USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

Hurricane evacuation traffic analysis and operational measures

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Hurricane evacuation traffic analysis and operational measures interim technical report
Physical Description:
Book
Language:
English
Creator:
Zaragoza, Douglas P
Mierzejewski, Edward A
Burris, Mark Whitman, 1970-
Palisetti, Vikash
Florida -- Dept. of Transportation
University of South Florida -- Center for Urban Transportation Research
Publisher:
Center for Urban Transportation Research, College of Engineering, University of South Florida
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Fla
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Evacuation of civilians -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Hurricane protection -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Hurricanes -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Traffic surveys -- Florida   ( lcsh )

Notes

Statement of Responsibility:
prepared by Douglas P. Zaragoza, Edward A. Mierzejewski, Mark W. Burris, Vikash Palisetti.
General Note:
"May 1997."
General Note:
Study conducted on behalf of the Florida Dept. of Transportation.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
usfldc doi - C01-00156
usfldc handle - c1.156
System ID:
SFS0032264:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

Hurricane Evacuation Traffic Analysis and Operational Measures Interim Technical Report Prepared by: Douglas P. Zaragoza, AICP Edward A Mier.rejewski, Ph.D. PE Mark W. Burris Vikash Palisetti Center for Urb an Transportation Research College of Engineering, Universiry of Soutli Florida May 1997

