Item N09Revised 3/99
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: Wednesday, Dec. 13 Division: BOCC
Bulk Item: Yes ❑ No X Department:
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Hurricane Evacuation Update.
ITEM BACKGROUND:
On December 7, the Hurricane Evacuation 2nd Draft was discussed at FDOT
District VI Headquarters in Miami. The following comments were delivered on
behalf of the Commission and Monroe County at that meeting.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: The BOCC aUroved general comments for
inclusion in the official Monroe County response to the 2draft at their November
meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
TOTAL COST: N/A BUDGETED: Yes ❑ No ❑
COST TO COUNTY: N/A
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes ❑ No ❑ AMOUNT PER MONTH
YEAR
APPROVED BY: COUNTY ATTY ❑ OMB/PURCHASING ❑ RISK MANAGEMENT ❑
44
APPROVAL:iZA� K/
NAME: Nora A. Williams, BOCC, District IV
DOCUMENTATION: INCLUDED: ❑ TO FOLLOW: X NOT REQUIR D:
DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM #:
lonr oe CountV Response to
Second Draft of the
Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation, Study
GENERAL CONCERNS
The following four general concerns about the 2" " draft of the Draft of the
Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Study are unanimously shared by the
members of the Board of Monroe County Commissioners.
Recommendations are possible ways to address those concerns.
A) The final version should not set policy, but should, rather,
indicate which traffic management techniques and construction
projects it can recommend as effective.
Recommendation: Everyone wants recommendations from the
contractor for the reduction in clearance time needed for the Florida
Keys. It is the manner in which the material is presented that is of
concern to us here. Would not the following conclusion by the
contractor provide the same conclusions essentially as those of the 2n1
draft, in a less inflammatory manner, without policy implications, and
in a manner which more suitably reflects the Governor's original
directive?
"All of the constructions projects detailed herein can be recommended
by the consultant, and the involved agencies should feel comfortable
selecting any or all of those projects to meet their goals for hurricane
evacuation clearance time. The consultant can also recommend the
various Traffic Systems Management efforts detailed herein, but only
given that the necessary resources are committed to the proposed
efforts and that involved agencies have accounted for necessary
preparation time in their hurricane evacuation plans."
B) The final version should provide adequate information to allow
policy -makers to make responsible policy decisions.
Recommendation: The spreadsheet requested in the specific queries
section below will be a great help, as will the answers to the Section
II. Questions, and the additional material on critical links. Material
information must be provided for each suggested TSM and
December 1, 2000
-1-
construction alternative so that, no matter- what the policy goals at the
end, participants have the ability to make informed decisions and
measure impacts of those decisions on hurricane evacuation clearance
times.
C) Don't pretend to1�have followed the Governor's direction if you
haven't found a single traffic management technique to
recommend.
Traffic Systems Management Techniques are in place and in
operation all over this country, in times of emergency and after every
significant football game. If the Governor's direction had meaning for -
this report, then TSM alternatives should be recommended from it,
even if only with caveats, as noted above. The Governor's request that
a priority be given to using EXISTING roadways to lessen our
evacuation clearance times necessitates more than the brief
examination and dismissal that takes place within this study
Recommendation: Follow recommendation of A) above.
D) Don't cheat by assessing the viability of non -construction traffic
management techniques under a different set of criteria than
construction projects.
Note that no "down -side" is mentioned for any construction project
noted in the report. The only place in fact, where political and
convenience factors are brought into play is for non -construction
projects, as in the discussion of the one-waying of Card Sound Road.
In that discussion, among other things, the "inconvenience" to Ocean
Reef is mentioned.
Not one of us wants to argue that it wouldn't be a pain to have to to
take longer to get to Publix if you live at Ocean Reef and want to shop
DURING a hurricane evacuation, but is that really a pertinent issue to
the Florida Keys hurricane evacuation report? That's a local policy
consideration. It is the same kind of policy decision that various state
and local bodies will have to make when they determine which
construction projects to ernbrace. Won't it be pretty darn
"inconvenient" for the businesses on U.S. One in Key Largo if we
decide to add a fifth lane throughout the island?
