federally and state-mandated planning documents, including
LRTP, TIP, UPWP, CMP and TDSP. They both follow the federally guided 3C (Continuing,
Comprehensive, Cooperative) planning process. Both MPOs also integrate performance-based
planning and programming into their LRTPs and TIPs, aligning with federal Transportation
Performance Management (TPM) requirements.
Planning Vision and Goals
Both MPOs' LRTPs emphasize an integrated, multimodal transportation system that supports
the movement of people and goods. Their core planning themes address a broad range of
common transportation issues, including safety, mobility, economic development,
environmental impact, security, and quality of life. Both MPOs also prioritize active
transportation by investing in bicycle, pedestrian, and shared-use trail projects and coordinate
on regional initiatives such as SUN Trail. They both also consider and integrate planning for
Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CAV) technology and identify environmental protection
and system resiliency/reliability as key planning goals. These shared priorities are reinforced
through collaborative efforts on regional transit services, hurricane evacuation studies, and
major roadway improvements.
Performance-Based Planning Framework
Both MPOs publish a System Performance Report (SPR) as part of their LRTPs. They both align
with and support FDOT’s Vision Zero safety initiative (PM1), aiming for zero traffic fatalities and
serious injuries, and program projects expected to contribute to these targets. Both MPOs adopt
or agree to support FDOT’s statewide targets for the condition of pavements and bridges on the
National Highway System (NHS) (PM2). For System Performance and Freight (PM3), both
address measures related to travel time reliability on NHS routes and freight movement,
supporting FDOT's statewide targets. They also incorporate Transit Asset Management (TAM)
and Transit Safety targets, supporting their local transit providers (Collier Area Transit (CAT) and
Page 309 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 57
LeeTran, respectively), both of which are classified as Tier II providers. Their TIPs are explicitly
developed to reflect investment priorities consistent with their adopted performance targets.
Funding and Financial Management
Both MPOs undertake comprehensive financial planning and forecasting as a critical component
of their LRTPs, ensuring that anticipated transportation improvements are fiscally feasible. Both
rely heavily on FDOT for long-range federal and state revenue forecasts, with FDOT prioritizing
safety and preservation of existing transportation infrastructure.
Both MPOs rely on a mix of federal, state, and local funding sources to support their
transportation programs. Local revenue is primarily generated through fuel taxes and impact
fees. In addition, Lee County receives toll revenue from locally operated facilities, which
contributes directly to its transportation funding capacity. Both MPOs also benefit from FDOT-
applied toll revenue credits, which serve as a soft match to satisfy non-federal match
requirements. Additionally, both MPOs operate under reimbursement-based funding models
and manage similar funding categories in their TIPs, including SU, and TALU allocations.
Regional coordination practices
Both MPOs actively collaborate on regional roadway, transit, and multimodal planning efforts,
including joint studies, shared priorities, and coordinated funding applications. They jointly
conduct regional congestion management processes, travel modeling, and freight planning
workshops. Additionally, both MPOs participate in quarterly CUTS Group meetings with FDOT
District One and other MPOs in the region.
Their coordination is formalized through interlocal agreements, which outline shared
responsibilities for regional planning, conflict resolution, and funding strategies. They also
collaborate on regional emergency preparedness and resiliency initiatives, including hurricane
evacuation studies with FDOT and local partners.
Existing Coordination Successes that Could Be Expanded
The Collier and Lee County MPOs have a history of successful collaboration, particularly in joint
planning and addressing shared regional transportation challenges.
Joint Planning and Prioritization
• The MPOs jointly developed their 2035 LRTPs using a single scope and consultant,
including a joint Goods and Freight Mobility Study, shared goals and objectives, public
meetings, projects, and a regional LRTP component.
• They continue to coordinate planning and prioritization for regionally significant
roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian projects, even though their more recent LRTPs (2040,
2045, 2050) were developed independently.
• They have jointly adopted regional priorities for state and federal programs, including
TRIP, SIS, and the Transportation Alternatives program overseen by FDOT.
Regional Multimodal and Roadway Coordination
• In 2024, they conducted a joint regional Transit Service and Fare Study evaluating new
intercounty routes and a shared fare structure.
• Interagency discussions on bicycle and pedestrian safety issues along Old US 41 resulted
in coordinated LRTP amendments and funding for a Project Development and
Environment (PD&E) study and design phases.
Page 310 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 58
• They completed a Bonita Estero Rail Trail (BERT) feasibility study, leading to its inclusion
on the Florida Forever Program’s Strategic Managed Area Lands List.
• They coordinated on the SR 82 Pathway Study, which FDOT implemented as part of a
roadway widening project.
• They continue to coordinate planning and funding for SUN Trail projects across the two-
county region.
• Collier County is implementing Corkscrew Road safety projects developed in
collaboration with Lee County.
• The MPOs successfully redirected a $10 million federal earmark from SAFETEA-LU for
specific improvements at Coconut Road and I-75 to undirected funding for I-75
improvements in Collier and Lee Counties.
• They successfully advocated for SR 82 to be added to the National Highway System,
increasing its eligibility for federal funding.
• They coordinated a regional rail study (led by Lee MPO).
• They are currently conducting a Joint Regional Congestion Management Process (CMP),
which will replace both existing MPO CMPs in FY 2025/2026. This joint CMP will revise
goals and performance measures, update the regional roadway network, identify
congested corridors, document solutions, develop and prioritize projects, and
recommend monitoring improvements.
• They coordinate past and current long-range plans to include roadways that cross
county lines, such as Interstate 75, Old US 41, US 41, and SR 82.
Shared Technical Tools and Data Coordination
• The MPOs developed a joint travel model and are now coordinating on regional travel
modeling alternatives and scenarios pertaining to the broader FDOT District 1 Regional
Planning Model (D1RPM).
• They hosted three joint freight and goods movement workshops with industry
stakeholders to inform regional freight planning.
• They jointly review regional and statewide policy documents, technology improvements,
and other issues impacting both MPO areas, such as updates to the SIS plan,
autonomous and connected vehicle technology, truck routing, and e-scooters.
• They share future development data to identify potential impacts to the regional
transportation network.
• They coordinate and respond collectively to Census-driven changes that influence
planning and funding.
Collaboration with Regional Partners and Multi-Regional Forums
• Both MPOs collaborate with a wide range of regional partners, including FDOT District 1,
local jurisdictions, the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (RPC), area transit
agencies (CAT, LeeTran), school boards, toll management agencies, and airport/port
authorities.
• They have coordinated with FDOT, county governments, and former regional bodies to
advance critical highway projects along I-75, SR 82, and SR 29.
• The MPOs have worked cooperatively with area transit agencies to plan for and fund
intercounty bus service along US 41.
• They supported a Regional Commuter Rail Feasibility Study with neighboring MPOs
(Charlotte County-Punta Gorda and Sarasota/Manatee MPOs).
Page 311 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 59
• The MPOs have jointly supported or led hurricane and evacuation studies in the region,
collaborating with the RPC, FDOT, and local jurisdictions.
• Both MPOs participate in quarterly Coordinated Urban Transportation Studies (CUTS)
Group meetings with other District One MPOs.
• Both MPOs engage in statewide coordination through the Florida MPO Advisory Council
(MPOAC), contributing to discussions on regional and statewide transportation funding.
• The Lee County MPO has a formal agreement with Lee County, which operates LeeTran,
to fund transit planning activities.
The Lee County MPO also entered into an interlocal agreement in 2024 with the Charlotte
County-Punta Gorda MPO and the Sarasota/Manatee MPO to formalize coordination across
these counties, including regional traffic forecasting model updates, LRTP updates, and joint
adoption of annual regional project priorities. This agreement replaced a similar one from 2013
and led to annual joint Governing Board meetings since 2013.
Gaps or Duplication that Consolidation Might Address
Despite existing coordination, the separate structures of the Collier and Lee County MPOs
present areas where consolidation could potentially streamline efforts and reduce duplicative
processes.
Urbanized Areas Boundaries and Regulatory Compliance
The Bonita Springs–Estero Urbanized Area (UZA) spans both Collier and Lee counties, placing
parts of the same UZA under the jurisdiction of two separate MPOs. This creates the potential
for duplicated planning efforts, inconsistencies in prioritization, and fragmented funding
strategies within a single federally recognized urban area. Additionally, because federal and
state transportation funding is partially allocated based on UZA boundaries and population,
having one UZA split between two MPOs can lead to concerns about how funds are distributed
and whether they reflect each area's actual transportation needs. Merging the MPOs could help
create a more coordinated and consistent approach for planning and investments in this shared
area. Population growth has led to the formerly distinct Cape Coral and Bonita Springs-Estero
UZAs becoming contiguous. While federal and state regulations allow for multiple MPOs to
serve contiguous UZAs with proper coordination, this geographic merging introduces demands
for cross-boundary planning, data sharing, and project integration. A single MPO could make it
easier to plan for the region. On the other hand, merging could raise concerns about how each
area’s needs are represented and whether smaller communities would still have a strong voice.
Additionally, a merged MPO could make coordinating land use and transportation planning
more complicated.
Separate Administrative and Operational Functions
The Collier and Lee County MPOs maintain independent administrative and operational
structures. Each organization manages its own staffing, budgeting, procurement, and grant
administration in accordance with its local policies and institutional framework.
• Both MPOs maintain separate organizational structures, personnel policies, business
operations, and administrative practices.
• Both MPOs employ separate staff, including executive directors, planners, and
administrative support personnel.
Page 312 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 60
• While both rely on federal and state grants, the management of these funds and
associated administrative tasks are duplicated across two distinct organizations. For
example, both have separate financial management and audit processes.
• Consultant services for major planning products are managed separately, with different
budget categorization methods.
• Both MPOs maintain separate office spaces and IT systems, incurring separate costs and
management efforts.
A consolidation of the two existing MPOs may provide an opportunity to achieve administrative
efficiencies for what is functionally a single, growing regional urbanized area.
Potential Benefits of a Unified Planning Process
While both MPOs already coordinate, a unified planning process might produce more
consistent, data-driven priorities that better reflect regional travel patterns and shared
infrastructure needs.
• Currently, the two MPOs use different goal structures and weighting systems for project
evaluation. A unified process could create a common framework for prioritizing
investments, making it easier to address cross-county transportation challenges with
shared criteria.
• Instead of two separate LRTPs and project lists, a consolidated approach could support
one long-range plan grounded in a shared vision for mobility, growth, and resilience
across the region.
• Shared transportation corridors like I-75, SR 82, and US 41 cross MPO boundaries. A
unified planning process could help ensure these corridors are planned and
programmed holistically.
• A single planning entity may streamline transit coordination and better align service and
investments across CAT and LeeTran service areas.
The existence of two separate Governing Boards and multiple advisory committees, even with
reciprocal representation, represents two distinct decision-making bodies where a single
Governing Board might simplify regional consensus-building for shared issues.
Notable Differences that May Present Challenges for Consolidation
Significant structural, operational, and financial differences between the two MPOs could pose
challenges during a potential consolidation process.
Organizational Structure and Administrative Autonomy
The two MPOs operate under distinct organizational models that reflect different levels of
administrative independence. Collier MPO follows a “leaning independent” structure, in which
Collier County serves as its fiscal and administrative agent through a formal Staff Services
Agreement. Under this arrangement, MPO staff, including the Executive Director, are County
employees for human resources and administrative purposes, and core functions such as
procurement, legal support, and financial management are handled by County departments. In
contrast, the Lee County MPO functions as a “freestanding independent” entity, with full control
over its administrative, financial, and staffing operations. The Executive Director is directly
employed under contract with the MPO Board and serves as the agency’s Chief Administrative
Officer, while specialized services are contracted externally as needed. Bringing those two
systems together would take time and effort, and key decisions would need to be made about
how the new organization would operate, such as:
Page 313 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 61
• Will the new MPO continue to be hosted (like Collier MPO) or be freestanding (like Lee
County MPO)?
• If it is hosted, who is the host?
• Whether hosted or freestanding, where will the new MPO be physically located (in Lee
County or Collier County)?
• If freestanding, how would local funds be acquired to provide capital float as federal
planning funds are provided through reimbursement process?
Staffing and Personnel Systems
The Collier MPO staff are subject to Collier County’s established HR rules and procedures,
including hiring, salary administration, performance evaluations, leave accrual, and benefits
eligibility. The County's HR Department handles payroll, onboarding, and recordkeeping. Collier
MPO employees are eligible for paid leave benefits based on county policies. The Lee County
MPO has its own internal procedures for recruitment, hiring, salary administration, and benefits
administration. Its staff are employees of the MPO and not governed by an external agency's
personnel system. The Lee County MPO contracts with Florida Municipal Insurance Trust (FMIT)
for health, dental, and vision insurance and provides retirement benefits through the Florida
Retirement System. The Lee County MPO staff accrue Paid Time Off (PTO) based on years of
service, rather than distinct vacation and sick leave categories.
Governing Board Structure and Membership
Florida law requires that an MPO's voting membership includes no fewer than 5 and no more
than 25 voting members, apportioned based on population and geography. All voting members
must be elected officials, and county commissioners must comprise at least one-third of the
board, except in specific small-board scenarios. In the event an MPO provides one or more seats
for an official of an agency that operates or administers a major mode of transportation, county
commissioners can comprise down to 20% of the MPO Governing Board.92
Currently, Collier MPO has 9 voting members, while Lee County MPO has 18 voting members. If
the MPOs were to merge, maintaining representation for all existing officials would push the
total beyond the 25-member cap. This limitation means that not all current members would
retain seats in a consolidated MPO, requiring difficult decisions about which jurisdictions or
officials would continue to have voting representation. Determining how to balance
representation could be complex and potentially sensitive.
Financial Management and Procurement
Consolidating the Collier MPO and Lee County MPO would require reconciling differences in
financial management structures, procurement procedures, and funding practices. These
differences reflect each MPO's organizational framework, scale of operations, and reliance on
external versus internal financial administration.
• Fiscal Agent vs. Independent Operations – The Collier MPO operates under the financial
administration of Collier County, which acts as its fiscal agent. This centralized model
relies on the County’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for oversight,
recordkeeping, and procurement compliance through established County ordinances
and manuals. In contrast, the Lee County MPO is an independent entity that contracts
with private CPA firms for financial services and annual audits, maintaining full control
over its own financial processes. This independence allows the Lee County MPO more
92 Florida Statutes § 339.175(3) (2024)
Page 314 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 62
direct flexibility but also requires it to internally manage more complex financial
responsibilities. A merged MPO would need to decide whether to integrate into a fiscal
agent-administered financial system (e.g., Collier's model) or retain independence
similar to the Lee County MPO.
• Cash flow – the Collier MPO relies on Collier County to provide funding for its operations
ahead of federal and state reimbursement, with payment to the County contingent
upon the MPO having sufficient federal and state funds in its UPWP. The Lee County
MPO does not have a fiscal agent to provide capital float and instead manages its cash
flow through local contributions and carryover funds. Merging the two MPOs would
require creating a unified cash management strategy.
• Budget scale and local contributions – The Lee County MPO operates with a larger
UPWP budget ($4.7 million vs. Collier’s $3.6 million) and a higher local funding share.
The Lee County MPO collected $146,382 from local governments over the most recent
two-year UPWP period, representing approximately 3.3% of its total budget, while the
Collier MPO collected $16,000 from local governments over the same two-year UPWP
period, accounting for approximately 0.4% of its total budget. Consolidation would
require reconciling differences in operational budgets and local contribution
expectations.
Project Prioritization and Funding Allocation Strategies
The Collier MPO and Lee County MPO employ distinct approaches to project prioritization and
federal fund allocation, shaped by differing goals, evaluation methodologies, funding policies,
and stakeholder engagement practices. Consolidating these two MPOs would require alignment
across multiple dimensions of planning and programming, many of which influence how projects
are scored, ranked, and ultimately funded.
• The Collier MPO's 2045 LRTP has 11 clearly defined goals, each with unique evaluation
criteria and explicit numerical weighting factors. The scoring system includes bonuses
for resiliency and negative scoring for environmental impacts. The Lee County MPO uses
12 project evaluation criteria for roadway needs and applies weighted categories for
prioritizing transit needs but does not assign a comprehensive set of numerical
weighting factors to its roadway criteria or overall goals, nor does it specify a system of
negative scoring for adverse impacts. Both MPOs are updating their LRTP goals and
evaluation frameworks for the 2050 cycle to reflect evolving federal and state planning
guidance, including expectations outlined in FDOT and FHWA correspondence.
