1. Sarasota/Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization
Moving Forward
Population (Census/American Fact Finder):
Manatee County ( ): 322, ,746
Sarasota County ( ): 380, ,962
Total for 2 county region: somewhere between 700,000 – 750,000
Sarasota/Manatee
Metropolitan Planning Organization

2. Sarasota/Manatee MPO
Give brief history of MPOs in the US, and how ours developed.
Interstate Highway System 1950s-1960s
Federal Highway Act of 1962: condition attached to federal transportation financial assistance
Explain who is on our board, committees, and talk about coordination that takes place at the MPO level between local governments, working with other MPOs, FDOT, FHWA, FTA, and public. Talk about the UPWP, Project Priorities, TIP, and LRTP, and Public Participation Plan

3. Early 1900s Rural focus: Federal $ to states No help for city streets
Connecting farms to markets
Improving country roads for cars
No help for city streets
We’ll start by taking a brief look at the history of transportation planning.
Going back to the early 1900s, the focus was on connecting farms to markets. Cities were not given State or Federal assistance in developing their streets.
Images courtesy of State Archives of Florida; Florida Memory

4. Role of Transit Thriving, privately run service
Government granted franchises and regulated services
Transit at this time was a privately owned and operated service that ran within and between cities.
Image courtesy of State Archives of Florida; Florida Memory

5. 1940s and 1950s: Interstate Highways Program
1944: 40,000 mile system approved ($ limited)
1956: Highway Trust Fund established
The Interstate Highway System was established in 1944 from the need to evacuate quickly in case of an atomic attack. This was the first time there was a coordinated effort in planning. Funding for this program was limited until 1956 when the Highway Trust Fund was established.
Growing Tension Over Urban Interstates
All this road building often caused major damage to communities. Here we see the construction of I-95 in Miami in Note how it goes right through existing homes, almost as if someone took an erasure to the landscape.
Image courtesy of State Archives of Florida; Florida Memory

6. 1960s: Emerging Federal Transportation Policy
1962 Federal Highway Act established “3 C” regional planning requirement:
Continuous
Comprehensive
Cooperative
Recognizing this tension, the 1962 Federal Highway Act was signed into law. The law required assistance for families and businesses displaced due to highway construction. It also required a continuous, comprehensive, and cooperative planning process, which we call the “3C” process. The image here shows Highway A1A in Cocoa Beach in the 1960s.
Image courtesy of State Archives of Florida; Florida Memory

7. Civil Rights and Environmental Protection Reforms
Civil Rights Act of 1964
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
Civil rights and environmental protection became a focus in the 1960s. Federal laws were enacted that mandated nondiscriminatory conduct and consideration of environmental impacts in all federally-supported programs – including transportation.
Images courtesy of State Archives of Florida; Florida Memory

8. 1970s: The Origin of MPOs
1973 Highway Act mandated Metropolitan Planning Organizations for urban areas over ,000 in population
Required multimodal approach
Allocated Highway Trust Fund $$ for planning purposes (PL funds)
The 1973 Highway Act signaled wide-spread recognition that the local element was missing in the top-down approach to transportation planning.
MPOs were created to fill that gap and give local areas a voice. Funding for MPOs came from the Highway Trust Fund.
The Sarasota Manatee MPO was established in 1978
Image courtesy of State Archives of Florida; Florida Memory

9. Sarasota/Manatee Urbanized Area
Continuous, Comprehensive, Cooperative
Decision-making forum since 1977:
Two counties
Nine cities and towns
Two transit agencies
One airport
One seaport
MPOs are required by law in areas with a population of 50,000 or more. These are known as Urbanized Area Boundaries. The MPO is formed by interlocal agreement with FDOT and local governments. We are responsible for reviewing and administering all policies and procedures applicable for state and federal transportation funding.

