The Martin County Metropolitan Planning Organization approved the cost‑feasible component of its 2050 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) draft at its Sept. 15 meeting, moving the plan closer to final adoption scheduled for Oct. 8.

The draft plan lists about $746 million in capacity projects and related investments over the plan horizon; MPO staff and consultants said available MPO‑level funding totals just over $701 million, leaving roughly $45 million identified as illustrative and dependent on discretionary or district‑level funding.

The cost gap is driven largely by the Cove Road capacity project and a small set of other projects staff expect could be funded by state Transportation Regional Incentive Program (TRIP) and other discretionary programs, Ricardo Vasquez, principal planner for the MPO, told the board. “Illustrative projects account for $45 million,” Vasquez said, “and those would be funded through anticipated discretionary funds at the district level.”

The plan prioritizes projects through a data‑driven scoring system. Staff and consultants said about 69 percent of the cost in the cost‑feasible package is for highway/roadway projects; other funding is allocated to transit, nonmotorized facilities, TSMO (transportation system management and operations), and a limited set of illustrative items such as passenger rail and an intermodal hub. The MPO presented modeled needs of roughly $2.3 billion in present‑day costs for identified projects and needs; inflated to year‑of‑expenditure the total needs were described as larger, while the constrained plan focuses on projects that can reasonably be matched to forecasted revenues.

The LRTP presentation and discussion focused heavily on two recurring issues: (1) how the plan treats “illustrative” projects that depend on discretionary funds beyond MPO allocations and (2) an intermodal hub / passenger‑rail station concept referenced for downtown Stuart near a Brightline station. Board members pressed staff and the consultant to describe the public involvement underpinning inclusion of the intermodal hub and asked how the MPO would respond if a local municipality opposed the concept. T. Y. Lin, consultant project manager, and Beth (MPO staff) emphasized that the LRTP is a 20‑ to 25‑year guide that blends technical modeling and public input; inclusion in the LRTP does not itself authorize construction or funding and projects identified as illustrative must be labeled accordingly.

During discussion Commissioner Jay Capps asked about fiscal constraint on page 10 of the draft, and staff reiterated that the plan is financially constrained because the $45 million shortfall is explicitly called out as illustrative and dependent on anticipated discretionary TRIP and district‑level funds. The board voted to approve the draft cost‑feasible plan; the motion passed with Commissioners Christopher Collins and Eileen Vargas recorded as dissenting votes.

Staff said the MPO will bring the LRTP back for final adoption Oct. 8, after which the document will be used to guide project programming and funding requests to FDOT and federal agencies. The MPO’s short‑range Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) will continue to be used to record projects with identified funds and schedules.

What the vote does and does not do: board approval of the cost‑feasible element moves the LRTP toward adoption but does not itself obligate construction funds or change jurisdictional land‑use authority. Staff repeatedly noted that local governments control land‑use decisions and that the MPO must be consistent with local comprehensive plans; if a municipality later adopts policy opposing a specific facility, the MPO may revise plan content to remain consistent.

The board will consider final adoption and any last edits at a special meeting Oct. 8.