Consolidation would require reconciling these differing prioritization frameworks.
• For federal Surface Transportation Block Grant – Urban (SU) or Transportation
Management Area (TMA) funds, the Collier MPO uses a five-year rotating policy
established in the 2045 LRTP, allocating 100% of available funds to specific project
categories each year (e.g., Pedestrian/Bicycle, Bridges, Congestion Management). The
Lee County MPO allocates federal funds across categories each year through its
Multimodal Enhancement “Box” Funds process, including recurring set-asides for
congestion management and bus replacement, without a rotating structure.
Consolidation would require aligning these differing funding allocation strategies.
• The Lee County MPO’s TIP is larger ($798 million vs. $500 million) and receives a higher
share of federal funds (56% vs. 25%) compared to the Collier MPO’s TIP. However, this
difference is largely driven by a single high-cost bridge project in Lee County, which
accounts for approximately 26% of its total TIP budget. Historically, both MPOs have
Page 315 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 63
received between 25–30% of their TIP funding from federal sources, and these
percentages fluctuate annually based on project mix and available discretionary funding.
While consolidation would not result in more dedicated formula grant federal or state
funding, it may shift how existing funds are programmed and prioritized.
Performance Measurement Scope
The two MPOs differ in their approach to performance measurement, with the Collier MPO
providing more localized metrics and internal tracking, while the Lee County MPO emphasizes
advanced safety analysis and multimodal system performance. Consolidation would require
harmonizing methodologies, addressing data gaps, and integrating detailed local performance
measures with broader regional frameworks to ensure consistency in monitoring and reporting.
• The Collier MPO provides raw crash statistics for the county, highlighting areas of
concentration. It also incorporates trend analysis in its Comprehensive Safety Action
Plan (CSAP), during the annual adoption of FDOT safety targets, and in its Annual Report
to the Board. The Lee County MPO demonstrates more advanced safety data analysis,
using five-year rolling averages and individual year comparisons, as well as
differentiating between state highways and off-system roadways. Consolidation would
require harmonizing the level of detail and methodology used for safety data reporting
and analysis.
• The Collier MPO details a broad range of locally adopted performance measures with
defined monitoring plans for its CMP, Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP), and
Local Roads Safety Plan (LRSP). It also tracks internal strategic performance measures
related to staffing and public outreach.
• The Lee County MPO uses comprehensive multimodal performance measures for its
CMP evaluation, it does not outline a comparable breadth of other local, non-federal
performance measurement and monitoring. Consolidation would require integrating the
Collier MPO’s detailed local performance measures with the Lee County MPO’s broader
multimodal approach.
• The Lee County MPO provides specific dollar figures for various investment categories
within its TIP that directly contribute to specific performance measures. The Collier MPO
categorizes its TIP funding into broad percentages and notes total funding for the TIP
without providing detailed dollar figures tied to performance measures. Consolidation
would require standardizing TIP investment reporting practices.
• The Lee County MPO's 2017 baseline performance for PM3 measures (travel time
reliability and freight movement) was stated as "Not Available", which may limit its
ability to track long-term trends for this area, unlike Collier MPO which reported these
baselines. Consolidation would require addressing gaps in baseline data availability.
Key Implications for Governance, Funding, and Operations under a Consolidated Structure
A consolidated MPO would require significant integration across governance, financial, and
operational domains, navigating the distinct characteristics of the current Collier and Lee County
MPOs.
Governance and Representation
Florida law (Section 339.175, F.S.) caps MPO Governing Boards at 25 voting members.
Combined, the two current boards exceed this limit, meaning some jurisdictions may lose direct
representation. Deciding how to fairly allocate voting seats will be complex and potentially
sensitive, especially if smaller jurisdictions feel underrepresented. Implications for this include:
Page 316 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 64
• Decisions about which jurisdictions retain representation and which do not. Each county
and municipality has different population sizes, travel needs, and infrastructure
priorities, making proportional representation potentially difficult to define.
• Smaller jurisdictions may worry that they will lose influence if they are not granted a
seat on the Governing Board. Even if they retain representation through advisory
committees or alternates, the loss of a formal vote can be perceived as a loss of power.
• The Lee County MPO’s greater number of municipalities means its MPO Governing
Board is already much larger than Collier’s. A merged board may lean more heavily
toward the Lee County MPO’s structure, which could lead to concerns in Collier County
about influence and control over planning priorities.
Operational and Administrative Integration
The two MPOs currently operate under distinct institutional frameworks, each with its own
strengths but few overlapping administrative systems. The Collier MPO operates under a
"leaning independent" model. It is supported by Collier County through a formal Staff Services
Agreement. This means: (1) county departments manage payroll, HR, procurement, legal, and
grant administration, (2) MPO staff are considered County employees and follow County
policies, and (3) the MPO benefits from integrated support and shared infrastructure but has
limited control over administrative decisions and service contracts. The Lee County MPO is a
"freestanding independent" agency. This means it: (1) employs its own staff directly (not
through the County), (2) manages internal HR, payroll, procurement, and legal services, often
contracting with external providers, and (3) has more direct administrative autonomy but must
maintain and fund standalone systems. A merged MPO would likely result of one of three
options:
• Option 1: Collier County continues its current role as the fiscal agent but for the larger,
merged MPO.
• Option 2: The merged MPO adopts the Lee County MPO’s “freestanding” structure.
• Option 3: Create an entirely new MPO anywhere on the hosted to independent
spectrum.
Each of these options present a balance of opportunities and challenges across governance,
funding, and operations. The right choice will depend on how decision-makers weigh priorities
such as regional balance, administrative efficiency, fiscal capacity, and the long-term vision for
coordinated transportation planning in the two-county area.
Personnel and Human Resources
Currently, Collier MPO staff are County employees for administrative purposes who follow
Collier County’s established hiring processes, pay scales, benefits packages, and leave policies.
Lee County MPO staff, by contrast, are directly employed by the MPO, with their own
independent HR rules, benefits (through Florida Municipal Insurance Trust), and paid time off
structure. Merging the two systems would require:
• Creating a unified employment framework so all staff operate under the same hiring,
pay, and evaluation policies.
• Aligning benefits such as health insurance, retirement plans, and leave accrual (changes
that could be seen as gains or losses depending on the individual employee).
• Redefining staff roles, responsibilities, and reporting lines to eliminate duplication and
ensure operational efficiency. Some positions might need to be consolidated, which
could raise concerns about job security and redundancy among existing staff. At the
Page 317 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 65
same time, a larger MPO may require more employees than either organization
currently maintains. This means staffing decisions after a merger would not only be
about reducing overlap but also about identifying where additional capacity is needed
to meet expanded responsibilities, particularly if a member jurisdiction is not providing
administrative support services under a staff services agreement.
• Defining terms for the new Executive Director, who would replace the current two
directors and whose contract would set the tone for other senior staff arrangements.
Financial Management and Resource Allocation
The merger of the Collier MPO and Lee County MPO would have significant implications for
financial management and resource allocation.
• The Collier MPO relies on Collier County for fiscal management, while the Lee County
MPO manages its own financial systems independently. A consolidated MPO would
need to establish a unified financial management and budgeting framework, including
policies for budgeting, procurement, grant administration, and auditing. This may
involve transitioning the Collier MPO’s financial operations from County oversight to an
independent structure or vice versa.
• A merged MPO would need to create a single UPWP, requiring alignment of task
priorities, funding allocations, and financial planning processes. This could streamline
operations but may also lead to challenges in reconciling differences in budget
structures and priorities.
• The Lee County MPO operates with a larger UPWP budget ($4.7 million vs. $3.6 million
for the Collier MPO) and collects a higher percentage of its funding from local
governments (3.3% vs. the Collier MPO’s 0.4%). Merging the two would require
reconciling these differences, establishing a unified contribution formula, and
determining how local contributions from both counties are pooled. This process would
need to address potential concerns over whether each county’s share of contributions is
matched by the benefits and investments they receive.
• The Collier MPO benefits from the County advancing operational funds ahead of federal
and state reimbursement, while the Lee County MPO relies on local contributions and
carryover funds to maintain cash flow. Consolidation would require adopting a single
cash management approach and deciding whether to integrate into a host-administered
fiscal system or full fiscal independence. Each choice has trade-offs for flexibility,
financial risk, and administrative capacity.
• The Collier MPO follows Collier County’s procurement ordinances and financial
oversight processes, which centralize control within the County’s Office of Management
and Budget. The Lee County MPO manages its own procurement under a separate
tiered system and contracts with CPA firms for financial oversight and annual audits. A
merger would require selecting one procurement framework, which could affect
efficiency, compliance requirements, and vendor relationships.
Standardization of Planning and Prioritization Methodologies
Standardization of planning and prioritization methodologies in a merger would require careful
alignment of goals, evaluation criteria, and processes. While this could improve regional
coordination, it would also involve significant effort to reconcile differences and ensure balance
across the consolidated planning area.
Page 318 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 66
• A merged MPO would need to create a single LRTP, requiring alignment of goals,
evaluation criteria, and methodologies. This could streamline planning but may lead to
challenges in reconciling differences in prioritization approaches, such as the Collier
MPO’s detailed scoring system versus the Lee County MPO’s more flexible framework.
• A consolidated approach could support one long-range plan grounded in a shared vision
for mobility, growth, and resilience across the region. However, a balance would need
to be stuck between developing goals that meet regional and local needs to satisfy all
participants in the process.
• A merged MPO would also produce a single LOPP and TIP covering the entire two-
county region. This would require aligning prioritization schedules, formatting
standards, and project ranking methodologies. It could improve regional consistency
and reduce duplication, but it may also lead to sensitive negotiations over how limited
federal and state funds are distributed, especially if one county perceives a loss of
influence or priority status for its projects.
• The two MPOs use different funding allocation methods (e.g., the Collier MPO’s five-
year rotating SU policy vs. the Lee County MPO’s annual “Box” fund set-asides). Merging
would require developing a single approach.
• Although both MPOs comply with federal Transportation Performance Management
requirements, they differ in the scope and detail of local performance tracking.
Standardization would improve consistency in monitoring outcomes but may require
significant changes to data collection, reporting, and analytical practices.
• The Collier MPO’s practice of applying penalties for environmental impacts (such as
intrusion into panther habitats) would need to be reconciled with the Lee County MPO’s
lack of explicit environmental scoring criteria. Creating a shared policy would require
balancing regional development priorities with environmental protection standards in
light of the fact that Collier County contains more protected, environmentally sensitive
lands relative to many other MPOs.
Funding Disparities and Implications for Regional Planning and Project Programming
Consolidation would not increase total UPWP funding, meaning the merged MPO would need to
deliver planning activities for a larger geographic area with almost the same overall resources
currently split between two programs. If well-managed, combining work programs could reduce
duplication, pool consultant expertise, and create efficiencies that free up resources for new or
expanded regional initiatives. However, without careful alignment of priorities and balanced
resource allocation, the merged MPO may face constraints in maintaining the same level of
attention to county-specific needs. The ultimate impact, whether positive or negative, would
depend on governance decisions, priority-setting, and how effectively the merged MPO
leverages its combined capacity.
• Federal code and rule (23 U.S.C. 104(d)(2) and 23 CFR 420.109, respectively) dictate that
each state develop a formula for distributing federal planning funds (PL). This formula is
reconsidered following each decennial census. The Florida PL formula states that, “Each
MPO will receive a base annual apportionment amount of $350,000” and that “MPOs
that merge retain base allocation.” Therefore, a consolidated MPO in Collier and Lee
Counties would receive a base annual apportionment of $700,000 in federal PL funds,
subject to changes in the statewide PL funding formula.
• FDOT distributes additional funds to each MPO based on the population of each
urbanized area. Since the proposed merger would not alter the boundaries or
Page 319 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 67
population of the existing urbanized areas, the population-based federal planning
funding distributed by FDOT would remain unchanged. In effect, the merged MPO
would receive the same total population-based planning funding as the two separate
MPOs currently receive combined.
The Lee County MPO currently manages a larger TIP, with approximately $798 million in planned
investments compared to $500 million in the Collier MPO’s TIP. While Lee’s TIP shows a higher
share of federal funding (56% vs. 25%), this is largely due to a single high-cost bridge project that
accounts for roughly 26% of its total TIP budget. Historically, both MPOs have received between
25–30% of their TIP funding from federal sources, and these percentages fluctuate year to year
based on project mix and available discretionary funding. Consolidation would not inherently
increase federal or state funding, but it could alter how existing funds are programmed and
prioritized across the region.
• A consolidated MPO may be more competitive for federal discretionary grants for
transportation projects (funds shown in the TIP not the UPWP) due to (1) potential for
more regionally significant and multi-jurisdictional projects, (2) potentially greater
administrative capacity and planning capacity, (3) possibly expanded ability to
demonstrate projects that support federal goals, and (4) increased political support for
grant applications. However, no guarantee of increased awards exists with success
depending on project quality and alignment with federal priorities.
• A consolidated MPO may strengthen the region’s position when competing for state
discretionary funds such as SIS and TRIP by demonstrating broader regional
coordination, streamlined planning, and enhanced project impact. These attributes can
help meet FDOT’s strategic investment criteria, which often favor projects with regional
significance and interagency collaboration. However, consolidation alone does not
guarantee success. Both the Collier and Lee County MPOs, working together, have
historically been successful securing TRIP funding, showing that strong planning and
coordination can be effective under current structures. Even with consolidation, MPOs
in less populous regions may still face challenges when competing against larger, more
complex MPOs whose projects align more directly with FDOT’s long-range priorities.
• A unified TIP could offer advantages for regional transportation planning. By
consolidating project priorities across county lines, the MPO could support more
cohesive corridor development, reduce administrative duplication, and improve
coordination among jurisdictions. However, consolidation may require reconciling
differing local priorities, funding expectations, and project timelines, which could lead to
delays or diluted attention to jurisdiction-specific needs.
• A single TIP might simplify public engagement and stakeholder communication, offering
a clearer and more transparent view of transportation investments. Yet, smaller
communities may worry that their projects will be deprioritized in favor of larger,
regionally significant initiatives. Without clear governance protocols and balanced
resource allocation, the unified TIP could become politically contentious, especially if
one county or municipality perceives a loss of influence over programming decisions.
• Shared data systems and streamlined programming processes could accelerate project
delivery and improve fiscal oversight. Conversely, the administrative burden of merging
systems, coordinating across a larger geography, and maintaining responsiveness to
diverse stakeholders may strain MPO staff capacity, particularly if no additional planning
funds are provided to support the expanded scope.