PAGE 2

T ab l e o f Contents LIST O F T ABL ES .. ........... ... .. .... ........ .. ... .... ... ... ... ... .. .... ...... .. .. .. .. .... .. .............................. ..... .......... iv L I ST O F FIGU"RES ...... ...... ....... .... .. .... .... ........ .... .. .... .. ....... .... . .. .... .... . . ........ . . . . .. .......... ... v SUMMARY ... ............ ................... .... H ... . . . . .................. .................. HoooooO-ooooooo oo o v i H U RRI C ANE O PAL E V ACU A Tl ON TRAF F I C C HARACT ERJSTI CS ... .. .. .. .... . .. ... .. I Evacuation T raffi c Analysi s ... ........ ..... ........... ....... .... ... ..... .... ..... ... .... .. ... .... ... ...... . . ... . . ...... ... 5 T raffic C ount Loc ations ...... ..... ... . ....... ..... . . . ... ........ ............ ............. ... ........ . ........ .. . .. .... . . 5 Evacuatio n Traffic Characteristics .. ... ... . . . .... .. . . . . . . . . .... ............. ...................... ............ .... 5 Evacuation Response Rate s . ..... ... ......... .... . ... ... ... .... ...... ... . ... ... .. ...... ...... ...... ... .............. ....... 6 County Evacuation T raffic Charact e r istics Summari e s ... .... .... ....... .... ... .. .. ... . . .... ....... ........ ...... 8 Escarn bia County . ............ . .... ... ............................. ................... ................. ... ..... ... .... .......... .... 9 Santa Rosa County ... ..... .. ...... ...... ....... ........ ....... ... ... ... . .... . . . . . .... .......... ..... ...... ... . . .... ... ... 9 Okalo osa Coun t y ............... . ....... .... ..... . ..... .......... ..... ..... . ....... .... .... .... ........ ....... ... ... . ........ . 9 Walton C o unty . .... .... ......... .... ............ ...... . ....... ....... .......... ... ...... ... ... ....... .... ...... .... ... . . . . 9 Bay County . ....... .... .. ..... ... ... ... ....... . ........... ............ .... . ....... .. ... ... .... ..... ....... . . ...... ...... ..... . 9 Gulf County ... ....... . ......... ............ ............ .... . ......... ... ....... .... .... . . ........ ........ .... . ...... ...... ..... I 0 F rank lin Coun t y ... .. ... .... ........... ... ..... . ... ............... .... ...... ..... ........ ... ... ....... .... ....... ... .... .... I 0 Wakulla Cou nty ..... ... ... ...... ........ .... ... .... . .. .... .... ....... . ... ... . .... . .... ... . ......... ... . ... ..... .. ... . . 10 Holmes and Wash ington Counties ....... . . ..................... ........... . ... .. ... ... . . ... .... ... .. ..... ... ... I 0 Jackson County .... ............. . . . ............... .... ................ ... ..... . ... ..... . ... ... .......... ... ... . . ... ....... I I Calhoun County ................ ....... . ...... ... .... .... ........ .......... ............ ...... ...... ..... . . .. . ... ... ... .... .... I I Liberty County .. .. .. .. .. ...... .... .... ........ ... ......... ... .... . . .... .......... ...... . . . . ... ... ........ ...... ... ... . . II Gadsden and Leon Counti e s ... ... ............. . ..... . . .... ............... ........... ... .... ....... ........ . ... ... .. II Post-Opal Public Response Survey ... . .... ............ ... . . . ... . . . . .......... ... ... .. .... ...... ... ... ... ... . ..... I I H U RRI C A N E BERTH A EVACUATIO N T RAFF I C CHARACT E RI ST I CS .. .. .... .... .. . 13 Traffic Count Locations ... ....... . ..... . ..... . .. ......... .... ........ . ....... .... ............. ... ... ... ... .. ..... .. ....... 16 Tra ffi c Cou n t Data Analysis ......... ...... ....... ... . . . .... . ........... . . .... ... .... . ... ...... ... ...... ... ...... ...... 2 1 Level of Servic e ..... . ... ..... ... ... ... .......... . ....... ...... ........... ... . ........ ........ ..... .......... .... ... . . ... .. .. .. 2 1 Clearance Time Estima t e s ........ ..... ... . . . . ............. .......... .... ... ....... ... .... .... . .... . ... ... ..... .. ... ..... 21 Duration of Substantial E vacuat ing Traffic .... .... . ... ... .. ... ............ ... ...... . ............ ... ... .... ......... 2 2 Com parison of Estima t ed and Observed Clearance Time s .. .... . ... ... ... .. ............ ....... ........... 2 4 CURREN T TRAFFIC D A TA C O LLEC TION METHODS 26 Curr e n t FDOT Traffic Data Collection M e thods .... ..... ... ... . . . ........... ..... ......... .............. .... .... 26 Det ector Functionality ........... ...... .......... .... ....... ....... ... ... .......... ......... ... ........ ... . ... .... ....... ... 26 Detector Technologies ... ................ ......... ....... .... ....... . ..... ............ .......... ................. .... ... ...... 27 Power Sources .......... .... ... .......... .. . ... ...... . ......... . ...... ..... .... .... ... .... ..... .... ... .. ... ... ...... ... ...... 27 Comrounicat i on and Data Retrieval .. ... ... ... ....... ... .. ......... . .... ...... ... .... .... ... ... ...... ..... ...... ..... 28 II