10. Multi Modal Planning for ALL Users

11. 1980s: New Federalism Reduced federal regulation and spending
Transportation programs successfully defended
Highway and transit legislation unified
The 1980s saw an emphasis on reducing federal regulation. Transportation programs were successfully spared from federal budget cuts. The image shows Governor Graham presenting musician Jimmy Buffet with an Highway A1A sign, 1980.
Image courtesy of Donn Gughi, State Archives of Florida; Florida Memory

12. 1990s: Major Policy Legislation
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of (ISTEA)
The 1990s saw the introduction of some major legislation. The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (known as ISTEA) was the first major change in transportation planning and policy since the era of the Interstate Highway System. MPOs were given greater power. The act identified high priority corridors as part of the national highway system, and provided funds for the first non-motorized commuter trails.
Image courtesy of Federal Highway Administration,

13. Reauthorization: 1998 TEA-21 and 2005 SAFETEA-LU
Streamlined planning process
Focus on environmental justice
Public involvement
Important legislation since ISTEA includes TEA-21 and SAFETEA-LU.
TEA-21 stands for the 1998 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century. SAFETEA-LU stands for the 2005 Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act – A Legacy for Users. These Acts emphasized environmental justice and the involvement of minority and low income citizens in the planning process.
The image shows construction of the sound wall on I-95, which is an excellent example of the MPO working with disadvantaged populations.

14. 2012: MAP-21 and 2015: FAST Act
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21)
Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act
Requires performance-based planning and programming
Invest resources in projects to achieve individual targets that collectively will make progress toward national goals.
MAP-21 stands for the “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century” Act. It is the first long-term highway authorization enacted since It creates a streamlined and performance-based surface transportation program and builds on the programs and policies established under ISTEA.
Fixing America’s Surface Transportation

15. MAP-21 Performance Measures Approach
U.S. DOT
Florida DOT
Sarasota/Manatee
Safety
Safety/
Security
Infrastructure
Condition
Preservation
Congestion
Reduction
Mobility
Mobility/
Congestion/
Reliability
System
Freight Movement and Economic Vitality
Economy
Economy/
Freight
Reduced Project
Delivery Delays
Project
Delivery
Environmental Sustainability
Environment
Environment/
Livability

16. LEAD IMPLEMENT PLAN COMMUNICATE Mobility & Access Economic Development
Congestion Management
Project Delivery
Job Creation
Public Safety & Security
Title VI/ADA/Civil Rights
Freight
Environment/Livability
Regional Coordination
Performance Measures
Improved Investment
Consistency with Plans
Emphasis on Region
Infrastructure
Tourism
Public Information and Participation
Public Health
System Reliability
Continuing Comprehensive Cooperative
Today, there is a long list of concepts and priorities that must addressed in transportation planning which you can see at the bottom of this slide. We incorporate these concepts within the four goal areas of our strategic plan: Lead; Plan; Implement; and Communicate.

17. Sarasota/Manatee MPO Organization Chart
Sarasota/Manatee MPO Governing Board
Public Involvement
Technical Advisory Committee
Citizens Advisory Committee
Organizationally, we have three advisory committees to the MPO Governing Board: the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Advisory Committee, the Citizen’s Advisory Committee, and the Technical Advisory Committee. Public Involvement is encouraged throughout the process. Let’s take a closer look at each Committee.
Bicycle, Pedestrian, Trails Advisory Committee

18. Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Advisory Committee (BPTAC)
The picture here shows The Legacy Trail in Venice. The BPTAC is made up of a broad representation of interested groups and citizens including local governments, law enforcement, educators, cyclists, hikers, walkers, environmentalists, and businesses.

19. Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC)
Specialized interest and knowledge
Broad representation of affected areas and interests
Recommended by local jurisdictions
“Minorities, the elderly, and the handicapped must be adequately represented”
The Citizens’ Advisory Committee or CAC is made up of interested citizens who are appointed by local jurisdictions.

20. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
Representatives of modal agencies and local governments
Planners, engineers, public works
Provide technical input
The CAC meets jointly with the Technical Advisory Committee or TAC. TAC members represent modal agencies, local governments, and citizens with specific expertise related to transportation planning.