Page 320 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 68
Appendix A: Source Documents Reviewed
Collier MPO Documents
Foundational & Governance
• Collier MPO 2015 Interlocal Agreement for Creation of the Collier MPO
• Collier MPO 2014 Intergovernmental Coordination and Review and Public
Transportation Coordination Joint Participation Agreement
• Collier MPO 2014 MPO Director TIP Authority
• Collier MPO 2015 Chair Ministerial Authority
• Collier MPO 2024 MPO Bylaws
• Collier MPO 2024 Congestion Management Committee (CMC) Bylaws
• Collier MPO 2024 Local Coordinating Board (LCB) Bylaws
• Collier MPO 2024 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Bylaws
• Collier MPO 2021 Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) Bylaws
• Collier MPO 2021 Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) Bylaws
• Collier MPO 2024 Public Participation Plan (PPP)
• Collier MPO 2025 Organizational Chart
• Collier MPO Succession Plan
Planning Documents
• Collier MPO 2019 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (BPMP)
• Collier MPO 2020 Ten-Year Transit Development Plan 2021–2030
• Collier MPO 2021 Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP)
• Collier MPO 2022 Congestion Management Process (CMP)
• Collier MPO 2025 Highway Freight and Safety Priorities
• Collier MPO 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP)
• Collier MPO FY 2025/26–2029/30 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
• Collier MPO Transportation System Performance Report (TSPR) and Action Plan
• Collier MPO Zero Emission Fleet Transition Plan, 2025
Finance, Audits & Administration
• Collier County 2016 Grants Administration Handbook of Internal Controls and Protocols
• Collier County 2023 Employee Benefits Snapshot
• Collier County 2023 Procurement Manual Procurement Services Division
• Collier MPO 2023 FDOT Office of Inspector General Audit Report
• Collier MPO 2023 Review and Approval of Invoice Payment Memo to Staff
• Collier MPO 2024 Annual Report
• Collier MPO 2025 Monthly Operating Budget Estimates
• Collier MPO Executed 2025 Staff Services Agreement
• Collier MPO 2025 Draft Annual List of Project Priorities (LOPP)
• Collier MPO Grant & Procurement Guide and Resources Memo to MPO Staff
• Collier MPO Grant Management and Financial Management Policies and Procedures
• Collier MPO Quality Assurance Plan
• Collier MPO Job Title Descriptions
Agreements
• Collier MPO 2025 Amendment to Lease Agreement
Page 321 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 69
• Collier MPO 2025 Executive Director Employment Agreement – Extension of Term
• Collier MPO 2025–2026 FDOT/MPO Agreement
• Collier MPO 2025 Transportation Disadvantaged Planning Grant Agreement
• Collier MPO 2024 Transportation Disadvantaged Service Plan
• Collier MPO 2024/25–2025/26 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP)
Resolutions
• Collier MPO Resolution 2012-05 Reallocation of Unused Project Funds
• Collier MPO Resolution 2018-02 Covering Cost Over-Runs on LAP Projects
• Collier MPO SS4A Local Match Agreement 2023
Lee County MPO Documents
Foundational & Governance
• Lee County MPO 2016 Interlocal Agreement for Creation of the Lee County MPO
• Lee County MPO 2013 Intergovernmental Coordination and Review and Public
Transportation Coordination Joint Participation Agreement
• Lee County MPO 2018 MPO Bylaws
• Lee County MPO 2019 Traffic Management and Operations Committee (TMOC) Bylaws
• Lee County MPO 2020 Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) Bylaws
• Lee County MPO 2022 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Bylaws
• Lee County MPO 2023 Bicycle Pedestrian Coordinating Committee (BPCC) Bylaws
• Lee County MPO 2023 Public Involvement Plan (PIP)
• Lee County MPO 2025 Organizational Chart
Planning Documents
• Lee County MPO 2020 Apportionment Plan
• Lee County MPO 2020 Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (BPSAP)
• Lee County MPO 2020 TSM&O Master Plan
• Lee County MPO 2025 Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (CSAP)
• Lee County MPO 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP)
• Lee County MPO FY 2025/26–2029/30 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
• Lee County MPO Congestion Management Process (CMP)
• Lee County MPO System Performance Report (SPR)
Finance, Audits & Administration
• Lee County MPO 2015 Lease Agreement
• Lee County MPO 2018 Engagement Letter with CRI CPAs and Advisors
• Lee County MPO 2022 Certification Report
• Lee County MPO 2022 Statement of Work from Clifton Larson Allen LLC (Auditor)
• Lee County MPO 2023 AP Disbursement Process Memo
• Lee County MPO 2023 Personnel Manual
• Lee County MPO 2023–2024 Monthly Revenue
• Lee County MPO 2024 Accounts Payable Disbursements Process
• Lee County MPO 2024 Auditor Statement
• Lee County MPO 2024 Cash Receipts and Cash Management Process Memo
• Lee County MPO 2024 Financial Statements and Regulatory Reports
• Lee County MPO 2024 Health Coverage Agreement
Page 322 of 397
Tech Memo #1: Current Local and Regional MPO Planning and Business Practices
cutr.usf.edu 70
• Lee County MPO 2024 Operating Procedure for Equipment Purchase, Maintenance, and
Disposal
• Lee County MPO 2024 Payroll Process Memo
• Lee County MPO 2024 Transmittal of Transportation Project Priorities Memo to FDOT
• Lee County MPO 2024/25–2025/26 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP)
• Lee County MPO 2025 Operating Budget
• Lee County MPO 2025–2026 Monthly Operating Budget Estimate
• Lee County MPO 2025 Employment Agreement with MPO Director
Agreements
• Lee County MPO 2025–2026 FDOT/MPO Agreement
• Lee County MPO 2025 Transportation Disadvantaged Planning Grant Agreement
• Lee County MPO 2025–2026 Transportation Disadvantaged Service Plan
• Lee County MPO Professional Service Agreement with Gray Robinson (Legal Services)
Resolutions
• Lee County MPO Resolution 2012-01 Deferred Compensation Program
• Lee County MPO Resolution 2012-05 No Written Investment Policy
• Lee County MPO Resolution 2023-09 Authorizing MPO Chair to Execute Administrative
Documents
• Lee County MPO Resolution 2024-05 Application of Federal Mileage Rates
Joint / Regional / Other Documents
• Interlocal Agreement 2009 for Joint Regional Transportation Planning and Coordination
Between Collier and Lee County MPOs
• Interlocal Agreement 2024 for Joint Regional Transportation Planning and Coordination
Between Sarasota/Manatee, Lee County, and Charlotte County–Punta Gorda MPOs
• Interlocal Agreement 2024 for Services Between Lee County Transit and the Lee County
MPO
• Application for MPOAC Southwest Florida Rail Feasibility Study 2022
• Florida Rail System Plan, 2023
• JOINT Collier and Lee MPO Boards’ Regional Coordination Workshop Agenda 2023
• JOINT Collier and Lee MPO Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda 2023
• Joint Resolution 2013-01 FDOT Requests Collier and Lee MPOs to Evaluate Planning
Areas
• Joint Resolution by Collier, Lee, Charlotte-Punta Gorda, and Sarasota/Manatee MPOs to
Submit Application for Southwest Florida Rail Study 2023
• Joint TRIP Priorities 2025
• LeeTran – Lee County Transit 2020 Transit Development Plan
• Pages from Joint Collier-Lee MPO 6F Gulf Coast Trail 2023
• Regional Congestion Management Process Element Scope of Services
Page 323 of 397
FDOT Contract Number (TWO BED89 130-01) November 2025
cutr.usf.edu
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY
MPO CONSOLIDATION
FEASIBILITY STUDY
Technical Memorandum #2: Regulatory Review
Prepared for Coller and Lee County MPOs
FDOT Contract Number (TWO BED89 130-01)
Page 324 of 397
T COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
: BDV00-000) MONTH YEAR
cutr.usf.edu i
Disclaimer
The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts
and the accuracy of the information presented herein.
Page 325 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu ii
Technical Documentation Page
1. Report No.
2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.
4. Title and Subtitle
Collier and Lee County MPO Consolidation Feasibility Study
Technical Memorandum: Regulatory Review
5. Report Date
November, 2025
6. Performing Organization Code
7. Author(s)
Jeff Kramer, Tia Boyd
8. Performing Organization Report No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Center for Urban Transportation Research
University of South Florida
4202 E. Fowler Ave, CUT 100 Tampa, FL 33620
10. Work Unit No.
11. Contract or Grant No. TWO BED89 130-01
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
13. Type of Report and Period Covered Technical Memorandum
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstract
The Collier and Lee County Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) each serve vital roles in coordinating
regional transportation planning and policy. With increasing population growth, expanded urbanized areas, and
shared transportation needs, discussions about potential consolidation of the MPOs have emerged as a means
to enhance efficiency, streamline operations, and improve regional coordination. Before making any decision
regarding consolidation, it is crucial to assess the perspectives of stakeholders, evaluate institutional feasibility,
and document potential benefits and tradeoffs.
This technical memorandum has been prepared as part of Task 3 of the Collier and Lee County MPOs
Consolidation Feasibility Study. It provides an overview and analysis of the current federal and state laws,
regulations, statutes, and policies related to MPO designation and redesignation, regional coordination, MPO
consolidation, urbanized area (UZA) and metropolitan planning area (MPA) boundaries, and related topics.
Additionally, it notes the areas related to the potential consolidation of two or more MPOs that are unclear or
require clarification, for which input was sought from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT). The findings from this memorandum will help establish a shared
understanding of the rules governing MPO consolidation, the steps involved with MPO consolidation, and any
potential obstacles or challenges related to this process.
17. Key Word
Metropolitan planning organizations, designation,
redesignation, consolidation, coordination
18. Distribution Statement
19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page)
21. No. of Pages 14
22. Price
Page 326 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu iii
Table of Contents
Disclaimer .................................................................................................................................... i
Technical Documentation Page .................................................................................................ii
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1
2. Thematic Areas of Federal Law and Rule, and Florida State Statutes .............................. 2
Designation and Redesignation ............................................................................................ 2
UZA and MPA Boundaries ...................................................................................................... 4
Organizational Structure and Governance ........................................................................... 4
Coordination ........................................................................................................................... 6
Funding ................................................................................................................................... 7
MPO Core Products ................................................................................................................ 9
3. Clarification of potential areas in federal or state law and regulations that could impact
MPO consolidation ................................................................................................................... 11
Questions to FHWA .............................................................................................................. 11
Questions to FDOT ............................................................................................................... 15
References ............................................................................................................................... 17
Page 327 of 397
T COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
: BDV00-000) MONTH YEAR
cutr.usf.edu 1
1. Introduction
This technical memorandum has been prepared as part of Task 3 of the Collier and Lee
County Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) Consolidation Feasibility Study. It
provides an overview and analysis of the current federal and state laws, regulations,
statutes, and policies pertaining to MPO designation and redesignation, regional
coordination, MPO consolidation, urbanized area (UZA) and metropolitan planning area
(MPA) boundaries, and related topics. Additionally, it documents the areas related to the
potential consolidation of two or more MPOs that are unclear or require clarification. For
topics without definitive facts available, feedback was sought from the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to support the
development of a set of assumptions relevant to the Collier and Lee County MPOs’
characteristics. The intent of this technical memorandum is to inform Governing Board
members of both MPOs as they consider whether to pursue the formation of a consolidated
regional MPO.
This Task serves as an early step in the Phase I assessment process. The findings from this
memorandum will help establish a shared understanding of the rules governing MPO
consolidation, the steps involved with MPO consolidation, and any potential obstacles or
challenges related to this process. This shared understanding is essential to future
discussions about the advantages, disadvantages, trade-offs, and feasibility of consolidating
the two organizations.
The information presented in this memorandum was gathered through a review of the
following sources:
► 23 U.S.C. 134
► 23 U.S.C. 104
► 49 U.S.C. 5303
► 49 U.S.C. 5305
► 23 CFR 450 Subpart C
► 23 CFR 420
► Florida Statutes s. 339.175
► The FDOT MPO Program Management
Handbook
► FDOT Work Program Instructions
The findings are organized thematically to support comparison and will be used to guide the
work of subsequent tasks. These thematic areas are designation and redesignation, MPA
and UZA boundaries, organizational structure and governance, coordination, funding, and
MPO core products.
It is important to note that this memorandum does not recommend specific approaches for
potential MPO consolidation, provide solutions for identified obstacles or challenges to MPO
consolidation, nor prescribe future actions. Rather, it is designed to support informed
decision-making by outlining the requirements for any potential consolidation and any
challenges or obstacles that may require future attention.
Page 328 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 2
2. Thematic Areas of Federal Law and Rule, and Florida State
Statutes
The key sections of federal law and regulations, as well as Florida State statutes, have been
organized into six main thematic areas that highlight topics relevant to the factors
influencing MPO consolidation. The six thematic areas are: (1) designation and
redesignation, (2) MPA and UZA boundaries, (3) organizational structure and governance, (4)
coordination, (5) funding, and (6) MPO core products. Many of these areas overlap, and
where applicable, citations from the CFR, U.S.C., and Florida Statutes may be repeated or
cross-referenced.
Designation and Redesignation
The designation of an MPO is established through an agreement between the Governor and
units of general-purpose local government that represent at least 75 percent of the affected
population. This includes the largest incorporated city based on population, as stated in 23
U.S.C. 134(d), 49 U.S.C. 5303(d), and 23 CFR 450.310. Additionally, the U.S.C. and CFR
specify that applicable state or local laws may provide alternative procedures for
designation.
Florida statutes include similar requirements, stating that designation is accomplished by
“agreement between the Governor and units of general-purpose local government
representing at least 75 percent of the population of the urbanized area” (s.
339.175(2)(a)1. F.S.). It modifies the criterion for the “largest incorporated city based on
population” and states that, “the unit of general-purpose local government that represents
the central city or cities within the M.P.O. jurisdiction, as defined by the United States
Bureau of the Census, must be a party to such agreement.” Florida statutes also specify that
designated MPOs should be fully operational no later than 6 months after designation (s.
339.175(2) F.S.)
According to 23 U.S.C. 134(d)(5), existing MPO designations remain in effect until the MPO
is redesignated (see also 23 CFR 450.310(g)). Redesignation requires an agreement
between the Governor and units of general-purpose local government that represent at least
75 percent of the existing metropolitan planning area (MPA) population, including the largest
incorporated city based on population (23 U.S.C. 134(d)(6)(A); 23 CFR 450.310(h)).
According to 23 CFR 450.310(i), during redesignation, units of general-purpose local
government are “elected officials from each unit of general-purpose local government
located within the metropolitan planning area served by the existing MPO.”
Florida statutes do not address redesignation. However, section 2.4 of the FDOT MPO
Administrative Handbook outlines the procedures for MPO redesignation as specified in 23
CFR 450.310 (FDOT, 2025).
Page 329 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 3
Redesignation, as outlined in 23 CFR 450.310(j), is required when there is a substantial
change in:
► The proportion of voting members on the existing MPO representing the largest
incorporated city, other units of general-purpose local government served by the MPO,
and the State(s); or
► The decision-making1 authority or responsibility of the MPO, or in decision-making
procedures established under the MPO bylaws.
Additionally, redesignation may be required if the boundaries of the UZA are adjusted in a
manner that changes the MPO’s composition (23 CFR 450.312(h)).
If there are no substantial changes or if restructuring is necessary to comply with 23 U.S.C.
134(d)(6)(B) (see also 23 CFR 450.310(d)(2)), redesignation is not required. Furthermore,
redesignation is not required for the following circumstances (23 CFR 450.310(l)):
► The identification of a new UZA (as determined by the Bureau of the Census) within an
existing MPA (see also 23 U.S.C. 134(e)(3)).
► Adding members to the MPO that represent new units of general-purpose local
government resulting from the expansion of the MPA.
► Adding members to satisfy the specific membership requirements described in 23 CFR
450.310(d) for an MPO that serves a Transportation Management Area (TMA).
► Periodic rotation of members representing units of general-purpose local government, as
established under MPO bylaws.
It is important to note that in 2016, a rule change to 23 CFR 450 required that if multiple
MPOs were designated within a UZA2, the Governor and MPOs would need to assess
whether multiple MPOs were appropriate. If it were determined that multiple MPOs were not
suitable, a merger would be required (81 FR 41473, 2016; 81 FR 93448, 2016). This
change would have applied to 23 CFR 450.310. Furthermore, the 4-1-17 edition of 23 CFR
450 stated that mergers into a single UZA would occur “in accordance with the
redesignation procedures described in 450.310(h)…” (23 CFR 450 4-1-17 edition). In 2017,
the rule was repealed through Public Law 115-33 (Davis, 2017; Nossaman, 2017).
Even though the proposed rule was repealed, it does reference 450.310(h) for
redesignation procedures in MPO mergers. According to 450.310(h):
An existing MPO may be redesignated only by agreement between the Governor and
units of general-purpose local government that together represent at least 75
1 In this technical memorandum, “decision-making” has been edited from “decisionmaking” for clarity and
consistency.
2 Before 2022, 23 USC 134(d)(7) read as follows, “More than 1 metropolitan planning organization may be
designated within an existing metropolitan planning area only if the Governor and the existing metropolitan
planning organization determine that the size and complexity of the existing metropolitan planning area make
designation of more than 1 metropolitan planning organization for the area appropriate.” However, this was
inaccurate, as MPOs can’t share an MPA. On 1/3/2022 the language was amended, substituting "an existing
urbanized area (as defined by the Bureau of the Census)" for "an existing metropolitan planning area" and "the
area" for "the existing metropolitan planning area. " It remains as such in the version of 23 USC 134 on the
retrieval date 8/13/2025.
Page 330 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 4
percent of the existing metropolitan planning area population (including the largest
incorporated city, based on population, as named by the Bureau of the Census).