PAGE 3

View Mode ... ... ......... ...... ....... ... . ............ .... . ....... ........... ... .. ...... ... ..... ........... ........ ... ... ... .. ... 28 Reconunended Changes ... ... ... ..... ......... .... .......... ... ..... ........... ... ... ........... .. .. ....... ..... ......... ... 28 ALTERNATIVE T E CHNOLOGIES . ........... .................... .... ...... .. ..... . .......... ... ...... .. .. .. ... 30 In ductance Detecto r s .. .. ...... ... ... ...... .......... ...... ... ... .. ...... ......... .. ... ..... ....... ......... ... ... .... ....... . ..... 30 Magne t ic Detectors ...... .. ......... ... ............. .... . ..... ... .. ... ... .... ...... ..... ..... ... ............... .... .. .. ... .......... 30 Piezoelectric Sensors .. ... .. ... ... .. ...... ................ ...... .. ..... ......... ... ..... .. ..... ... ............ ... ................... 31 Mi crowave Radar Sensors .. ........ ...... .... ..... ...... . ... ............ ... ...... .. ..... ... .... . .. . .............. ......... 31 Infrared Sensors .......... ... ... ...... ...... ....... .... ..... ..... .... ... ........................... .... ... ... ..... ...... ....... 31 Sonic an d Ultr asonic Devices ... ......... ....... .... ..... ......... ... .... .................................. ... . .......... 3 2 Video Based Systems ... ............ .................. ......... ... . .... ......... ........ ... . ... ... ... .. ................... 33 Cell u lar P hones ......... .... ... .... ........ .... ................ ... ........ ......... .. ... ... ... . ............ ... ............ ... .... ... 34 Citizen Band Radios (CBs) ........... ... .......... ....... ... ..... .. ... ............ ..... .... ... ............ ........ ... ........ . 34 Aerial Observation ....... ... ........ ................ .... ... ..... .. ............ ... ..... .. ..... .......... ... ............ ... ... ... ... 35 Call Boxes ............. ....... ... ....... ... ..... ... ....... .... ....................... . . ... ... ... ... ...... .. .. ... ... ....... .............. 35 THE POTENTIAL ROLE OF T H E INTERNET 36 ENDNOTES .. ...... .. ..... H ......................................................................... ...... ....... ........................ 39 BIBLIOGRAPHY .................... ........................................................................................................ 40 APPENDIX A: Summary o f Traffic Count Summaries for the Hurricane Opal Evacuation Post Opal Hurricane Evacuat io n Assessment ............................................... 42 Traffic Coun t Loca tions ... ............. ........... ............ ..... ... ......... ....... ... .. ........ ... ... ... ... .... ...... ... .. ... 43 T raffic Count Data . ... .... .... ....... ....... .. ... ....... ... .... ... .... .... ... .... ...... ........ ... ... ................... .. .. 44 Level of Service ... ....... .................... ......... .... ............ .... ....... . ... .... ... ... ....... ........ ........................ 44 Road Construction ...... ...... ........................ .... .... ......... ... .............. ... .. ... ... ......... .. ...... ...... ..... . 45 APPENDIX B: Summary of Hurricane Opal Assessmemt, Review of the Use and Value of Hurricane Evacuation Study Products in tbe Hurricane Opal Evacuation, Alabama and Florida -Octobe-r 3-4, 199S ............... ............. .. .. ........ u . 46. Post Hurricane Assessments .......... ..... ..... .... ...... .. ...... ............ ... .. ................. ... ........... ... .... ... 47 Hurricane Opal E vacuat ions .. ..... ........... ........ ... ............ .... ... ...... ..... ... .... . ......... . ... ............ ...... 4 7 Hurricane Opal Assess ment Reconunendations and Conclusions .... .... .................. .. ... . .... .... . 48 APPENDIX C: Hu:rricane Bertha Evacuation Traffic Volume Graphs ............................ 50 APPENDIX D: Closed Circuit TV Cameras for Monitoring Traffic ............................... 110 iii

PAGE 4

Li s t of Tabl es Tabl e 1: Hurricane Opal Advisory and Evacuation Orde r Chro n o logy ............ . .... ... ... .......... 4 T able 2 : Hurricane O pa l Duration of Substan t ial Evacuation Traffic . ... ....... .... ... ... .. ...... ..... 6 T a b l e 3 : Hurricane Opa l Estimated Cl e arance Times vs. Measured Duration of Substantia l Evacuat ion Traffic ..... .. ......... ... .... ...... ............... ..... ...... ... . .... .... . ... .................. ... 8 Tabl e 4 : Hurricane Bertha Advisory and Evacuation Orde r Chronology ....... ........... ... .... 15 T abl e 5: FOOT Traffi c Count Statio n Loca t ions Analyzed for H urricane Bertha Evacuation Traffic Characteristics ...... ... ....... ........ .... ... ... ......... ..... ...... ... .. .......... 18 Tab l e 6: 1995 Clearance Times (Nort h east Florida Hurricane Evacuation Study) . . ........... 32 T ab le 7 : 1 990 Clearance Times (East Central Flor i da Hurricane Evacuation Study) ...... ... 22 Tab l e 8: Hurricane Bert h a Duration of S ubs t antia l Ev a cuation Traffic ... .. ... ........ ............... 23 Tabl e 9: Hurricane Be rth a Estimated Clearance Times vs Measured Duration of Substantial Evacuation Traffic ... ....... ... ............ ................ ... ........ ............. ... ......... 2 4 T a b l e 10: Rea l T i me Traffi c Inform a tio n on the I n t e rnet ......... .. ... ... .... ... .... .......... . ....... ....... 37 IV