21. MPO Governing Board
Sets big-picture framework for transportation decisions
Direct authority for MPO plans and programs
Elected officials
The MPO Governing Board reviews recommendations from committees and staff and sets the big-picture framework for transportation decisions. This Board has direct authority over MPO plans and Programs. When an issue needs to be discussed in greater depth than can occur at Board meetings, the Executive Committee will meet. The MPO Executive Committee consists of the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and two at-large Board members.

22. MPO Staff Provide information and technical support Prepare documents
Foster interagency coordination
Facilitate public input and feedback
Engage consultants as needed
Manage the planning process
MPO staff enact the decisions made by the MPO Board. We currently have 9 staff members:
From left to right:
Leigh Holt, Multi Modal Program Manager
Diana McCartney, Administrative Secretary
Kim Smith, Bicycle and Pedestrian Education Coordinator
Georganna Gillette, Transportation Program Specialist
Laura Carter, Operations Manager
Steven Bostel, Transportation Analyst
Bob Kamm, Executive Director
Carol Holden, Executive Assistant
Katrina Morrell, Multi Modal Communications Specialist
Now that we’ve discussed who we are, let’s take a look at the work we produce…..

23. Sunshine Law Meetings must be open to the public
Reasonable notice of all meetings must be provided
Meeting minutes taken and open for public inspection
Applies to meetings of two or more members of a board when discussing matters that may foreseeably come before the board
Applies to a board member and non-board member when latter individual is used as a conduit
Applies to telephone and computer conversations

24. MPO Plans

25. Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP)
Details comprehensive plan for transportation modes
Includes long and short range goals and strategies
Identifies funding sources and estimates costs
Provides framework for choosing transportation projects
Updated every five years
The Long Range Transportation Plan provides a common vision for the community’s future transportation needs and guides the investment of public funds over a timeline of 20 or more years. It provides a framework for choosing transportation projects. Both short and long term strategies for all transportation modes are addressed. The LRTP is updated every five years. We are currently working on the 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan.

26. Project Priorities
Project applications requested from counties, local municipalities, and transportation providers
Projects reviewed by committees and staff
MPO Board adopts Project Priorities for consideration by Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)
The MPO only reviews projects eligible for
State and Federal funding.
Locally funded projects are selected by County Commission or
City Council/Commission.
Transportation planning is a bottom-up process that begins with local elected officials.
Every spring, the MPO requests project ideas from municipalities, the County, and transportation providers. Only projects seeking State and Federal funding are prioritized. Local projects are the responsibility of the governing body where the project is located.
Potential projects must be in line with the Long Range Transportation Plan. Projects are reviewed by MPO Committees and citizens. A draft prioritized list is submitted to the MPO Board for consideration. Once adopted, the list is forwarded to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for consideration.

27. Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
Lists priority projects from the LRTP
Provides five-year implementation schedule
Allocates state and federal funds for capital projects
Becomes part of statewide TIP (STIP)
Adopted every year
The Transportation Improvement Program (or TIP) lists each transportation project to be implemented over the next five years. It serves as our short range plan. The TIP may only contain projects that are in the approved Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The TIP is updated throughout the year as needed.

28. Public Participation Plan
Outlines organizational structure and work products
Describes MPO public communication tools
Prescribes public comment periods
Adopted every three years
Results reported annually
Public involvement begins with our Public Participation Plan. This document outlines our communication tools and ways for citizens to get involved. This document is reviewed and updated every three years.