UZA and MPA Boundaries
The UZA is defined as “the geographic area with a population of 50,000 or more, as
determined by the Bureau of the Census” (23 U.S.C. 134(b)(7)). The MPA is “the geographic
area determined by agreement between the metropolitan planning organization for the area
and the Governor” (23 U.S.C. 134(b)(1), see also 23 CFR 450.312(a)).
More than one MPO may be designated within a UZA or group of contiguous UZAs if the
Governor and MPOs agree that the size and complexity justify this designation (23 U.S.C.
134(d)(7), 23 CFR 450.310(e), s. 339.175(2)(a)2. F.S.). When it is deemed appropriate to
designate more than one MPO for a UZA, federal regulations require these MPOs to have
written agreements that specify how they will coordinate and divide planning
responsibilities. In addition to these written agreements between the MPOs, when more
than one MPO is designated for a UZA, they are also required to have written agreements
between the state(s) and the public transportation operator(s). These agreements should
describe their approach to coordinating transportation plans and transportation
improvement programs across the MPA boundaries (23 CFR 450.310(e), 23 CFR
450.314(e)). Florida statutes contain similar language, requiring each MPO to consult with
every other MPO designated for the UZA and the state. They are also required to coordinate
plans and programs and ensure, when practicable, that the data used in the planning
process is consistent (s. 339.175(2)(a)2. F.S.).
The MPA boundary is required to cover the existing UZA as well as the contiguous area that
is expected to become urbanized within 20 years (23 U.S.C. 134(e)(2)(A), see also 49 U.S.C.
5303, 23 CFR 450.312(a)(1) and s. 339.175(2)(c) F.S.). Additionally, the MPA boundary
may also cover the entire metropolitan statistical area or consolidated metropolitan
statistical area as outlined in 23 U.S.C. 134(e)(2)(B), 23 CFR 450.312(a)(2), and s.
339.175(2)(c) F.S. While an MPA boundary may encompass more than one UZA, the
boundaries cannot overlap (23 CFR 450.312(c), 23 CFR 450.312(g)).
Organizational Structure and Governance
According to 23 U.S.C. 134(d)(2) and 23 CFR 450.310(d)(1), each MPO that serves as a
TMA must include local elected officials, officials of modal agencies, and appropriate State
officials. The U.S.C. and CFR also state that “Subject to the bylaws or enabling statute of the
MPO, a representative of a provider of public transportation may also serve as a
representative of a local municipality” (23 U.S.C. 134(d)(3)(B); 23 CFR 450.310(d)(3)(ii)).
In 2016, the FHWA and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) issued a final rule
concerning changes made by the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-
21) and the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (81 FR 34050). Within the
general comments section of this rule, two references were made regarding the
representation of public transportation providers on MPO Governing Boards as provided in
23 U.S.C. 134(d)(3)(B) and 23 CFR 450.310(d)(3)(ii):
Page 331 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 5
• In reference to a comment regarding equal decision-making rights, as well as the
direct participation of transit providers, the response states that “the statute was
changed in the FAST Act to explicitly allow that the representative of an operator of
public transportation may simultaneously represent a local municipality.”
• Related to comments on flexibility in how transit providers are represented in the
decision-making process, the FHWA and FTA confirmed that a single official can serve
in multiple capacities, stating that this “would be particularly appropriate in instances
where the local elected official represents a local government that operates a transit
system.”
Although the CFR does not specify the number of members for the MPO Governing Board, it
requires that when designating these officials for the first time, the MPO must consider the
equitable and proportional representation of the population of the MPA (23 U.S.C.
134(d)(3)(D), see also s. 339.175(3)(a) F.S.).
Florida statute specifies that the MPO must designate a chair, a vice chair, and an agency
clerk (s. 339.175(2)(e) F.S.) and outlines specific requirements for MPO voting membership
(s. 339.175(3) F.S.). The voting membership must include at least 5 but no more than 25
apportioned members, with the actual number of voting members determined based on an
“equitable geographic-population ratio basis.” The following requirements for MPO voting
membership are also addressed in s. 339.175(3)(a) F.S.:
• County commissioners shall compose at least one-third of the MPO governing board
membership
o This does not apply when all of the county commissioners in a single-county MPO
are members of the governing board.
o A multicounty MPO may satisfy this requirement by any combination of county
commissioners from each of the counties constituting the MPO.
• Voting members shall be elected officials of general-purpose local governments, one
of whom may represent a group of general-purpose local governments through an
entity created by an MPO for that purpose.
• An MPO may include, as part of its apportioned voting members, a member of a
statutorily authorized planning board, an official of an agency that operates or
administers a major mode of transportation, or an official of Space Florida.
• County commissioners shall compose not less than 20 percent of the MPO
membership if an official of an agency that operates or administers a major mode of
transportation has been appointed to an MPO.
Florida statutes (s. 339.175(4)) address MPO membership apportionment and require
MPOs to evaluate their membership composition in conjunction with the decennial census. If
required, reapportionment is undertaken through agreement between the Governor and
affected general-purpose local governments. Alternate members and the method for
appointing alternate members are determined through a cooperative agreement between
the Governor and a majority of units of general-purpose local government. Representatives
Page 332 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 6
from FDOT are required to be included as non-voting advisers to the MPO Board. Additional
non-voting advisers can be appointed by the MPO, but these advisors are encouraged to be
of various multimodal forms of transportation not otherwise represented by voting members
of the MPO. By request of major military installations located within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the MPO and agreement of the MPO, a representative of the installation can
serve as a non-voting adviser.
MPO Governing Board members serve 4-year terms and can be reappointed for one or more
additional 4-year terms. However, there are two circumstances that would result in the
termination of a public official's membership before the four-year period. The first is if they
leave their elective or appointed office. The second is if they are voted out by the
membership of the governing board they represent (s. 339.175(4)(b) F.S.).
Coordination
As noted in the section of the technical memorandum regarding UZA and MPA boundaries,
both the CFR and Florida statute require that MPOs that are designated for one UZA or are a
part of contiguous UZAs establish official, written agreements for coordination as well as
planning and programming responsibilities (23 CFR 450.310(e); s. 339.175(2)(a)2 F.S.).
The CFR requires MPOs to have written agreements with other MPOs, and in some
instances, the state and public transportation providers, under the following circumstances:
• When more than one MPO is designed to serve a UZA or group of contiguous UZAs
(23 CFR 450.310(e), 23 CFR 450.310(e), 23 CFR 450.314(e), 450.314(h)(ii),
450.306(d)).
• In cases where part of an urbanized area served by one MPO extends into an
adjacent MPA (23 CFR 450.312(h)).
The U.S.C. requires MPOs to consult with one another and coordinate plans and programs
when:
• More than one MPO has authority within a UZA or an area designated as a
nonattainment area for ozone or carbon monoxide under the Clean Air Act (23 U.S.C.
134(g)(1)).
• A transportation improvement funded from the Highway Trust Fund or authorized
under chapter 53 of title 49 is located within the boundaries of more than one MPA
(23 U.S.C. 134(g)(2)).
Furthermore, 23 U.S.C. 134(g)(4) requires consistency in planning data and forecasts
between MPOs that cover the same UZA.
Florida statute (s. 339.175, F.S.) reflects these federal requirements, allowing multiple
MPOs within a contiguous UZA while mandating coordination on federally and state-required
planning products, including long-range transportation plans, transportation improvement
programs, and priority project lists (s. 339.175(7)(a) F.S., s. 339.175(7)(b) F.S., s.
339.175(8)(a) F.S.). Additionally, Florida statutes require MPOs within contiguous UZAs to
ensure the consistency of data used in the planning process (s. 339.175(7)(b) F.S.). MPO
Page 333 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 7
core products and related requirements for coordination between MPOs will be discussed in
the section of this technical memorandum titled MPO Core Products.
Florida statute section 339.175(6), which includes provisions for powers, duties, and
responsibilities, requires MPOs to develop coordination mechanisms with one another; the
exact methods are not prescribed, but the statutes encourage flexibility in the approach (s.
339.175(6)(j)1. F.S.). MPOs that join with one another or an individual political subdivision
to coordinate activities or achieve planning and development goals are required to have an
interlocal agreement (s. 339.175(6)(j)2. F.S.). This section of the statutes also states that
multiple MPOs may merge, combine, or otherwise join together as a single MPO, but it does
not provide specific details regarding the merger process. The FDOT MPO Program
Management Handbook includes considerations for MPOs that choose to merge. These
considerations address consensus among the MPOs, outreach, representation, the creation
and adoption of planning, development, and policy documents, required agreements,
hosting agreements if necessary, staffing needs, start-up costs, local funding needs, and
committees (FDOT, 2025).
Funding
As stated in 23 CFR 450.308, funding for MPOs is available through the provisions outlined
in 23 U.S.C. 104(d) (Metropolitan Planning Program (MPP) funds), 49 U.S.C. 5305(d) (FTA
section 5305 funds), and 49 U.S.C. 5307 (FTA Urbanized Area Formula Grants Program
funds). Additional provisions, including 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(2) (Surface Transportation Block
Grant (STBG) program funds (also STBG – Urban (SU) and Transportation Alternative –
Urban (TALU)), 23 U.S.C. 505 (State Planning and Research (SPR) program funds), 49 U.S.C.
5305(e) (State Planning and Research (SPR) program funds), may also be available to MPOs
for transportation planning. TMA’s, which both the Lee County MPO and Collier MPO are
classified as, can use funds sub-allocated under 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(4) (STBG funds).
23 U.S.C. 104 addresses apportionment, and subsection (d) specifically pertains to the
distribution of metropolitan planning funds (PL funds). According to 23 U.S.C. 104(d)(2) (see
also 23 CFR 420.109), the funds are to be distributed by the States based on a formula
that:
(i) is developed by each State and approved by the Secretary; and
(ii) takes into consideration, at a minimum, population, status of planning, attainment of
air quality standards, metropolitan area transportation needs, and other factors
necessary to provide for an appropriate distribution of funds to carry out section 134 and
other applicable requirements of Federal law.
While 23 CFR 420.109 uses similar language, it extends the requirements for the formula,
adding that it should be developed by the state Department of Transportation (DOT) in
consultation with the MPOs and approved by the FHWA Division Administrator. Florida
statutes require the FDOT to allocate “an appropriate amount of federal transportation
planning funds” to each MPO (s. 339.175(6)(f)).
Page 334 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 8
49 U.S.C. 5305(d) defines how transit planning funds are apportioned to the States. The
allocation process from the states to the MPOs is described as follows:
Amounts apportioned to a State under paragraph (1) shall be made available, not
later than 30 days after the date of apportionment, to metropolitan planning
organizations in the State designated under this section under a formula that—
(A) considers population of urbanized areas;
(B) provides an appropriate distribution for urbanized areas to carry out the
cooperative processes described in this section;
(C) the State develops in cooperation with the metropolitan planning
organizations; and
(D) the Secretary approves.
Florida participates in the Consolidated Planning Grant (CPG) program, which allows the
State to combine FHWA PL funds and FTA 5305(d) funds into a single grant (FDOT, 2025).
The distribution formulas, as outlined in the FDOT Work Program Instructions (FDOT, 2024),
are as follows:
1) FHWA PL Funds Allocation
• The MPOAC will receive an off-the-top allocation of $770,000 from each
requested annual apportionment.
• Each MPO will receive a base annual apportionment amount of $350,000.
• In addition to the annual base apportionment of $350,000, each MPO will
receive additional PL funds proportionate to the population of the urban areas
with 50,000 or more people relative to the total population in urban areas
with 50,000 or more people in the state, from the balance of funds remaining
after the apportionment above.
• MPOs that merge retain base allocation.
• $350,000 one-time allocation for MPOs extending boundaries to include new
urban areas with 50,000 or more people.
• The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act requires that 2.5% of each MPO’s
PL allocation be set aside for Complete Streets activities.
2) FTA 5305(d) Funds Allocation
• Each MPO, including the MPOAC, will receive a base annual apportionment
amount of $30,000.
• $350,000 one-time allocation for MPOs extending boundaries to include new
urban areas with 50,000 or more people.
• After the base amount is allocated, half of the remaining funds are distributed
based on the population of the urban areas with 50,000 or more people
within the MPO’s jurisdiction, as a portion of the allocation in urban areas with
50,000 or more people of all the MPO’s jurisdiction.
Page 335 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 9
• A quarter of the remaining funds, after the base amount is allocated, are
distributed based on Revenue Miles within the MPO’s jurisdiction as a portion
of all the revenue miles in all the MPOs’ jurisdiction.
• A quarter of the remaining funds, after the base amount is allocated, are
distributed based on the Passenger Trips within the MPO’s jurisdiction as a
portion of all the passenger trips in all the MPOs’ jurisdiction.
23 U.S.C. 133 outlines the requirements for the STBG Program. Section (d) specifies the
application of apportioned STBG-Urban (SU) funds based on population. Paragraph (2)
states that “Funds attributed to an urbanized area under paragraph (1)(A)(i) may be
obligated in the metropolitan area established under section 134 that encompasses the
urbanized area.” Paragraph (d)(1)(A)(i) refers to urbanized areas populations exceeding
200,000 (or a TMA). The U.S.C. also allows the State to obligate funds among urbanized
areas with populations over 200,000 based on other factors, with approval from the
Secretary to the state and the relevant MPOs. At the discretion of the Department, MPOs are
allowed to use SU funds to supplement the PL allocations for planning tasks (FDOT, 2024).
MPO Core Products
MPOs are required in federal law and rule to develop a metropolitan transportation plan
(MTP, also referred to as a long range transportation plan (LRTP)), a transportation
improvement program (TIP), a unified planning work program (UPWP), a public participation
plan (PPP), and a congestion management process (CMP) in TMA MPOs. MPOs in Florida are
also required by Florida law to develop a list of project priorities (LOPP) and CMP (regardless
of TMA status)3. These plans and processes are generally referred to as MPO core products.
In certain circumstances, the U.S.C., CFR, and Florida statutes require MPOs to coordinate
and consult on activities related to core products. These circumstances include:
• When more than 1 MPO is designated within a UZA (23 U.S.C. 143(g)(1)), 23 U.S.C.
143(g)(4), 23 CFR 450.314(e), s. 339.175(2)(a)2.a. F.S, s. 339.175(8)(b) F.S.)
• When multiple MPOs serve a contiguous group of UZAs (s. 339.175(2)(a)2 F.S., s.
339.175(8)(c)8. F.S.)
• If a project is located within the boundaries of more than one MPO (23 U.S.C.
143(g)(2), s. 339.175(7)(a) F.S., and s. 339.175(8)(c)7. F.S.)
Many of these provisions require written agreements that describe the coordinated
development of plans and programs, as described in the section of this technical
memorandum on coordination. They also necessitate documentation of coordination efforts
in the UPWP, LRTP, and TIP, as required by 23 CFR 450.314(e) for MPOs serving a single
UZA. However, these provisions do not mandate the creation of joint planning and
programming documents. Furthermore, 23 U.S.C. 134(g), which addresses MPO
consultation in plan and TIP coordination, includes a clause (23 U.S.C. 134(g)(5)) stating
that nothing in the subsection requires multiple MPOs within a UZA to develop planning
3 Although Florida statute (s. 339.175(6)(c)1 uses the term “congestion management system”, this document
will use the term “congestion management process” (CMP) to remain consistent with federal law and rule .
Page 336 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 10
documents jointly. In some cases, MPOs have the option to develop a single transportation
plan and/or TIP for the UZA, as indicated in 23 CFR 450.314(e).
In addition to the requirements for coordinated planning and programming, as well as
documenting coordination efforts outlined in the U.S.C. and the CFR, Florida statutes
mandate coordination for specific MPO core products. This section highlights the
coordination requirements for the LRTP, the TIP, the LOPP, and the CMP.
LRTP:
• If a project is located within the boundaries of more than one MPO, the MPOs must
coordinate plans regarding the project in the long-range transportation plan (s.
339.175(7)(a) F.S.).
• Multiple MPOs covering contiguous urbanized areas must coordinate the
development of long-range transportation plans to be reviewed by the Metropolitan
Planning Organization Advisory Council (s. 339.175(7)(a) F.S.).
• Multiple MPOs covering contiguous urbanized areas must ensure, to the maximum
extent possible, the consistency of data used in the planning process (s.
339.175(7)(b) F.S.).
TIP:
• Multiple MPOs within a contiguous urbanized area must coordinate transportation
improvement programs (s. 339.175(8)(a) F.S.).