Monroe County Response to the 2r° Draft of the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Report
-2 of 10-
We aren't suggesting that the contractor can't raise concerns about
suggested alternatives. We are suggesting that they shouldn't be
political in nature, and that all projects should be heated fairly, on the
same level, in examining the pros and cons.
Recommendation: If you want to get into these kinds of
considerations, then do them for every proposed project. Otherwise,
include those considerations for none of them. And, if you're going to
be including such considerations, make them serious concerns, not
questions of inconvenience - hurricane evacuations themselves are, by
their very nature, inconvenient.
I1. SPECIFIC QUERIES AND CONCERNS
A) While the table on page 65 claims to be based on a list of critical links in
order of severity, it is not itself the list of critical links. There is no list of
critical links, segments of the evacuation route that have a high ratio of
volume (# of vehicles that want to be on that segment) to capacity (# of
vehicles that can be on that segment) on page 65. Although there is a
different set of critical link information provided for each run, there is to
be a general listing here, conforming to the existing conditions.
Scope of Work: Paragraph IV E 9. A: "Volume to capacity ratios are calculated for
heavily traveled roadway segments. Segments with the highest ratios shall be
identified as critical links. Critical links and intersections control the flow of
evacuating traffic during a hurricane evacuation and indicate key areas for special
traffic control."
➢ Nowhere in the 2"d draft is there a clear listing and identification of critical links
in order of severity as defined above, with the existing roadway. Provide that list
to accompany the table on page 65. The table itself is not adequate for this
purpose as it does not indicate necessarily the order of severity and lumps
treatment of different links together.
Scope of Work: Paragraph IV.E.9.b states, "A listing shall be provided, in order
of severity of all those roadway segments, both inside and outside of Monroe
County, that will have the most effect on clearance times. This listing/table will
serve as a starting point for local law enforcement to prioritize traffic control
resources and department of transportation officials to plan roadway
improvements."
Monroe County Response to the 2id Draft of the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Report
-3 of 10-
➢ On the list of critical links, in order of severity, with the first being the segment
with the highest ratio of volume to capacity. what number would the following
links be?
1) Link Q (MM 105-106)
2) Link R-2 (Florida City)
�) Link R-1 ( I8)nllc "'belch)
4) Link S (SR 905)
5) Link T (Ocean Rcell)
6) Link U (Card Sound Rd.)
7) Link H (MM 47-48)
8) Link N (MM85.6-90)
9) Palm Drive in Florida City*
*Note that the intersection ;ii Palm Drive does not appear to be addressed in this
draft, yet in the 1991 Lower SE FL Hurricane Evacuation Study Technical
Assessment — A Summary of Monroe Count (ACOE, FEMA, NOAA, FDCA),
it was cited as the second most critical link. Why is it not a crucially important
link now?
If the answer is that it won't be considered until the Miami- Dade study is
complete, it is yet another example of why the final draft of this study should not
be accepted until all aspects of the Scope of Work are addressed.
➢ Are the remaining critical links after any given proposed improvement those
segments with numbers above zero for the column entitled "Hours with
backup" in the Summary Tables for the run? (A table for every run presents
those with "hours with backup" under the first page of the table depicting
"Normal Response Curve.")
B) Page 63, "Stalled vehicles and/or crashes"
The scenario is for a two hour shutdown of the 18 mile stretch. This study elsewhere
accounts for the impacts of a completely closed Card Sound Road.
➢ Explain why these outcomes are statistically more likely than shutting down the
Seven Mile Bridge or losing the use of any of the 40+ bridges south of Key Largo?
%- Comment on the significance of that increased probability, if, in fact, it can be
illustrated.
%e Where does the Scope of Work call for calculation of clearance times with
a two-hour shutdown of the 18-mile stretch?
Monroe County Response to the 2i° Draft of the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Report
-4 of 10-
Were field crews that will actually be present consulted as to protocol for treatment of
such a situation to determine if this is a realistic scenario? What, (or example, are the
conditions under which such a blockage would be tolerated, rather than swiftly and
expeditiously dealt with?