PAGE 5

Li st o f Figures Figure 1: Hurricane O p a l's Path ...... ...... . . .... ............................ ......... ..... ... .. .. ..... ........ ... ... ... 2 Fig ure 2: F l orida Co un ties Affected by H u rricane Opal Evacuations ....... ....... ... ........ .. ........... 3 Figure 3: Hurricane Bertha s Path ...... .... .... ........... ..... ... ............... ... ... ... .... ..... ... ..... ...... ..... 1 4 Figure 4: FOOT Traffic Count S tations E valuated for Hurricane Bertha E vacuatio n s ....... .... ....... .... . .... ..... .... ... ................ .... ...... .... ........ . ... .. .. .. ..... ... ...... .... 17 Figur e 5 : Autosense II Image (ac tive-infrared technology) by Schwartz El e ctro Optics I n c ..... .... ........ .... ... .... . . . .......... ......... ..... . .... ....................... ........ ......... ...... 32 v

PAGE 6

SUMMARY On behalf of the Florida Department of Transportation (FOOT) the Center for Urban Transp ortatio n Research (CUTR) is conducting a study entitled, "HWTicane Evacuation T raffic Analysis and Operational Measures." The objectives of this study are twofold: Phase I: to ut ilize FOOT permanent traffic count data to examine the actual temporal variation in traffic demands during the HWTicane Opal and Bertha evacuation events, and to compare these conditions with asswnptions used in the hurricane evacuation studies previously completed for the areas impacted by these two storms; and Phase II: to identify specific actions that emergency management officials can exercise to decrease clearance times during hWTi. cane evacuations This Interim T echnical Report focuses on Phase L It summarizes the findings of the evaluation of th e Hurricane Opal and Bertha evacuation traffic characteristics and examines some of the alternative traffic data collection technologies tha t are currently in use and would be avai.lable to help manag e a hWTicane evacuation event. Advantages and disadvantages of various a.ltemative technologies are explored Spec i al attention is focused on technologies that incl ude live video feeds of traffic conditions Completing the second objective of the study will involve a series of telephone and personal interviews with emergency management officials around the state. The purpose of these i n terviews will be to investigate and summarize methodologies and programs being emplo yed or considered throughou t Florida for re ducing hWTicane clearance times and, ultimately facilitating smoother and safer hWTicane evacuations The Sununary Report will present the findings of both Phase I and II of the study vi