• The TIP has to indicate coordination or alignment with transportation improvement
plans of other MPOs within the contiguous urbanized area (s. 339.175(8)(c)8 F.S.).
List of Project Priorities:
• Where more than one MPO exists in an urbanized area, the MPOs shall coordinate in
the development of regionally significant project priorities (s. 339.175(8)(b) F.S.).
Congestion Management Process
• Each MPO shall prepare a congestion management process for the contiguous
urbanized metropolitan area and cooperate with the department in the development
of all other transportation management systems required by state or federal law (s.
339.175(6)(c)1. F.S.).
Beyond the requirements outlined in state statutes, some programs may have specific
eligibility requirements that involve multiple MPOs collaborating or include MPOs in a
contiguous area working together. For example, the Transportation Regional Incentive
Program (TRIP) states that eligible applicants include, among other possible applicants, one
or more MPOs and one or more contiguous counties that are not MPO members (FDOT,
2024).
Page 337 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 11
3. Clarification of potential areas in federal or state law and
regulations that could impact MPO consolidation
In August 2025, the following questions were posed to the FHWA Florida Division Office and
the FDOT Office of Policy Planning (OPP) to clarify issues in federal law and regulations, and
state statutes. Based on feedback received from the FHWA and FDOT, the research team
made the following assumptions for each of the questions.
Questions to FHWA
1. Question: Please confirm that federal law supersedes federal regulations, and that
federal regulations and policies supersede state laws, statutes, and policies where they
are not in complete alignment.
Assumption: In general, federal law supersedes state law when they conflict. This is
based on the “federal preemption” principle, which is rooted in the Constitution's
Supremacy Clause (Article VI, Clause 2). Exceptions could apply in areas that have
been traditionally regulated by the states, unless Congress has made a clear intent to
preempt (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/supremacy_clause).
2. Question: Federal laws and regulations contain references to MPO designation (23
U.S.C. 134(d)(1) and 23 CFR 450.310(b)) and redesignation (23 U.S.C. 134(d)(6) and
23 CFR 450.310(h)). Both of these processes require agreement between the Governor
and units of general-purpose local government that together represent at least 75
percent of the affected population (urbanized area for designation and existing
metropolitan planning area (MPA) for redesignation). It is our understanding that until an
agreement is reached for the creation of a new MPO through consolidation, no one party
can unilaterally make a decision to redesignate an MPO. Within this context, please
clarify if the consolidation of two or more MPOs into a single MPO must follow the
designation procedures outlined in 23 U.S.C.134(d)(1) and 23 CFR 450.310(b) or if they
should follow the redesignation procedures outlined in 23 U.S.C. 134(d)(6) and 23 CFR
450.310(h).
Assumption: If an entirely new MPO structure is desired, one that would cover both
existing UZAs plus the contiguous area expected to become urbanized within a 20-
year forecast period, the existing MPOs must disband prior to the formation of the
new MPO. The existing MPOs would be required to follow regulations pertaining to
redesignation to disband. The formation of the entirely new MPO, once both existing
MPOs have been disbanded, would be required to follow the regulations pertaining to
designation.
If one of the existing MPOs were to absorb the other to create a single MPO, the MPO
to be absorbed would be required to disband following the regulations pertaining to
redesignation. Once the MPO being absorbed is disbanded, the absorbing MPO
Page 338 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 12
would be required to follow the regulations pertaining to redesignation to adjust the
existing MPA boundary to include the areas of both UZAs (plus the contiguous area
expected to become urbanized within a 20-year forecast period) no longer covered by
an MPO process.
If the members of the two existing MPOs chose not to form a single MPO to cover
both UZAs, but instead chose to redraw their existing MPA boundaries such that each
MPO covered one of the two existing UZAs, both existing MPOs would be required to
redraw their MPA boundaries following the regulations pertaining to redesignation.
This would apply only to the Lee County jurisdictions within the Bonita Springs-Estero
UZA.
3. Question: For the purposes of MPO consolidation between two MPOs that cover
contiguous UZAs, is approval required from local jurisdictions representing 75% of each
UZA separately, or should approval be provided by local jurisdictions representing 75%
of the combined population of both UZAs?
Assumption: Based on the scenarios described in question 2, the process for
consolidation involves redesignation and possibly designation. The scenarios were: 1)
disbanding both the MPOs and forming an entirely new MPO, 2) one MPO absorbing
the other MPO by disbanding one MPO and adjusting the MPA boundary of the
remaining MPO, and 3) expanding the Collier MPO boundary to encompass the
portion of Lee County (and municipalities) that are a part of the Bonita Springs-Estero
UZA, although this third scenario results in two MPOs and is not a consolidation
option. The approving body depends on the process being considered.
Disbanding an existing MPO or adjusting existing MPA boundaries (redesignation)
requires approval of the Governor and units of general purpose local government
that together represent at least 75 percent of the existing MPA population
(including the largest incorporated city, based on population, as named by the
Bureau of the Census) for each MPO.
Formation of an entirely new MPO (designation) requires approval of the Governor
and units of general purpose local government that together represent at least 75
percent of the affected population (including the largest incorporated city, based
on population, as named by the Bureau of the Census) or in accordance with
procedures established by applicable State or local law. In this case, the new
MPO structure would, at a minimum, encompass both UZAs and the area
expected to become urbanized within a 20-year forecast period.
Page 339 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 13
4. Question: In the potential merger of the Collier and Lee County MPOs, which cities are
considered the largest incorporated cities by population in each UZA?
Assumption: According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the City of Bonita Springs is the
largest incorporated city by population in the Bonita Springs – Estero UZA. The City of
Cape Coral is the largest incorporated city by population in the Cape Coral UZA.
5. Question: For the purpose of MPO consolidation between two MPOs that cover
contiguous UZAs, is approval required from the largest incorporated city by population in
each UZA separately or by the largest incorporated city by population in the contiguous
UZAs?
Assumption: The largest incorporated city in each existing MPA (the City of Bonita
Springs for the Collier MPO and the City of Cape Coral for the Lee County MPO) would
have to approve any action requiring redesignation, including disbanding. The City of
Cape Coral would have to approve the formation of an entirely new MPO, as
designation requires approval of the units of general purpose local government that
together represent at least 75 percent of the affected population, including the
largest incorporated city, based on population, as named by the U.S. Census Bureau.
6. Question: Can federal transportation funds that are suballocated for use in
transportation management areas (TMAs), including Surface Transportation Block Grant
Program-Urban (SU) and Transportation Alternatives - Urban (TALU) program funds, be
spent on projects or for planning purposes anywhere within the MPA of an MPO covering
contiguous UZAs, or can these funds only be spent within the UZA for which they were
originally intended?
Assumption: Per 23 U.S.C. 133(d)(2)) and (23 CFR 450.326(m), funds suballocated
at the state level to any MPO can be used anywhere within the agreed-upon MPA
boundary.
7. Question: How long after consolidation would a newly created MPO have to adopt
federally required products, such as the transportation improvement program (TIP), long-
range transportation plan (LRTP), unified planning work program (UPWP), public
participation plan (PPP), congestion management process (CMP), and performance
targets? Please provide a response for each type of product if the lengths of time are
different for each item.
Assumption:
• LRTP, TIP, and CMP – There is no set timeframe for when a newly formed MPO
must adopt an LRTP, TIP, or CMP. In the past, newly formed MPOs have been
Page 340 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 14
encouraged to complete these documents/activities within the first three
years of existence. However, the absence of these documents/activities could
limit the ability of the newly formed MPO to influence the expenditure of
federal transportation funds in the MPA and, possibly, federal discretionary
grant fund allocation due to the lack of planning and programming in the MPA.
• PPP – There is no set timeframe for when a newly formed MPO must adopt a
PPP. However, public participation is required for the development of the
LRTP, TIP, CMP, and UPWP.
• UPWP – There is no set timeframe for when a newly formed MPO must adopt
a UPWP. However, a UPWP is required for the receipt of federal planning
funds.
• Performance targets – In the past, guidance for the development of federal
performance targets has permitted flexibility to ensure that the MPO can set
meaningful targets. However, MPOs are required to set performance targets
within 180 days of the formal adoption date of state-level performance
targets.
8. Question: Please indicate the timing for the federal certification review of a new MPO
created through a consolidation of two or more already existing MPOs.
Assumption: Per 23 U.S.C. 134(k)(6) and 23 CFR 450.336, the “FHWA and the FTA
jointly shall review and evaluate the transportation planning process for each TMA no
less than once every 4 years to determine if the process meets the requirements of
applicable provisions of Federal law.” Therefore, an entirely new MPO would need to
undergo a federal certification review within four years of establishment.
Redesignated MPOs would undergo a federal certification review in accordance with
their current certification schedule.
9. Question: According to 23 CFR 450.312, an MPA boundary may encompass more than
one urbanized area, but the boundaries cannot overlap. Our understanding is that the
two previously existing MPAs would not have to be fully covered by a new MPA. Instead,
the new MPO must cover the Bonita Springs—Estero UZA and the Cape Coral UZA, and
the area expected to be urbanized over the next 20 years. Is this accurate? If not, please
clarify the procedures for establishing a new MPA in the context of an MPO merger in
Collier and Lee counties.
Assumption: The members of an entirely new MPO and the Governor would establish
an MPA boundary that must cover both existing UZAs plus the contiguous area
expected to become urbanized within a 20-year forecast period. Therefore, the two
previously existing MPAs would not have to be fully covered by a new MPA.
Page 341 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 15
Questions to FDOT
1. Question: The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) uses the term “largest incorporated
city based on population” (23 CFR 450.310(b)). However, Florida statute uses the term
"central city or cities within the M.P.O. jurisdiction, as defined by the United States
Bureau of the Census” 339.175(2)(a)1. We note that the Census glossary indicates that
the term “central city” is no longer in use
(https://www.census.gov/glossary/?term=Central+City). In the context of Florida
statute, how is the term “central city” now defined, given the lack of definition provided
by the Census Bureau?
Assumption: The definition of “central city” in Florida Statute applies to the most
populous city in the urban area, corresponding to the now-defunct U.S. Census
Bureau definition for the term "central city."
3. Question: According to Florida statute section 339.175(3)(a), the actual number of
voting members on an MPO Governing Board is determined on an “equitable
geographic-population ratio basis.” Please define “equitable geographic-population ratio
basis.”
Assumption: The term “equitable geographic-population ratio basis” in the Florida
statute implies that the composition of the MPO Governing Board must consider the
population and relative population density of the members of the MPO.
4. Question: For the purpose of creating a consolidated MPO, please describe acceptable
methods for demonstrating agreement on the part of units of general-purpose local
government (e.g., resolution of the city council, Mayoral executive order, or other).
Assumption: Individual units of general-purpose local government, with the support of
their general counsel, determine the appropriate acceptable method for
demonstrating agreement for the purpose of agreeing to the creation of a
consolidated MPO.
5. Question: The current statewide Consolidated Planning Grant (CPG) funding formula
states that “MPOs that merge retain base allocation.” Can you confirm whether an MPO
formed by the consolidation of the Collier and Lee County MPOs would retain the base
allocation for each individual MPO (Collier MPO's base allocation + Lee County MPO's
base allocation)? If so, for how long?
Assumption: Per federal code and rule (23 U.S.C. 104(d)(2) and 23 CFR 420.109,
respectively), each state is required to develop a formula for distributing federal
planning funds (PL). This formula is reconsidered following each decennial census.
Page 342 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 16
The FDOT Work Program Instructions (Part III, Chapter 21: Planning, p 5) pertaining to
the distribution of FHWA PL funds states that, effective July 1, 2024, “Each MPO will
receive a base annual apportionment amount of $350,000.” and “MPOs that merge
retain base allocation.”
Therefore, a consolidated MPO formed from the merger of two former MPOs will
receive a base annual apportionment of $700,000, subject to changes in the
statewide PL funding formula.
6. Question: Florida statute, section 339.175(2)(e) states that new MPOs must be fully
operative no later than 6 months following their designation. When does an MPO formed
through a merger of two existing MPOs need to be fully operational?
Assumption: A newly formed MPO, one resulting from the consolidation of two or
more previously existing MPOs, must be fully operative no later than 6 months
following designation.
7. Question: The FDOT work program apportionments for federal Surface Transportation
Block Grant Program – Urban (SU) and Transportation Alternatives – Urban (TALU)
funding for the Lee and Collier MPOs are based on the population of the Cape Coral
urbanized area (for the Lee MPO) and the Bonita Springs-Estero urbanized area (for the
Collier MPO) that share a boundary at Alico Road in Lee County. This results in the
urbanized population in the City of Bonita Springs, Village of Estero, and San Carlos Park
in Lee County being used in the apportionment calculation for the Collier MPO, which
impacts the funding allocated to the Lee County MPO for projects in those areas. Is
there any way to resolve this issue without combining the two MPOs?
Assumption: Two areas of the state where similar conditions are in place were
contacted to identify how SU and TALU funds are distributed. In both cases, it
appears that the distribution decision was guided by local consensus.
Therefore, the distribution of SU and TALU funds for the Bonita Springs-Estero urban
area (UZA) could be negotiated through an agreement between the Collier and Lee
County MPOs and approved by the FDOT if a change from the current distribution is
desired.
Page 343 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 17
References
Apportionment, 23 U.S.C. § 104 (1956).
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title23-
section104&num=0&edition=prelim
Davis, J. (2017). House T&I Approves Bill Repealing MPO Consolidation Rule. The Eno Center
for Transportation. https://enotrans.org/article/house-ti-approves-bill-repealing-mpo-
consolidation-rule/
FDOT. (2024). Work Program Instructions FY 25/26 – 29/30.
https://www.fdot.gov/workprogram/development/wp-instructions.shtm
FDOT. (2025). MPO Program Management Handbook.
https://www.fdot.gov/planning/policy/metrosupport/mpohandbook.shtm
FHWA, FTA, & U.S. DOT. (2016, May 27). Statewide and Nonmetropolitan Transportation
Planning; Metropolitan Transportation Planning. Federal Register.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/05/27/2016-11964/statewide-
and-nonmetropolitan-transportation-planning-metropolitan-transportation-planning
Metropolitan Planning Organization, 339.175 (2024).
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=03
00-0399/0339/Sections/0339.175.html
Metropolitan Transportation Planning, 23 U.S.C. § 134 (1962).
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title23-
section134&num=0&edition=prelim
Metropolitan Transportation Planning, 49 U.S.C. § 5303 (1994).
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&req=granuleid%3AU
SC-1994-title49-section5303&num=0
Metropolitan Transportation Planning, 23 CFR § 450 4-1-17 edition (2017).
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2017-title23-vol1/pdf/CFR-2017-title23-
vol1-sec450-314.pdf
Metropolitan Transportation Planning and Programming, 23 CFR § 450 Subpart C (2016).
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-23/part-450/subpart-C
Nossaman. (2017). Federal Government Repeals MPO Consolidation Rule.
https://www.infrainsightblog.com/federal-government-repeals-mpo-consolidation-
rule
Planning and Research Program Administration, 23 CFR Part § 420 (2002).
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-23/part-420
Planning Programs, 49 USC § 5305 (1994).
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&req=granuleid%3AU
SC-1999-title49-section5305&num=0
Page 344 of 397
COLLIER AND LEE COUNTY MPO CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY STUDY
cutr.usf.edu 18
U.S. DOT, FHWA, & FTA. (2016, June 27). 81 FR 41473 Proposed Rule: Metropolitan
Planning Organization Coordination and Planning Area Reform.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/06/27/2016-
14854/metropolitan-planning-organization-coordination-and-planning-area-reform
U.S. DOT, FHWA, & FTA. (2016, December 20). 81 FR 93448 Rule: Metropolitan Planning
Organization Coordination and Planning Area Reform.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/06/27/2016-
14854/metropolitan-planning-organization-coordination-and-planning-area-reform
Page 345 of 397
Collier & Lee County MPOs:
Key Facts for Decision Makers
Introduction
The Collier and Lee County Metropolitan
Planning Organizations (MPOs) are
contiguous MPOs, and as a result, they
coordinate on regional planning activities.
The local legislative delegation has
expressed interest in exploring the
benefits, costs, and process of
consolidating the Collier and Lee County
MPOs.