Note, again, for the record, that the State has accepted the inclusion of the use of
Card Sound Road as a significant evacuation route (as documented in our
Comprehensive Plan). If the run of evacuation clearance times without the use
of Card Sound Road is to be used as anything other than an academic exercise,
the County will register its protest now
C) Table 6, page 10: Input Parameters Per Group
Phis listing of the variables for the hurricane evacuation inodel is much appreciated, however,
it is missing a key element for understanding the significance of the numbers - and, in fact,
understanding the workings of the model: the sensitivity of the model to its variables.
Indicate the sensitivity of the model to these variables and indicate those which
have no impact on the model.
Example: What is the impact on clearance times if there is a 1 % change in
occupancy of tourist units? Dwelling units?
D) End of Appendix B: Link Analysis:
R-1 (Milemarker 106.3 to 126.5), R-2 (Milemarker 126.5 to HEFT) and S
(Milemarker 106.3 to Intersection CR 905/ CR905A)
➢ How can the background traffic numbers for the 18 Mile Stretch and Card Sound Road,
(10-12) be roughly equivalent to those of Florida City (11-13)?
➢ What are the sources of background traffic on/in:
1. The 18 Mile Stretch
2. Florida City
3. Card Sound Road/SR 905?*
➢ And why is there no evacuating traffic entering Florida City?** I am aware that you
are not factoring in a simultaneous evacuation, but the idea that there would be no
"sympathy evacuatees seems unlikely.
If this is based on the assumption that there are some 40 active intersections on
SR905/Card Sound Road, as indicated in Table 12 on page 53, that assumption
appears to be erroneous. If that assumption is, indeed, the basis for these
background traffic numbers, they will need to be re -visited. Or are there traffic
counts for those intersections?
Monroe County Response to the 2"° Draft of the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Report
-5 of 10-
** It' tills number is expected to be added with the completion ol'thr Miami -
Dade study_ it is yet another indication that this study should not he accepted
as final before all parts of the Scope of Work are addressed.
E) Appendix C: Model Runs 1115 & # 16
'Ihese runs are for a situation in which Traffic Management Techniques are in place.
1� 15 for hurricanes in categories 1-2, and H 16 for hurricanes in categories 3-5. Those
runs, as illustrated on page 64 of the 2nd draft, Table 17, resulted in clearance times
of 18 h 44 m and 22 h 58 minutes, respectively.
What would the resultant clearance times be if the capacity of Link S was not 600
(Runs 15 & 16, Roadway Network Table), but was 1350, the outbound flow for
Link S in Table 9 (pg. 20)'.'
Why is the capacity of Link S, State Road 905 to the intersection at Ocean Reef,
600 for these runs when the outbound flow is 1350 in Table 9 , and none of the
included TSM alternatives impacts that link?
F) Page 20, Table 9: Roadway network: Outbound Flow:
According to this table, the outbound flow per lane of US 1 from Mile marker 90-106 is
900 vehicles per lane, with two lanes northbound resulting in a total outbound flow of
1800, the precise equivalent of the two lanes of outbound flow through Florida City. If a
northbound lane is added to both Key Largo and the Florida City sections, the total
outbound flow for both areas would increase to 2700.
Under present conditions, as illustrated in this table, the combined outbound flow of the
18 Mile Stretch (1500) and Card Sound Road (1350) is 2850, i.e., the two means of egress
from the Florida Keys to Florida City already have more than adequate capacity to handle
the addition of a lane at both ends (Key Largo and Florida City), according to the figures
presented in Table 9, on page 20. Therefore, one must ask:
y Why is the addition of a second lane of northbound traffic needed on either Card Sound
Road or the 18 Mile Stretch? (The list of critical links requested above for the existing
roadways should be crucial to this.)
What is the impact of adding an additional outbound lane on the 18 Mile Stretch given
this? Break out the evacuation clearances impact of each of the three aspects of the
proposed second construction improvement (add one lane through Florida City, add one
lane 18 Mile Stretch, add one lane MM105-106), suggested in "Table 18, page 65.
y Each run of the models provides a listing of impacts of that run on critical links, segments
of the evacuation route where there is the possibility of bottleneck delay because of
Monroe County Response to the 20° Draft of the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Report
-6 of 10-
volume/capacity issues. The only model runs that show a bottleneck delay issue with the
18 Mile Stretch are runs #1 & #2, where Card Sound Road is unavailable for evacuation.
Is it true that the only situation in which the 18 Mile Stretch is a critical link, i.e. is subject
to back-up due to volume/capacity issues is in Card Sound Road was non-existent as an
evacuation route? Is that, in fact, the only condition under which the three- laning of the 18
Mile Stretch actuallyaeduces clearance time?