PAGE 7

HURRICANE OPAL EVACUATION TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS 'Ibis section presents a summary of the evacuation traffic characteristics experienced in the Florida Panhand le during the Hurricane Opal eve n t on Tuesday, Octobe r 3 and Wednesday, October 4 1995. Two post-Opal assessment reports were reviewed for the information contained in this chapter. Summaries of these two documents, t itled Traffic Count Summaries for the Hurricane Opal Evacuation Post Opal Hurricane Evacuation Assessment (the "Traffic Volume Report"), prepared by Post, Buckl ey Schuh & Jernigan, Inc (January 1996) and Hurrica n e Opal Assessment: Review of the Use and Value of Hurricane Evacuation Study Products in the Hurricane Opal Evacuation, Alabama and Florida, October 3 4 1995 (the "Hurri cane Opal Assessment"), prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Philadelphia District (September 1996) are included as Appendices A an d B, r es pectiv ely. Hurricane Opal made landfa ll as a marginal Category 3 h urricane, ne ar Pensacola, Florida on October 4, 1995. Figure I s h ows Hurricane Opal's tra ck as she made her way to Florida's Panhandle. T ime stamps in dica te dates and times of significant changes in O pal's direction and intensity Evacuations for the storrn were ordered from the evening of Tuesday, October 3 to the morning of the following day, Wednesday, October 4 1995. As a reference, Figure 2 shows the Florida counties affected by Hurricane Opal in greater detail. Co nfusion and chaos have been used to describe the evacuati on which was impeded by several contributing events, such as communication s problems road construction on Intersta te I 0 and other major evacuation routes and an all-at-once loading of the highway network (see Summary of Hurricane Opal Assess m ent). The National Climactic Data Center (NCDC) es ti mate d that 100,000 people evacuated for Hurricane Opa l although several reviewers of the NCDC's draft report believed the number o f ev acuees was sign ifican tly larger (USACE, 1996). At the arrival of pre-eye landfall hazard conditions (i.e., w inds exceeding 39 miles per hour) some evacuating traffic was still on the evacuation routes. Emergency managemen t offic i a ls urged evac uee s to seek w h a t ever shelter of last resort they could find. Some evacuees sought shelter at highwa y service plazas, while so me had already returned home due to the congestion expe rie nced on the evacuation routes. "Fo r a n umbe r of hours on Oc t ob e r 4 there was a rea l possibility that thousands o f evacuees were going to be caught by violent winds on open highways" (USACE, 1996) The weakening of Hurricane Opa l just before m aking landfall prevented this potential d isaster. The Hurricane Opal Assessment prese nts a chro nolo gy of the issuance of Hurric an e Opal advisories by the National Hurricane Center (NHC) and county evacuat io n orders as well as evacuation traffic mov emen t information in relation to the hurricane advisories and evacuat io n orders. The information inc lud ed in Table I has been extracted from the Hurricane Opal Ass essment.

PAGE 8

2

PAGE 9

l I I .. t 0. z 1 -=I 0 0 I : 0 .. I g ,.. I .. c 0 :, ... .. .. :I .. > w I .. ... 0 1 I I N :I ""' ., ... u." .. :tl : = I .a .. c <( .r: II .. "' !i I & -. -- 0 u. I t I 3

PAGE 10

4:00p.m. 5 :00p.m 6:00p.m. 8 :00p.m. 10:00 p.m. II :00 p m. 3:00a.m. 6:00a.m. 7:00a.m. 8:00a.m. 9:00a.m 10:00 a m. 11:00 a.m. 12:00 p.m. I :00 p. m. 5:00p.m. Table 1 Hurricane Opal Advisory and Evacuation Order Chronology Source: Hurricane Opal Assessment (USACE) Tuesday, October 3, 1995 Santa Rosa County issues evacuation order. Escamb ia Count y issues "pre-evacuation" notice. Okaloosa County issues Category 1-3 evacuation order. Gulf County recommends evacuation of mobile homes and low-ly ing and coastal areas. l\'HC issues statement: "All prepardtions should be rushed to completion Escambia County issues Category 1-2 evacuation order. Santa Rosa issues beach evacuation order Wakulla CoWlty issues volWltary evacuation recommendation. Bay County issues Category 1-3 evacuation order effective at 6 a.m. Wednesday. Wednesday, October 4, 1995 Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties expand evacuation orders to include Categories 3 +. Bay County evacuation order becomes effective. Gulf CoWlty issues mandatory evacuation order for all coastal and low-ly ing areas. WakuHa County issues mandatory evacuation order, beginning at dawn. Franklin County issues evacuation order. Evacuation routes throughout Northwest Florida are becomingjanuned. Gulf County issues evacuation order for the north part of the county and all mobile homes Calhoun and Leon Counties issue evacuation orders f o r mobile homes. Okaloosa County expands evacuation o rder to include Categories 4-5. E scambia and Okaloosa County evacuations are canceled, and evacuees are told to "seek refuge Santa Rosa res i dents are told to stay put if not already evacuating. Bay County reverses the southbound lane s of US 23 I. Escambia County estimates there are still tens of thousands of evacuees on the road. Calhoun County schoolboard closes schools, and school buses taking children home from school get caught in the evacuating traffic. Bay County surge areas evacuation completed. Hurricane Opal makes landfall, and many evacuees are unable to reach safe destin a tio ns before the onset of tropica l storm force winds. 4