29. Public participation Comprehensive Cooperative Must be consistent
Financially Feasible LRTP
Local Comprehensive Plan
Project Priorities
This chart shows the flow of our external work products. The development of our Long Range Transportation Plan must be consistent with the local Comprehensive Plan. The LRTP determines Project Priorities and the projects outlined in the Transportation Improvement Program or TIP. The TIP, in turn, must be consistent with the Florida Department of Transportation’s five year work program. This is all part of the 3-C Process mentioned earlier.
Continuous
Comprehensive
Cooperative
Must be consistent
FDOT 5 Year Work Program
TIP

30. Project Priorities Process
F F I

31. FDOT Adopted 5-Year Work Program

32. State Transportation Revenue
Fiscal Year
Florida Department of Transportation; Office of Comptroller – General Accounting Office; Revenue Management Section; Spring 2017

33.    Federal Aid Highway Apportionments
Three funding streams distributed through MPOs
National Highway Performance Program
Surface Transportation Block Grant (50%)
Interstate Maintenance
Highway Safety Improvement Program
National Highway Freight Program
Transportation Alternatives
Congestion Mitigation
Metropolitan Planning   
Motor Fuel Tax – primary source of funding for both highway and transit
Other Miscellaneous Sources – tires, new tractor/trailer purchases, etc.
Deposited into Federal Highway Trust Fund
Allocated via complex funding formulas in Federal Authorization Act
Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act

34. Total Adopted 5-Year Work Program $46,609M
Five Year Work Program FY
Funding Sources for Commitments (in millions) I
MPOs
Total Adopted 5-Year Work Program $46,609M
July 2016
Florida Department of Transportation; Office of Comptroller – General Accounting Office; Revenue Management Section; Spring 2017

35. Implementation Feasibility (FEAS)
Project Development and Environmental Studies (PD&E)
Design/Preliminary Engineering (PE)
Right of Way (ROW)
Construction (CST)
“Concept to Concrete” 5 Steps:
So now that we’ve identified projects, we need to implement them. Projects often take longer and cost more than people realize. Each project goes through a five step process.
Projects may take 15 years
or more to complete once they are funded

36. 1: Feasibility Studies (FEAS)
Determine if design and location economically justified
Examine alternatives
Can cost of construction and maintenance be funded?
The first step in project implementation is a Feasibility Study. Feasibility Studies determine if the project can be justified and if there is funding for construction and maintenance. Existing conditions are reviewed and alternatives are examined to determine which approach is most viable.

37. 2: Project Development and Environment Studies (PD&E)
What kind of improvement needed
Cost and impacts of improvement
How to minimize negative impacts
Step 2 in project implementation is the Project Development and Environment Studies (or PD&E). Now that the project has been deemed feasible, the PD&E determines what kind of improvement is needed when considering travel demand in 20 to 25 years. The costs and impacts – both environmental and community impacts - are considered.
The image shown here is from the PD&E for the Viera Interchange project.

38. 3: Design (PE) Typically done by consultants
Determines project details
Results in production of construction plans
In the design phase, the project details are ironed out and a set of construction plans is produced.

39. 4: Right of Way (ROW)
Acquisition of additional land needed for road expansion and water retention
Eminent Domain – pay fair market value for property
Legal, regulated procedure
Often most expensive part of a project
Step 4 involves the purchasing of additional land needed to complete a project. These issues can make or break a project as it is often the most expensive part of a project.

40. 5: Construction (CST) Maintenance of traffic
Continued access for residents and businesses
Landscaping
The final step in project implementation is construction. During construction, crews must maintain traffic flow and allow continued access for residents and businesses. Landscaping is considered a part of the construction costs.

41. For every $1 spent on transportation, there is a $5 return.
Cost
Very expensive and increases over time
Right of Way cost often exceeds construction cost
Transportation projects are expensive but, according to the Department of Transportation, for every $1 spent on transportation, there is a $5 return.
For every $1 spent on transportation, there is a $5 return.

42. Questions? Leigh Holt leigh@mympo.org 941-359-5772 (C) 321-302-5848
Ryan Brown Multi Modal Planner
Alvimarie Corales-Cuadrado Multi Modal Planner
Rachel McClain Planning Assistant
Neveen Nawawy Transportation Planner
Corinne Tucker Public Involvement Coordinator
We are NOT in the business of creating traffic jams and sidewalks to nowhere! Our goal is to develop transportation plans and programs that improve quality of life and add to the economic viability and safety of the community.