G) Policy -makers need to be able to weigh all options in setting responsible
clearance time and project goals. All traffic management options should not be
lumped together in a single run and all suggested roadway improvements should
have extensive information provided concerning them. As illustrated in the
following spreadsheet, provide for each TSM and construction project:
I. Its impact (alone) on clearance time
2. Its impact on clearance time when combined with each of the other proposed
alternatives.
3. Its impact when combined with a set of other alternatives (list two sets)
4. A clear indication of which projects have the same impact as another in addressing a
critical link issue.
Note that it will also be of concern to policy -makers that we know the costs and lengths of
time for projects to be completed or implemented, but that is likely to be the result of work
by the Florida Department of Transportation as a result of this studyAt would be nice to
have that information, however, before the DCA meeting on this topic that is planned for
January.
H) The One-Waying of Card Sound Road
In the scenario outlined in Draft 2 with regards to the one-waying of Card Sound Road, the
project looks much more daunting, although still do -able, than when Craig Miller
recommended one-waying in the Kimley-Horn 1995 study. However, it is difficult to avoid
the conclusion that some of the reason for this may be erroneous calculation or excessive
preparation time estimations.
What is the purpose of the 770 delineators? In the "Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices" (USDOT), the sections on delineators are quite specific:
Delineation is intended to be a guide to the vehicle operator as to the alignment of
the highway... delineators are to be considered guidance devices rather than warning
de vices... delineators are particularly beneficial at locations where the alignment
might be confusing or unexpected... delineators are not necessary for traffic
Monroe County Response to the 2nd Draft of the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Report
-7 of 10-
cc
i
o
LD ca
C)
0
0
0
!2 E
a) 0
0,
coU
0
0 0
0
-0
IT
(n
4-
of 0
cn
0
cu
�E 2
0
0
E .6
o
-0
0
0
C)
A)
E o E
0
V
(n
-0 N0
0,
+
.... ... . ..
..
....
.. ......
0
0
0
. ...
......
+
tjt
. ......
.
.... ...
...
.. .....
........
>
co
r
+
0- 01 01
0�
----- --- -
0 4t
0 S; E
E Do
N: 0)
co
o
U
c LLJ
0
—jr
0
a) a)
0 i '�7
(13
i
0
> 1
cc
'o a) a)
CID +
LLJ
I
T
mI n
0
L
3IE
a)
a) CL
U-
a)
r-: 'o
+
0
CID!
C,
W
-0:
+
ol E
cn
(D
NU)
co
ol
—
—
—
—
—
—
C:
1.0
a)! +
0
0
C�j
-0 0
0.
0 En
CID
+
co
C,
NN C:
..
..........
...
. ........
... ....
..... —
-
i
Olo
M
E is
-r-: W
a):
ca
E
0 1 (2
0 t
,
"0
C%4
U a) M
C) > C 1
0
r
co
it
�5!
U)
-2
'.a)
I
N
D)
OI
i CID T
C:
1 0)
r_
2
E
aOILE
0 .2
c
0
o a)
0
0
.2
0
c
cn
C,:
Ni
u
2
t
=3
.2
2iE
0 0 1 (n
cn
(n
2
0
.01
DO (n
m
a,
U)
0
0'
0
0
0
0
r_
0
0
0
E
U1A
a)
10
0
-0 -CLI OU
00
CY)
I 00j
0
C14
cl)
N
N 1
1 C41
0410
moving in the direction of wider pavement or on the side of the roadway where
alignment is not affected." (emphasis added)
do what is the thinking here, that people will get confused about which lane they are
in when the lanes are clearly marked? That people won't realize that it's one-way
Without delineators? Sinef, the division between the two lanes is clearly marked, what
actual purpose would the"deliilea tors serve'? What actual message are they expected to
deliver? And what would be the dangers if they were not M place?
%- Were permanent signs that flip up to display their message considered? Isn't it
possible that preparation time for an evacuation could be greatly reduced by
permanently placing signs as needed at intersections? And couldn't those signs be
configured so that they were only delivering their message when specifically
"activated?"