The Center for Urban Transportation
Research (CUTR) at the University of South
Florida (USF) is conducting an MPO
consolidation feasibility study on behalf of
the Collier and Lee County MPOs. This
study will evaluate the benefits, challenges,
and key considerations associated with a
potential merger of the two MPOs, fulfilling
the expressed interest of the local
legislative delegation.
This document gives decision makers a
clear overview of how the Collier and Lee
County MPOs operate today and what a
potential merger of the two MPOs could
mean. It explains current coordination, the
rules that apply, and the major
opportunities and challenges to consider.
The goal is to give you the essential context
to make informed choices about the future
of regional transportation planning.
What is an MPO?
An MPO is a policy board responsible for
regional transportation planning in
urbanized areas (UZA) with populations
over 50,000.
Why MPOs Exist?
Created under federal and state law to
ensure transportation decisions are
coordinated, data-driven, and locally
informed.
What MPOs Do?
MPOs plan, prioritize, and program
transportation projects and funding to build
a safe, efficient, and multimodal system for
their metropolitan planning area (MPA).
Their core responsibilities include:
🗺🗺 Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP)
20+ year vision for the region’s
transportation future.
🛣🛣 Transportation Improvement Program
(TIP) 5-year list of funded projects.
📋📋 List of Priority Projects (LOPP) Annual
ranking of top local and regional projects.
🧭🧭 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP):
2-Year work program and budget for MPO
studies and tasks.
👉👉 A UZA is a Census-defined urban area with 50,000+ people. Each UZA must be
covered by at least one MPO, which leads regional transportation planning there.
👉👉 An MPA is the geographic area designated by an MPO and the state Governor
where regional transportation planning occurs and must include the existing
urbanized area, as defined by the U.S. Census, and the contiguous areas projected to
become urbanized within the next 20 years.
Page 346 of 397
Collier & Lee County MPOs: Key Facts for Decision Makers
2
Background
The Lee County MPO was established in 1977 to serve the Fort Myers UZA,
encompassing the cities of Cape Coral, Fort Myers, and surrounding unincorporated
areas in Lee County.
The Collier MPO was established in 1982 to serve the Naples UZA, covering Naples,
Marco Island, Everglades City, and nearby unincorporated areas of Collier County.
As both counties grew, more people traveled across county lines, and the region became
more connected. After 2000, the urban area in Collier County stretched into Lee County,
while Lee’s urban area expanded south. By 2010, they met near Williams Road, officially
linking the two areas. Today, the Census calls them the Cape Coral UZA and the Bonita
Springs–Estero UZA.
Why This Matters
Federal law encourages—but does not require—there to be a single MPO covering
contiguous UZAs.
The Bonita Springs–Estero UZA now spans both counties, raising questions about
efficiency, representation, and funding balance.
Current Practices
Both MPOs:
Operate under the same federal/state requirements.
Have similar staff sizes (4 each) and use consultants for specialized work.
Develop and manage important planning documents and processes that guide how
transportation dollars are spent and projects are prioritized.
Rely heavily on FDOT for revenue forecasts and programming guidance.
Already collaborate on transit studies, freight planning, emergency management, and
corridor projects such as I-75, SR 82, Old US 41, SUNTrail, and more.
The question before decision makers is:
💡💡 Should the communities in Collier and Lee County maintain two MPOs covering two
contiguous UZAs, or designate a new, unified MPO that covers both?
Page 347 of 397
Collier & Lee County MPOs: Key Facts for Decision Makers
3
Regulatory Context
Federal law and state statute encourage a single MPO per UZA, unless the size and
complexity justify multiple MPOs.
MPO designation or redesignation requires:
o Approval by the Governor
o Approval by local governments representing at least 75% of the affected
population
o Inclusion of the largest city by population
MPA Boundaries must cover the current UZA and areas expected to urbanize within
20 years. MPA boundaries can’t overlap.
Coordination is required when multiple MPOs serve the same or contiguous UZAs or
adjacent MPAs — this includes shared planning, programming, and consistent data.
Florida Statutes cap MPO Governing Board size at 25 voting members.
Each MPO must follow Florida statutes on who can be a member of its Board.
Each MPO with more than 200,000 people must include elected officials, state
officials, and representatives from transportation agencies like transit and airports.
Federal/state law does not specify how MPOs should go about consolidating.
Key Issues for Decision Makers
Governance & Representation
The current combined board would exceed Florida’s 25-member cap.
Some jurisdictions would lose direct voting seats.
Allocation of representation would be politically sensitive.
📌📌 Each item in this snapshot is a preview and will be explained in more detail later.
Page 348 of 397
Collier & Lee County MPOs: Key Facts for Decision Makers
4
Choosing an MPO structure means balancing autonomy and capacity.
👉👉 Independent MPOs retain greater decision-making power—but may struggle with
staffing and funding.
👉👉 Hosted MPOs get more help—but may have to share decision-making power.
⚖ The balance between autonomy and support shifts along the spectrum.
Operations & Staffing
Collier MPO staff are County employees (leaning independent model).
Lee County MPO staff are employees of an independent agency (freestanding model).
A merger may require a new HR/employment framework, with implications for staff
retention and administration.
A single MPO covering an MPA of approximately 1.15 million people would likely
require more employees than either organization currently maintains individually (4)
or combined (8). Decisions after a merger would be about reducing overlap and
where additional capacity is needed to meet expanded responsibilities.
Both MPO Executive Directors are contract employees. A merger would require
defining terms for the new Executive Director (replacing the current two directors).
👉👉 Nationally, MPOs serving a population of more than a million people have a median
staff size of 25 employees.
Page 349 of 397
Collier & Lee County MPOs: Key Facts for Decision Makers
5
Financial Management
The Collier MPO relies on Collier County to front expenses before federal/state
reimbursement.
The Lee County MPO uses local contributions/carryover funds to manage cash flow
and pay for expenses before federal/state reimbursement.
A merged MPO would need to decide where on the spectrum of organizational
structures it should fall and how that affects its financial operations.
Current budgets differ: Lee County MPO ($4.7M 2-Year UPWP; ~$73k/yr (3.3%) local
share) vs. Collier MPO ($3.6M 2-Year UPWP; $8K/yr (0.4%) local share, including
one-time funding of ~$0.7M for LRTP and federal grant matching).
Planning & Prioritization
Consolidation would require a single framework for:
o LRTP (unified goals & scoring)
o TIP (combined project list & shared funding)
o LOPP (joint prioritization process)
A unified planning and prioritization process could offer advantages for regional
transportation planning.
o Opportunity for improved coordination across county lines.
o Likely focus on regionally significant project planning and prioritization,
o Reduced administrative duplication.
o More cohesive corridor development.
A unified planning and prioritization process could introduce politically contentious
issues.
o Developing a common organizational mission and vision, clear governance
protocols, and balanced resource allocation.
o Reconciling differing project and funding priorities (local versus regional).
o Some communities may worry that their projects will be deprioritized in favor
of larger, regionally significant initiatives.
Implications for Funding
Base funds
o Currently, each MPO receives a base amount of $350,000 annually in federal
planning funds.
o A consolidated MPO would receive a base annual amount of $700,000 in
federal planning funds.
o The statewide federal planning funding formula is reconsidered following each
decennial census, potentially reducing the total base funding for the
consolidated MPO to match other MPOs in the state
Population-based federal planning funds
o Each MPO receives additional federal planning funds based on UZA
population, which wouldn’t change with an MPO merger—so total funding
would stay the same.
Page 350 of 397
Collier & Lee County MPOs: Key Facts for Decision Makers
6
o A consolidated MPO Governing Board would be responsible for allocating the
previously separate planning resources across the entire 2-County MPA, which
may prompt concerns about how planning funds are used to support both
urban cores and smaller jurisdictions if the planning focus is changed to
regionally significant project planning and prioritization.
Federal formula funds for capital improvements
o Federal formula-based funding for roadway and other transportation projects
would remain unchanged (a combined $16.8M in federal Surface
Transportation Block Grant Program–Urban Allocation funds (SU) and $2.49M
in federal Transportation Alternatives Program– Urban Allocation funds
(TALU), as these funds are distributed based on UZA population.
o A consolidated MPO could pool resources across the entire 2-county area,
potentially enabling the pursuit of larger, regionally significant projects that
might otherwise be out of reach for either of the MPOs on their own.
o This shift could benefit high-cost regionally significant and cross-jurisdictional
investments but may also raise concerns among some jurisdictions about
diminished visibility, influence, or access to funding for more local priorities.
Federal discretionary grants
o A consolidated MPO might be more competitive for federal discretionary
grants (opportunity for larger regional scope, enhanced administrative
capacity, and ability to demonstrate broader project impacts). However, no
guarantee of increased awards exists. Success would depend on project
quality and alignment with federal priorities.
o Both MPOs have historically been successful in securing discretionary grants
through strong planning and coordination under their current structures.
Options for Consolidation
To support informed discussion, the graphic below outlines five broad structural options for
MPO consolidation, including the option to forego consolidation and maintain the current
MPO structure in the 2 counties. These options represent potential consolidation models,
each with distinct administrative and fiscal implications. These scenarios are presented to
facilitate exploration, not to suggest a recommended course of action.
👉👉 Federal transportation formula program funds are federal dollars distributed to
states and local entities using formulas that consider factors like population or usage,
primarily for transit and highway projects.
👉👉 Federal transportation discretionary grants are competitive funds from the U.S.
Department of Transportation (USDOT) for projects that align with the agency's goals
such as safety and economic growth.
Page 351 of 397
Collier & Lee County MPOs: Key Facts for Decision Makers
7
Page 352 of 397
Collier and Lee County MPO Consolidation Feasibility Study
Draft Perspectives Survey
Page 1 of 6
Collier and Lee County MPO Consolidation Feasibility Study
Perspectives Survey
Study Background
The Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) at the University of South Florida (USF) is
conducting an MPO consolidation feasibility study on behalf of the Collier and Lee County Metropolitan
Planning Organizations (MPOs). This study will evaluate the potential benefits, challenges, and key
considerations associated with a potential merger of the two MPOs.
Survey Objectives
We are documenting the perspectives of local elected officials from member jurisdictions regarding the
potential merger of the Collier and Lee County MPOs. Your input will help us better contextualize the
potential benefits and drawbacks of a consolidated MPO.
To better inform you of current MPO planning and business practices, regional planning coordination, and
federal/state regulations related to MPO requirements, a briefing document can be found at the following
link: Collier & Lee County MPOs key facts for decision makers
The survey will take approximately 10 minutes to complete.
Your responses are requested by November 26, 2025.
If you have any questions, please contact Jeff Kramer at kramer@usf.edu or Tia Boyd at
tiaboyd@usf.edu.
Your participation is essential in guiding this important discussion.
Helpful Tips:
• If you are unable to complete the survey in one sitting, you can return to the survey at any time by
reentering through the survey link using the same device and browser. Reentering the survey will
return you to the last completed question. If you have any issues reentering the survey, email Tia
Boyd at tiaboyd@usf.edu.
• Survey navigation is conducted by selecting the “save and go back” or “save and continue” button
at the bottom of each page.
• You will be notified if you skipped questions on a page, but only General Information section
questions require answers.
• The survey can be submitted by selecting the “submit" button at the end of the survey. Please
review your answers before you submit them. Once the submit button is selected, you cannot go
back and make changes.
• Survey responses will be shown in the study report. However, the identity of survey respondents
will remain anonymous.
Note: Throughout the survey, the terms “merger” and “consolidation” are used interchangeably, referring
to the combining of two or more MPOs into a single MPO.
Page 353 of 397
Collier and Lee County MPO Consolidation Feasibility Study
Draft Perspectives Survey
Page 2 of 6
General Information
The information collected in this survey will be anonymized. Personal identifying information will not
be included in the final report.
Q1 Select your title. o Mayor/Vice Mayor o City Council Member o County Commissioner o Other (please specify) __________________________________________________
Q2 Select the local government or municipality you serve as an elected official. o City of Bonita Springs o City of Cape Coral o City of Marco Island o City of Naples o Collier County o Everglades City o City of Fort Myers o Lee County o City of Sanibel Island o Town of Fort Myers Beach o Village of Estero
Q3 Are you currently an MPO Governing Board member? o Yes, I am currently an MPO Governing Board member/alternate o No, I am not currently an MPO Governing Board member/alternate
Page 354 of 397
Collier and Lee County MPO Consolidation Feasibility Study
Draft Perspectives Survey
Page 3 of 6
Values
This section identifies what is important to you when considering the potential merger of the Collier and
Lee County MPOs.
Q4 Structure and Operations - Select up to three items in the following list that are most important to you
as they relate to the potential merger of the Collier and Lee County MPOs. □ MPO Governing Board composition. □ Coordination with regional partners. □ MPO staff roles and responsibilities. □ Location of the MPO’s home office. □ Funding for MPO administrative and operational needs. □ Streamlined MPO administrative and operational functions. □ A single MPO with a unified voice and image for the region. □ Other (please specify) __________________________________________________
Q5 Funding - Select up to three items in the following list that are most important to you as they relate to
the potential merger of the Collier and Lee County MPOs. (Please refer to the briefing document for more
information about funding: Collier & Lee County MPOs key facts for decision makers) □ State and federal formula funds for regionally significant transportation improvement projects. □ The MPO's competitiveness when applying for discretionary or competitive funds (grants) for regionally significant transportation improvement projects. □ State and federal formula funds for locally significant transportation improvement projects. □ The MPO's competitiveness when applying for discretionary or competitive funds (grants) for locally significant transportation improvement projects. □ Funding for planning activities in the county that I serve (e.g., the long range transportation plan, planning studies). □ Funding for planning activities in the two-county region (e.g., the long range transportation plan, planning studies). □ Other (please specify) __________________________________________________
Page 355 of 397
Collier and Lee County MPO Consolidation Feasibility Study
Draft Perspectives Survey
Page 4 of 6
Q6 Organizational Culture - Using a scale of 1 to 5, how would you characterize the compatibility of the
Collier and Lee County MPO Governing Board cultures? Note: Culture in this question is defined as the
shared characteristics, values, conventions, and norms within an organization or group. o 5 - Highly compatible o 4 - Somewhat compatible o 3 - Neutral o 2 - Somewhat incompatible o 1 - Highly incompatible o 0 - Unsure
Q7 Tradeoffs - When evaluating the feasibility of merging two or more MPOs, it is important to consider
the trade-offs. A significant tradeoff in this type of process is between autonomy and financial support.
Regarding the potential merger of the Collier and Lee County MPOs, which aspect is more important to
you? o Autonomy – the MPO's ability to operate independently while having to seek out its own funding
sources and staff support. o Financial support – the MPO’s ability to receive financial and staff support from another entity, but
with the requirement to adhere to that agency’s policies or share administrative decision-making
authority.
Coordination
This section queries you on your opinions about the coordination efforts between the Lee and Collier
MPOs.
Q8 How would you describe the level of coordination between the Collier and Lee County MPOs in
addressing regional transportation needs and facilitating joint planning activities?
Very
effective
Somewhat
effective Neutral Somewhat
ineffective
Very
ineffective Unsure
Addressing regional
transportation needs o o o o o o
Facilitating joint
planning activities o o o o o o
Display this question:
If Q8 [ Somewhat effective ] or [ Somewhat ineffective ] or [ Very ineffective ]
Q8a Please briefly describe the regional transportation needs that are not being met and/or joint planning
activities you believe are not supported through coordination efforts.
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
Page 356 of 397
Collier and Lee County MPO Consolidation Feasibility Study
Draft Perspectives Survey
Page 5 of 6
Display this question:
If Q8 [ Somewhat effective ] or [ Somewhat ineffective ] or [ Very ineffective ]
Q8b In your opinion, what would help the MPOs meet regional transportation needs and/or facilitate joint
planning activities?
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
Considerations
This section explores your opinions on the benefits and challenges of a merger between the Collier and
Lee County MPOs.
Q9 What do you believe are the top three strategic benefits of a merger between the Collier and Lee
County MPOs? o #1 __________________________________________________ o #2 __________________________________________________ o #3 __________________________________________________
Q10 What do you believe are the top three greatest risks, costs, or challenges associated with a merger
between the Collier and Lee County MPOs? o #1 __________________________________________________ o #2 __________________________________________________ o #3 __________________________________________________
Concluding Thoughts
This is the last section of the survey, designed for you to share any additional thoughts about the potential
merger of the Collier and Lee County MPOs.