PAGE 11

Evacuation Traffic Analysis The Traffic Volume Report presents traffic data summarized from various FDOT traffic count stations in the Florida Panhandle area that participated in the Hurrican.e Opal evacuations or were i mpacted by traffic from evacuating counties. The information contained in the Traffic Volume Report was used in the development of the Hurricane Opal Assessment (see Appendices A and B). Traffic Count Locations Twenty-nine traffic count stations in the Florida Panhandle counties of Bay, Escarnbia, Gadsden, J ackson J efferson Liberty, Okaloosa, Santa Rosa, Wakulla Walton, and Washington were ana l yzed in the Traffic Volume Report Graphs depicting the hourly directional traffic volumes over the twenty-four hour period, beginning at 10:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 3 1995 and end ing at 9:00 p.m on Wednesday, October 4, 1995, were developed from FDOT traffic count data. Evacuation Traffic Characteristics Accordi ng to the Traffic Vol ume Report, evacuation traffic along Interstate I 0 began as early as 5:00 a.m on Wednesday, October 4, and en ded as late as 12:00 a.m. on Thursday, October 5. The duration of the substan tial evacuation traffic ranged from nine hours, at the westernmost, westbound count station, to seventeen hours at the easternmost, eastbound count station Sitnilarly, evacuation traffic along the other six major east/west routes began as early as 12:00 a.m. on Wednesday October 4 and ended as late as 4:00p.m. on the same day. The duration of the substantial evacuation traffic on these routes ranged from six to thirteen hours. Evacuation traffic a long the eight major north/south routes began as early as 5:00 a.m on Wednesday, October 4 and end ed as late as 8 : 00 p.m. that evening The duration of the substantial evacuat io n traffic on these routes ranged from nine to thirteen hours. Evacuatio n patterns on the eight routes in the Tallahassee and surrounding urban areas are difficult t o distinguish from the n ormal traffic patterns associa ted with these urban areas. Volume graphs for these count locations are included in the T ra ffic Volume Report, but summary s t atistics for the stations are not i ncluded. Evacuatio n traffic informa tion from the H urricane Opal Assessment has been summarized in Table 2. The duration of substantial evacuatio n traffic was derived in the Hurricane Opal Assessment from the traffic count information pres e nted in the Traffic Volume Report Essentially, the duration of substantial evacuation traffic is the time period, during an evacuat ion 5