Please explain again how many individual signs are needed at each intersection and
precisely what those signs are.
Define the 44 intersections on CR-905 and Card Sound Road and point them out on
the accompanying overviews.
If, as it appears above, the 18 Mile Stretch is only a critical link when Card Sound
Road is non-existent as an evacuation route, is the opposite true as well? Is it correct
that one-waying Card Sound Road is, in fact, effective as a means of decreasing
evacuation time ONLY if the 18 Mile Stretch was nonexistent as an evacuation route?
I) Concerns of calculation evolution from Draft One to Draft Two:
Explain how the permanent improvements in Draft #1, evacuating 40,408
vehicles, resulted in a clearance time of 19 hours and 16 minutes (p. 42, Table 3)
and the identical improvements, using the higher vehicle count of year 2005
(41,208) resulted in a quicker clearance time of 18 hours and 58 minutes in Draft
Two (p.64, Table 17).
K) A Curve on Card Sound Road
➢ Is it, in fact, a contention of this study that the proposed curve on Card Sound
Road does nothing, in and of itself, to improve evacuation clearance times?
r Describe the minimal construction projects required in conjunction with the
curving of Card Sound Road that will allow us to see a reduction in clearance
times from that curve.
Monroe County Response to the 2nd Draft of the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Report
-8 of 10-
What would the resultant clearance times be from that change (i.e. the mininuil
construction projects required to lead to reduced clearance times from a curve M1
Card Sound Road PLUS the actual curve)?
L) Continuing Concerns;About the Completion of Elements Required in the
Scope of Work
As pointed out repeatedly within this document, there are serious elements of -tie
Scope of N ork missing from this document. Including among those are items that
will not be provided until the unknown completion date of a Miami- Dade study of
hurricane evacuation.
The Scope of Work IV.A.4 states "The transportation analysis shall include roadways
and intersections in Dade County that could create bottlenecks and critical congestion
for evacuating traffic." This has not been done.
➢ Please note another instance of FDOT accepting a contract or a report when the
Scope of Work was not complete? Please note another instance where items
specifically listed without caveat in the Scope of Work were left to another
contractor operating under a different Scope of Work? This seems highly
irregular.
y As pointed out earlier in these questions, an intersection cited in an earlier study
as the second most critical link in Monroe County Hurricane Evacuation has not
been included within this report.
Is it possible that the inclusion of Miami -Dade into this report, as called for in the
Scope of Work, could have significant repercussions not only for the list of
critical links, but for the order in which projects might affect clearance times?
Might the inclusion of that data result in recommendations of different or new
construction projects, which could have greater impact on clearance times than
some of those before us today? If so, should conclusions be drawn before the
Scope of Work is completed?
L) Model Runs One & Two:
Runs One and Two simulate the results of a model run of the following condition:
Existing Roadway Network without Card Sound Road," yet the outbound flow rate
of Card Sound Road appears to be 600 (Link S, Normal Response Curve), not zero.
Is this run with a reduced capacity on Card Sound Road or WITHOUT Card
Sound Road?
Monroe County Response to the 20° Draft of the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Report
-9 of 10-
y Where does that 600 f►gure come from? Is it the same "600" that appears in Runs
1115 & 916? Upon what situation/criteria/response is it based?
M) Road Segments T & U
CND
In the Model Runs, there are repeated notations of "bottleneck delays" for
segments T and U (tlY6 Ocean Reef intersection and Card Sound Road).
According to Miller, those high values are due to the fact that these are the only
two T-intersection links which arc feeding into "roadway segments whose
capacity is already consumed by upstream mainline link discharges."
➢ For Road Segment T, what is the upstream mainline link discharge that is
causing the "bottleneck delay?" Is additional entering traffic from Ocean Reef
a factor and in what numbers? Is Ocean Reef traffic crossing the hurricane
evacuation route to turn south part of the equation
➢ For Road Segment U, what is the upstream mainline hrik discharge that is
causing the "bottleneck delay?" Is additional entering traffic an expected
factor in this segment? If so, from whence is that traffic expected?
Monroe County Response to the 2n° Draft of the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Report
-10 of 10-