Q11 Using a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you think a merger between the Lee and Collier County
MPOs would be in improving transportation planning and programming in the region? Note: In this
context, the region refers to the areas covered by the two counties. o 5 - Very effective o 4 - Somewhat effective o 3 - No impact o 2 - Somewhat ineffective o 1 - Very ineffective o 0 - Unsure
Page 357 of 397
Collier and Lee County MPO Consolidation Feasibility Study
Draft Perspectives Survey
Page 6 of 6
Q12 Using a scale of 1 to 5, how confident are you that a single MPO resulting from the merger of the
Collier and Lee County MPOs could effectively serve the transportation needs of the communities in your
jurisdiction? o 5 - Very confident o 4 - Somewhat confident o 3 - Neutral o 2 - Somewhat unconfident o 1 - Not confident at all o 0 - Unsure
Q13 Please provide any additional comments or concerns you have regarding the potential merger of the
Collier and Lee County MPOs. These may include the following items:
• Information you believe is necessary for making a fully informed decision.
• Issues or topics that are important to you concerning the potential merger.
• Key regional partners that should be considered during a merger process.
• Any other relevant information.
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
You are at the end of the survey.
To review and edit your responses, click the "Review Responses" button.
To submit your responses, click the "Submit" button.
Once you submit your responses, you cannot go back to make changes.
Page 358 of 397
Collier and Lee County
MPO Consolidation
Feasibility Study
Key Facts for Decision Makers
Principal Investigator: Jeff Kramer
University of South Florida
November 12 & 14, 2025
Page 359 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Purpose of this presentation
Page 360 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Background
•The Lee County MPO was established in
1977 to serve an urbanized area (UZA)
which encompassed the cities of Cape
Coral, Fort Myers, and surrounding
unincorporated areas in Lee County.
•The Collier MPO was established in
1982 to serve a UZA covering Naples and
nearby unincorporated areas of Collier
County.
1990 Census UZAs
Page 361 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Background
Page 362 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Why this matters
•Federal law encourages—but does not
require—there to be a single MPO
covering contiguous UZAs.
•The Bonita Springs–Estero UZA now
spans both counties, raising questions
about efficiency, representation, and
funding balance.
Page 363 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
MPO Organizational Snapshot
Collier MPO Lee County MPO
Organizational Model Leaning Independent Freestanding Independent
Board 9 voting members 18 voting members
Population of MPA 376,706 (2019)770,577 (2019)
Staff 4 (plus Collier County staff support)4
MPO Operational
Budget ~$584/yr ~$623/yr
Planning Budget
(UPWP)
$3.6M for 2 years
(local share $8,000/yr; Includes one-
time federal/local funding of ~$0.7M)
$4.7M for 2 years
(local share $73,191/yr)
Financial Model Collier County fronts expenses until
reimbursed
Uses local contributions & carryover
funds until reimbursed
Page 364 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Regional Coordination
Areas of Regional Coordination
•Regional planning and studies: joint
CMP, trail planning, corridor coordination,
and shared freight and transit studies.
•Data and modeling: shared travel demand
model, coordinated socioeconomic data
updates, and consistent performance
measures.
•Policy alignment: joint advocacy for
federal and state funding and shared
review of statewide plans.
•Regional partners: collaborate closely
with FDOT District 1, the RPC, and
neighboring MPOs.
Areas They Handle Separately
•Plan adoption and updates: each MPO
independently develops and adopts its own
LRTP, TIP, UPWP, and LOPP to meet
federal/state requirements.
•Public involvement: each maintains its
own public participation plan, advisory
committees, and branding.
•Transit administration: Collier MPO
coordinates with Collier Area Transit (CAT),
while Lee County MPO coordinates with
LeeTran under separate agreements.
Page 365 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
The Legal Framework
Federal law/state statute encourages a single MPO per UZA unless complexity justifies more
MPOs formed or merged with approvals: Governor & local governments representing 75% of
population (must include the largest city)
Approval would need to include the Cities of Bonita Springs and Cape Coral, as the largest
incorporated cities in their respective urbanized areas.
Board rules: Florida caps boards at 25 members; must include elected officials, state reps, and
modal representation for larger MPOs
MPO Boundaries: Must cover today’s UZA plus areas expected to urbanize within 20 years
Consolidation process: Federal law requires approvals but does not dictate how MPOs might go
about merging
Page 366 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Key Considerations for Decision Makers
We’ve distilled the main considerations into five categories:
(day-to-day MPO operations and budgets)
(dollars for regional transportation plans and projects)
Governance & Representation
Operations & Staffing
Financial Management
Planning & Prioritization
Planning and Project Funding
Page 367 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Governance & Representation
•The current combined board would
exceed Florida’s 25-member cap.
•If the two MPO merged as is, there
would be a total of 27 board
members.
Key Considerations for Decision Makers
Lee County MPO Board
Collier MPO Board
Reducing or restructuring the board would require making decisions about
representation and voting balance.
Page 368 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH
FLORIDA
Operations & Staffing
Key Considerations for Decision Makers
A merger would require deciding where the new organization should fall on the
spectrum balancing autonomy with administrative efficiency and shared services.
Page 369 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH
FLORIDA
•A merger would require a new HR/employment
framework, with implications for staff retention and
administration.
•A single MPO covering an MPA of approximately
1.15 million people would likely require more
employees than either organization currently
maintains individually or combined .
Operations & Staffing
Key Considerations for Decision Makers
Lee County MPA Population
Collier MPA Population
Nationally, MPOs serving a population of more than a million people have a
median staff size of 25 employees.
Page 370 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Financial Management
Key Considerations for Decision Makers
Collier MPO
• County fronts MPO expenses before
reimbursement
• Uses County systems for payroll,
purchasing, and contracts
• Two -year UPWP: $3.6M
• Local match: $8K/year
Lee County MPO
• Uses local contributions and
carryover funds to manage cash flow
• Manages its own accounts and
financial processes
• Two-year UPWP: $4.7M
• Local match: $73K/year
A merged MPO would need to determine where to fall on the spectrum and align its
financial systems, reimbursement processes, and local match structure accordingly.
Page 371 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Planning & Prioritization
Key Considerations for Decision Makers
A merger would require a single, unified planning and prioritization framework that could
strengthen regional coordination and reduce duplication but may also create challenges in
balancing local priorities, funding expectations, and political representation.
Page 372 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Planning and Project Funding
Key Considerations for Decision Makers
Base & Population-Based Funds
(Planning)
•Each MPO currently receives $350K in base
federal funds → combined $700K if merged
•Total population-based planning funds would
remain the same
•A merged MPO Board would allocate
planning funds across both counties
Project & Grant Funding (Capital)
•Total Formula-based funds would remain
the same (based on population)
•A merger could pool resources for larger,
regionally significant projects
•Larger MPO could be more competitive for
discretionary grants, but success depends
on project quality
A merger wouldn’t increase total federal funding, but it could change how planning and
project funds are distributed, potentially shifting the focus toward larger, regional priorities.
Page 373 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Next Steps
Local Officials Survey
10-minute survey to capture local
perspectives on potential merger
benefits and challenges
Briefing Document
Summary of MPO structures,
coordination, and merger
framework
Page 374 of 397
CENTER FOR URBAN TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH | UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA
Questions
For further information contact:
Jeff Kramer
Center for Urban Transportation Research
University of South Florida
kramer@usf.edu
813-974-1397
Page 375 of 397
11/14/2025
Item # 10.B
ID# 2025-4694
Executive Summary
FDOT FY 2027-2031 Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program
OBJECTIVE: For the Board to have the opportunity to review the Draft Tentative Work Program for FY 2027 - 2031
in detail and ask questions and provide comments to FDOT.
CONSIDERATIONS: FDOT released the FY 2027-2031 Draft Tentative Work Program to Collier MPO on October
14th. MPO staff distributed copies to agency technical staff for review and comment initially, followed by advisory
committees.
The item is posted on the agenda under Reports and Presentations to provide Board members an opportunity to review
the draft Work Program in detail (Attachment 1), along with FDOT’s preliminary response to questions posed during
the TAC meeting. (Attachment 2)
FDOT’s formal (in-person and virtual) presentations and public hearing on the draft Work Program took place in Fort
Myers and Bartow from October 20th through October 24, 2025.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: MPO staff distributed copies to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Committee at its October 21, 2025, meeting, and the Technical and Citizens Advisory Committees at their October 27,
2025, meetings. The item will be presented to the Congestion Management Committee on November 19, 2025.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Board have the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft Tentative
Work Program.
PREPARED BY: Anne McLaughlin, Executive Director
Dusty Hansen, Planner II
ATTACHMENTS:
1. FDOT’s Draft Tentative Work Program for FY 2027-2031
2. FDOT Response to TAC Questions
Page 376 of 397
Page 377 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 1 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Highways
000151-1 - TOLL OPERATIONS EVERGLADES PARKWAY ALLIGATOR ALLEY
Type of Work: TOLL PLAZA
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Operations Toll/Turnpike $6,417,247 $6,530,277 $6,718,651 $6,900,479 $7,162,064
Total for Project 000151-1 $6,417,247 $6,530,277 $6,718,651 $6,900,479 $7,162,064
412666-1 - COLLIER COUNTY TSMCA
Type of Work: TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES/SYSTEM
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Operations State $746,621 $52,172
Total for Project 412666-1 $746,621 $52,172
413627-1 - CITY OF NAPLES TSMCA
Type of Work: TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES/SYSTEM
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Operations State $147,520 $153,459
Total for Project 413627-1 $147,520 $153,459
417540-5 - SR 29 FROM CR 846 E TO N OF NEW MARKET ROAD W
Type of Work: NEW ROAD CONSTRUCTION
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction State $72,749,035
Environmental State $500,000
Railroad & Utilities State $7,201,588
Right of Way State $7,821,000
Total for Project 417540-5 $88,271,623
417540-6 - SR 29 FROM N OF NEW MARKET RD TO SR 82
Type of Work: ADD LANES & RECONSTRUCT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction State $57,778,897
Railroad & Utilities State $7,264,500
Total for Project 417540-6 $65,043,397
425843-2 - I-75 (SR 93) AT SR 951
Type of Work: INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Design Build State $2,572,500
Total for Project 425843-2 $2,572,500
Page 378 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 2 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Highways
425843-3 - I-75 (SR 93) AT SR 951 (COLLIER BLVD INTERCHANGE)
Type of Work: LANDSCAPING
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction State $1,422,078
Total for Project 425843-3 $1,422,078
435110-2 - OLD US 41 FROM US 41 TO LEE / COLLIER COUNTY LINE
Type of Work: ADD LANES & RECONSTRUCT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Preliminary Engineering Federal $3,001,000
Total for Project 435110-2 $3,001,000
435389-1 - ALLIGATOR ALLEY FIRE STATION @ MM63
Type of Work: MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURE
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Capital Toll/Turnpike $1,500,000 $2,300,000 $2,300,000 $2,300,000 $2,300,000
Total for Project 435389-1 $1,500,000 $2,300,000 $2,300,000 $2,300,000 $2,300,000
437103-1 - COLLIER TMC OPS FUND COUNTY WIDE
Type of Work: OTHER ITS
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Operations State $100,500 $100,500 $100,500 $100,500 $100,500
Total for Project 437103-1 $100,500 $100,500 $100,500 $100,500 $100,500
437908-1 - SR 45 (US 41) FROM GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY TO SOUTH OF 3RD AVE
Type of Work: FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT RECONSTRUCT.
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Environmental State $50,000
Preliminary Engineering State $5,300,000
Total for Project 437908-1 $5,350,000
437925-1 - SIGNAL TIMING COUNTY ROADS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS
Type of Work: TRAFFIC SIGNAL UPDATE
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Preliminary Engineering Federal $772,942
Total for Project 437925-1 $772,942
Page 379 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 3 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Highways
440436-1 - ORCHID DRIVE SIDEWALK AND BIKE LANE CONNECTION
Type of Work: BIKE LANE/SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $349,407
Total for Project 440436-1 $349,407
441512-1 - SR 45 (US 41) FROM N OF OLD US 41 TO S OF GULF PARK DR
Type of Work: RESURFACING
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $19,795,132
Local $7,718
Toll/Turnpike $2,816,325
Railroad & Utilities State $1,600,000
Total for Project 441512-1 $24,219,175
443375-3 - COLLIER COUNTY LAKE TRAFFORD ROAD SIDEWALK AND BIKE LANES
Type of Work: SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $992,491
Total for Project 443375-3 $992,491
443375-4 - COLLIER COUNTY LAKE TRAFFORD ROAD SIDEWALK AND BIKE LANES
Type of Work: SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $1,615,054
Total for Project 443375-4 $1,615,054
445296-4 - SR93 AT PINE RIDGE RD INTERCHANGE
Type of Work: LANDSCAPING
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction State $1,660,600
Total for Project 445296-4 $1,660,600
445460-1 - CAXAMBAS COURT / ROBERTS BAY REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE #034112
Type of Work: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $9,529,915
Local $3,169,778
Railroad & Utilities Local $3,000,000
Total for Project 445460-1 $15,699,693
Page 380 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 4 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Highways
446251-1 - TRAVEL TIME DATA COLLIER COUNTY ITS
Type of Work: ITS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Capital Federal $700,000
Total for Project 446251-1 $700,000
446341-1 - GOODLETTE FRANK RD FROM VANDERBILT RD TO IMMOKALEE RD
Type of Work: ADD LANES & RECONSTRUCT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Local $2,750,000
State $2,750,000
Total for Project 446341-1 $5,500,000
446451-1 - SR 45 (US 41) AT CR 886 (GOLDEN GATE PKWY)
Type of Work: INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $1,868,634
Railroad & Utilities State $300,000
Total for Project 446451-1 $2,168,634
448069-1 - WIGGINS PASS SIDEWALK FROM VANDERBILT DR TO US 41
Type of Work: SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $2,943,553
Total for Project 448069-1 $2,943,553
448130-2 - GOLDEN GATE SIDEWALKS - VARIOUS LOCATIONS 4 SEGMENTS
Type of Work: SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $1,203,952
Total for Project 448130-2 $1,203,952
449484-1 - LAVERN GAYNOR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL
Type of Work: SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $850,496
Total for Project 449484-1 $850,496
Page 381 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 5 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Highways
449514-1 - 91ST AVE N SIDEWALK FROM VANDERBILT DR TO US 41
Type of Work: SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $1,377,301
Total for Project 449514-1 $1,377,301
449526-1 - ITS FIBER OPTIC AND FPL
Type of Work: ITS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $831,337
Total for Project 449526-1 $831,337
449580-1 - ATMS RETIMING FOR ARTERIALS
Type of Work: ITS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Preliminary Engineering Federal $881,900
Total for Project 449580-1 $881,900
451274-1 - SR29 FROM N OF BRIDGE #030307 TO S OF BRIDGE #030299
Type of Work: PAVEMENT ONLY RESURFACE (FLEX)
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction State $3,935,887
Total for Project 451274-1 $3,935,887
451276-1 - SR 29 FROM S OF I-75 TO N OF BRIDGE NO 030298
Type of Work: PAVEMENT ONLY RESURFACE (FLEX)
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction State $5,253,192
Total for Project 451276-1 $5,253,192
451277-1 - SR 29 FROM N OF OIL WELL RD (CR 858) TO N OF BRIDGE #030304
Type of Work: PAVEMENT ONLY RESURFACE (FLEX)
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction State $5,320,697
Total for Project 451277-1 $5,320,697
Page 382 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 6 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Highways
451278-1 - SR 29 FROM N OF CR 846 TO S OF NEW MARKET RD
Type of Work: RESURFACING
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $12,546,740
Total for Project 451278-1 $12,546,740
451542-1 - IMMOKALEE SIDEWALKS
Type of Work: SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $899,000
Preliminary Engineering Federal $182,000
Total for Project 451542-1 $182,000 $899,000
452052-1 - EVERGLADES CITY PH4 BIKE/PED IMPROVEMENTS
Type of Work: BIKE LANE/SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Preliminary Engineering Federal $426,466
Total for Project 452052-1 $426,466
452064-1 - MCCARTY ST FROM FLORIDIAN AVE TO CAROLINE AVE
Type of Work: SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $926,000
Preliminary Engineering Federal $156,000
Total for Project 452064-1 $156,000 $926,000
452065-1 - GOLDEN GATE CITY SIDEWALKS - 23RD PL SW & 45TH ST SW
Type of Work: SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $274,428
Preliminary Engineering Federal $36,672
Total for Project 452065-1 $36,672 $274,428
452207-1 - VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD FROM GULF SHORE DRIVE TO US 41
Type of Work: BIKE PATH/TRAIL
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Preliminary Engineering Federal $101,000
Total for Project 452207-1 $101,000
Page 383 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 7 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Highways
452208-1 - 106TH AVE N FROM VANDERBILT DR TO US 41
Type of Work: SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Preliminary Engineering Federal $73,000
Total for Project 452208-1 $73,000
452209-1 - BALD EAGLE DR FROM SAN MARCO RD TO N COLLIER BLVD
Type of Work: BIKE LANE/SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $2,300,000
Total for Project 452209-1 $2,300,000
452210-1 - 109TH AVE N FROM VANDERBILT DR TO US 41
Type of Work: SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Preliminary Engineering Federal $73,000
Total for Project 452210-1 $73,000
452211-1 - 108TH AVE N FROM VANDERBILT DR TO US 41
Type of Work: SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Preliminary Engineering Federal $1,000 $72,000
Total for Project 452211-1 $1,000 $72,000
452247-1 - IMMOKALEE RD FROM LIVINGSTON RD TO LOGAN BLVD
Type of Work: PAVE SHOULDERS
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Local $10,284,458
State $10,213,542
Total for Project 452247-1 $20,498,000
452544-3 - I-75 FROM IMMOKALEE TO BONITA BEACH
Type of Work: ADD LANES & RECONSTRUCT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Design Build State $3,186,000 $102,517,621
Preliminary Engineering State $584,748 $1,810,930
Railroad & Utilities State $2,000,000
Total for Project 452544-3 $3,770,748 $106,328,551
Page 384 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 8 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Highways
452544-4 - IMMOKALEE INTERCHANGE
Type of Work: ADD LANES & RECONSTRUCT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Design Build State $1,593,000 $49,397,528
Preliminary Engineering State $2,338,449
Railroad & Utilities Local $2,000,000
State $2,000,000
Total for Project 452544-4 $1,593,000 $55,735,977
452544-5 - I-75 FROM IMMOKALEE TO PINE RIDGE
Type of Work: ADD LANES & RECONSTRUCT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Design Build State $13,320,000 $147,376,522
Preliminary Engineering State $923,868 $6,284,588
Railroad & Utilities State $2,000,000
Total for Project 452544-5 $14,243,868 $155,661,110
452544-6 - I-75 FROM PINE RIDGE TO GOLDEN GATE
Type of Work: ADD LANES & RECONSTRUCT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Design Build State $18,960,632
Total for Project 452544-6 $18,960,632
453415-1 - US 41 FROM 3RD AVE TO SR 84 INTERSECTION/MOBILITY IMPROVEMENTS PD&E
Type of Work: PD&E/EMO STUDY
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
PD & E Federal $1,188,222
Total for Project 453415-1 $1,188,222
453421-1 - 47TH AVE NE BRIDGE FROM EVERGLADES BLVD TO 20TH ST NE
Type of Work: NEW BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $4,810,000
Total for Project 453421-1 $4,810,000
455927-1 - HARBOR DR & MOORING LINE DR BETWEEN US41 & CRAYTON RD
Type of Work: TRAFFIC SIGNAL UPDATE
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $1,998,153
Total for Project 455927-1 $1,998,153
Page 385 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 9 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Highways
455935-1 - GOLDENROD AVE OVER SMOKEHOUSE BAY BRIDGE #034116
Type of Work: BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $3,087,997
Local $4,977,378
Preliminary Engineering Federal $25,000
Local $1,106,783
Total for Project 455935-1 $1,131,783 $8,065,375
456234-1 - SR 45 (US 41) FROM S OF SHADY REST LANE TO GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY
Type of Work: RESURFACING
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $11,410,557
Preliminary Engineering Federal $1,010,000
Total for Project 456234-1 $1,010,000 $11,410,557
456236-1 - SR45/90(US41) FROM 5TH AVE S TO EAST OF SR84(DAVIS BLVD)
Type of Work: PAVEMENT ONLY RESURFACE (FLEX)
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction State $3,925,120
Preliminary Engineering State $100,000
Total for Project 456236-1 $100,000 $3,925,120
456577-1 - SR 29 AT OIL WELL ROAD
Type of Work: LIGHTING
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $608,838
Total for Project 456577-1 $608,838
457255-1 - I-75 FROM CR951 TO GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY
Type of Work: SAFETY PROJECT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $4,116,649
Preliminary Engineering Federal $10,000
Total for Project 457255-1 $4,126,649
Page 386 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 10 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Highways
457256-1 - I-75 FROM WEST TOLL BOOTH PLAZA TO CR951
Type of Work: SAFETY PROJECT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $473,382
State $2,760,111
Preliminary Engineering State $10,000
Total for Project 457256-1 $3,243,493
457499-2 - ALLIGATOR ALLEY WEST AUTOMATIC ELECTRONIC TOLL (AET) CONVERSION FULL
Type of Work: ADD LANES & RECONSTRUCT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Toll/Turnpike $9,655,300
Preliminary Engineering Toll/Turnpike $1,500,000
Total for Project 457499-2 $1,500,000 $9,655,300
457536-1 - PINE RIDGE ROAD FROM LOGAN BLVD TO COLLIER BLVD
Type of Work: ADD LANES & RECONSTRUCT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Preliminary Engineering Local $2,900,000
State $2,900,000
Total for Project 457536-1 $5,800,000
Page 387 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 11 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Maintenance
412574-1 - COLLIER COUNTY HIGHWAY LIGHTING
Type of Work: ROUTINE MAINTENANCE
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Bridge/Roadway/Contract Maintenance State $562,865
Total for Project 412574-1 $562,865
412918-2 - COLLIER COUNTY ASSET MAINTENACE
Type of Work: ROUTINE MAINTENANCE
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Bridge/Roadway/Contract Maintenance State $2,419,593 $2,219,593 $2,219,593 $2,219,593 $2,219,593
Total for Project 412918-2 $2,419,593 $2,219,593 $2,219,593 $2,219,593 $2,219,593
413537-1 - NAPLES HIGHWAY LIGHTING DDR FUNDING
Type of Work: ROUTINE MAINTENANCE
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Bridge/Roadway/Contract Maintenance State $212,956
Total for Project 413537-1 $212,956
Page 388 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 12 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Miscellaneous
448265-1 - PHASE 3 EVERGLADES CITY BIKE/PED MASTERPLAN
Type of Work: BIKE LANE/SIDEWALK
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Construction Federal $1,815,467
Total for Project 448265-1 $1,815,467
Page 389 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 13 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Modal Development: Aviation
446353-1 - NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT SOUTH QUADRANT BOX AND T-HANGARS
Type of Work: AVIATION REVENUE/OPERATIONAL
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Administration State $2,500,000 $2,500,000
Total for Project 446353-1 $2,500,000 $2,500,000
446385-1 - NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT EAST QUADRANT APRON CONSTRUCTION
Type of Work: AVIATION CAPACITY PROJECT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Capital Federal $9,270,000
Local $515,000
State $515,000
Total for Project 446385-1 $10,300,000
455456-1 - MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Type of Work: AVIATION CAPACITY PROJECT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Capital Federal $450,000
Local $25,000
State $25,000
Total for Project 455456-1 $500,000
457271-1 - NAPLES AIRPORT REHABILITATE RUNWAY 5-23
Type of Work: AVIATION PRESERVATION PROJECT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Capital Federal $900,000 $11,250,000
Local $50,000 $625,000
State $50,000 $625,000
Total for Project 457271-1 $1,000,000 $12,500,000
457273-1 - NAPLES AIRPORT TAXIWAY E.G.H REHABILITATION
Type of Work: AVIATION PRESERVATION PROJECT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Capital Federal $450,000
Local $25,000
State $25,000
Total for Project 457273-1 $500,000
Page 390 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 14 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Modal Development: Aviation
457286-1 - IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN UPDATE
Type of Work: AVIATION CAPACITY PROJECT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Capital Federal $850,000
Local $47,222
State $47,222
Total for Project 457286-1 $944,444
Page 391 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 15 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Modal Development: Intermodal
446358-1 - IMMOKALEE REGIONAL ARPT AIRPARK BLVD EXTENSION
Type of Work: AVIATION CAPACITY PROJECT
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Capital Local $174,000
State $696,000 $3,000,000
Total for Project 446358-1 $870,000 $3,000,000
Page 392 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 16 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Modal Development: Transit
410120-2 - COLLIER COUNTY FTA SECTION 5311 OPERATING ASSISTANCE
Type of Work: OPERATING/ADMIN. ASSISTANCE
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Operations Federal $657,432 $934,525 $784,255 $67,268
Local $1,061,957 $530,000 $784,255 $67,268
Total for Project 410120-2 $1,719,389 $1,464,525 $1,568,510 $134,536
410139-1 - COLLIER COUNTY STATE TRANSIT BLOCK GRANT OPERATING ASSISTANCE
Type of Work: OPERATING FOR FIXED ROUTE
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Operations Local $1,323,591 $1,363,298 $1,404,197 $1,446,323 $1,489,713
State $1,323,591 $1,363,298 $1,404,197 $1,446,323 $1,489,713
Total for Project 410139-1 $2,647,182 $2,726,596 $2,808,394 $2,892,646 $2,979,426
410146-1 - COLLIER COUNTY/BONITA SPRING UZA/FTA SECTION 5307 CAPITAL ASSISTANCE
Type of Work: CAPITAL FOR FIXED ROUTE
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Capital Federal $4,741,514 $6,590,514 $6,595,220 $6,794,680 $8,940,115
Local $1,185,379 $1,647,629 $1,648,805 $1,698,670 $2,235,029
Total for Project 410146-1 $5,926,893 $8,238,143 $8,244,025 $8,493,350 $11,175,144
410146-2 - COLLIER COUNTY/BONITA SPRINGS UZA/FTA SECTION 5307 OPERATING ASSIST
Type of Work: OPERATING FOR FIXED ROUTE
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Operations Federal $75,490 $1,183,080 $1,316,836 $3,578,470 $2,239,990
Local $75,490 $1,183,080 $1,316,836 $3,578,470 $2,239,990
Total for Project 410146-2 $150,980 $2,366,160 $2,633,672 $7,156,940 $4,479,980
434030-1 - COLLIER CO./BONITA SPRINGS UZA FTA SECTION 5339 CAPITAL ASSISTANCE
Type of Work: CAPITAL FOR FIXED ROUTE
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Capital Federal $592,009 $708,668 $728,797 $955,234 $1,009,957
Local $148,002 $177,167 $182,199 $238,809 $252,489
Total for Project 434030-1 $740,011 $885,835 $910,996 $1,194,043 $1,262,446
Page 393 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 17 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Modal Development: Transit
452749-1 - COLLIER AREA TRANSIT OPERATING ASSISTANCE CORRIDOR US 41
Type of Work: URBAN CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Operations Local $491,530 $491,530 $491,530 $491,530
State $491,530 $491,530 $491,530 $491,530
Total for Project 452749-1 $983,060 $983,060 $983,060 $983,060
Page 394 of 397
Draft Tentative Five-Year Work Program Public Hearing Summary Report - As of October 9, 2025
July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2031
Florida Department of Transportation - District One
Page 18 Sorted By: Item/Segment SUBJECT TO CHANGE
COLLIER COUNTY Transportation Planning
439314-6 - COLLIER COUNTY MPO FY 2026/2027-2027/2028 UPWP
Type of Work: TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Planning Federal $1,241,935 $1,241,935
Total for Project 439314-6 $1,241,935 $1,241,935
439314-7 - COLLIER COUNTY MPO FY 2028/2029-2029/2030 UPWP
Type of Work: TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Planning Federal $1,341,935 $1,341,935
Total for Project 439314-7 $1,341,935 $1,341,935
439314-8 - COLLIER COUNTY MPO FY 2030/2031-2031/2032 UPWP
Type of Work: TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
Phase Funding Source 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031
Planning Federal $891,935
Total for Project 439314-8 $891,935
Page 395 of 397
From:Evans, Marcellus
To:Anne McLaughlin
Cc:Smith, Kristi; Gaither, Wayne; Kosheleva, Dasha; Sean Kingston; Dusty Hansen
Subject:RE: Draft Tentative Work Program FY27-31 Public Hearing Reports
Date:Wednesday, October 29, 2025 2:10:18 PM
Attachments:image005.jpg
image006.jpg
image007.png
image008.png
image009.png
image010.png
image011.png
image012.png
image013.png
image014.png
image015.png
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when
opening attachments or clicking links.
Good afternoon,
I hope this email finds you well. Below are responses to your questions. Feel free to reach out for more information.
1. Bayshore CRA Sidewalk 451543-1; was in FY26-29 TIP for PE in FY26, CST FY28 but does not appear in the DTWP. What
is its status?
451543-1: In July, Work Program reprogrammed the PE phase from a 38 (LAP) to 32 (in-house continuing services) at the request of
Collier County. As a result, the CST and CEI phases were used to establish 451543-2. There is currently $184,486 programmed on
phase 58 and $27,669 on phase 68. We do not know why the segment 2 didn’t show up in the DTWP, but we are researching this and
several other projects in a similar situation.
On another note, Aileen the LAP Coordinator uploaded a document that shows the total at or around $613,000. As it stands, there is
insufficient funding programmed to complete the project. It is likely additional funds for CST/CEI phases will need to be allocated
from the MPO box, if that is the direction you wish to take.
2. Naples Sidewalks on 26th Ave 448131-1; is in Summary of Changes as a new project funded for CST FY28 but does not
appear in TIP Summary pdf or excel spreadsheet. (Background - this is a former programmed project deleted due to
CARU funding; prioritized for reprogramming in FY31 by the MPO Board this past June. 448131-2 appeared in roll-forward
amendment to FY26-30 TIP for $200,000 PE 26. What is its status?
448131-1: There is currently $585,729 programmed on phase 58 and $87,859 programmed on phase 68 in FY 2028. The funding was
added in July, so perhaps that is why it did not appear in the TIP Summary documents. It is programmed, and should be adopted on
7/1/2026.
Marcellus Evans II, CSM, FCCM
Community Liaison
Metropolitan Planning Office
Florida Department of Transportation – District One
Office: 863.519.2446 Mobile: 863.444.6551
Email: Marcellus.Evans@dot.state.fl.us
From: Anne McLaughlin <Anne.McLaughlin@collier.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2025 2:01 PM
Page 396 of 397
To: Evans, Marcellus <Marcellus.Evans@dot.state.fl.us>
Cc: Smith, Kristi <Kristi.Smith@dot.state.fl.us>; Gaither, Wayne <Wayne.Gaither@dot.state.fl.us>; Kosheleva, Dasha
<Dasha.Kosheleva@dot.state.fl.us>; Sean Kingston <Sean.Kingston@collier.gov>; Dusty Hansen <Dusty.Hansen@collier.gov>
Subject: Draft Tentative Work Program FY27-31 Public Hearing Reports
EXTERNAL SENDER: Use caution with links and attachments.
Hi Marcellus,
I have a couple of questions and one comment to follow up on the TAC meeting yesterday:
1. Bayshore CRA Sidewalk 451543-1; was in FY26-29 TIP for PE in FY26, CST FY28 but does not appear in the DTWP. What
is its status?
2. Naples Sidewalks on 26th Ave 448131-1; is in Summary of Changes as a new project funded for CST FY28 but does not
appear in TIP Summary pdf or excel spreadsheet. (Background - this is a former programmed project deleted due to
CARU funding; prioritized for reprogramming in FY31 by the MPO Board this past June. 448131-2 appeared in roll-forward
amendment to FY26-30 TIP for $200,000 PE 26. What is its status?
3. Immokalee Interchange 452544-4. Type of Work should be DDI rather than add lanes & reconstruct.
Anne McLaughlin
Executive Director - MPO
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Office:239-252-5884
Mobile:239-919-4378
2885 South Horseshoe Dr
Naples, FL 34104
Anne.McLaughlin@collier.gov
My email address has changed. Effective immediately, please update your contact
list to use this new address: Anne.McLaughlin@collier.gov
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records
request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
Page 397 of 397