PAGE 12

in which the recorded traffic volume at a lo cation (i. e., at a FOOT traffic count station location) is greater than the volume that would be associated with normal conditions. Table2 Hurricane Opal Duration of Substantial Evacuation Traffic (Wednesday, October 4, 1995) Evacuation Evacuation Traffic County Order Effective Begin End Duration (1) Escambia I 0:00 p.m., T u es. Oct. 3 5:00a.m. 2:00p.m. 9hours Santa Rosa 4:00p.m., Tues. Oct. 3 8:00a.m. 4:00p.m. 8 hours (Navarre Beach) 4:00p.m., Tues. Oct. 3 3:00a. m. 8:30a.m. 5 5 hours Okaloosa 6:00p.m., Tues. Oct. 3 6:00a.m. 4:00p.m. !Ohours Walton I I :00 p.m., Tues. Oct. 3 6:00a. m. 5:00p.m. 11 hours Bay 6:00a.m., Wed. Oct. 4 5:00a.m. 4:00p.m. 11 hours Gulf 7:00a.m. Wed. Oct. 4 8:00a.m. 7:00p.m. II hours Franklin 7:00a.m. Wed. Oct. 4 8:00a.m. 4:00p.m. 8 hours Wakulla 7:00a.m., Wed. Oct. 4 8:00a.m. 7:00p.m. II hours Washington ( I ) 8:00a.m. 7:00p.m. 11 hours Calhoun (2) 9:00a.m. Wed. Oct. 4 8:00a.m. 7:00p.m. II hours Lib erty (1) 8 : 00a.m. 7:00p.m. 1 1 hours Holmes (1) 7:00a.m. 6 :00p.m. II hours Jackson (1) 7:00a.m. 8:00p.m. 13 hours Gadsden (I) 9:00a.m. 11:00 p.m. 14 hours Leon (2) 9:00 a.m., Wed. Oct. 4 9:00a.m. 11:00 p.m. 14 hours Notes : {I) The duration of major evacuation flow in a particular county does not necessarily mean that county issued an evacuation order. Major evacuation flow from evacuating counties impacted roadways on a regional basis. (2) Only mobile home residents were ordered to evacuate. At 2:00p.m. on Wednesday a wind gust of 79 mph was recorded. Reviewing Table 2, it is clear that evacuations were ongoing at the arrival of tropical storm force winds (i.e., 40 mph) and co n tinue d for several hours thereafter. Evacuation Response Rates Evacuation response rates can be shown with behavioral response curves, which "depict slow, medium, and rapid responses by the public to an evacuation order Typically a small percentage 6

PAGE 13

of households will start before an order is issued. Upon receiving the evacuat ion order, some percentage of households will leave within an hour, some within two hours, some withi n three, etc. A curve can be drawn to show the cumulative percentage of hous e holds that has entered the evac uation network over a number of hours. A rapid loadin g of the network produces a quickly ri s ing curv e ; a medium loading produces a flatter curve e t c." (USACE, 1996). FOOT traffic counts a s reported in the P BS&J Traffic Vo lum e Report and the USACE Hurricane Opal Assessment show that "despite the issuance of evac uation orders by a number o f counties on Tuesday evening, the r e were only very smal l increases in traffic as compared to normal [ traffic conditions)througb about 5 a.m on W ednesday" (U SACE, 1996). The Hurricane Opal Assessment uses a 10:00 p .m., Tuesday, October 3 evacuation order time as an "overall" ev acuation time as ''there were several county evacuation ord ers clustered around" this time. Seve n hours l ater, the Opal response curve (showing the cumulative percentag e of evacuees who have started their evacuation trip) incr eases sharply, whereas "one would normally expect to sec a steep rise soon after ten o'clock (0 hours)" in the curve (USACE 19 96). This trend can further be see n i n the previous table, where the t ime the eva cuation or der was effe ctive in each county is s hown next to the start time of the major evac uation traffic llow Of the ten county and Navarre Beach locations which iss ued evacuation orders, on av erage, major evacuation traffic flow began about five hours after issuance of the order. It is important to note that some county emer ge n cy management agencies observe a "no nighttime evacuations policy. It is conceivab l e tbat some counti es, therefore delayed issuing their evacuation orders until suc h a time that the eva c uations would take place during daylight hours In retrospect by waiting for daylight, evacuations were set to take p l ace with a much stro nger storm app roaching than would have been the case ba d evacuations b eg un the nigh t before. Furthermore, as noted in the Hurrican e Opal Ass e ssme nt some co u nties estab lished and public ized targe t times for the co mpletion of evacuations Under the assumption that the time needed to reach their evacuation destination would be the normal" travel time man y evacuees waited until Wednesday morning to evacuate given the target time of 12 :00 p.m. Wednesday. Public perception and, as stated in the Hurricane Opal Assessment, coumer-prod uctive public informatio n efforts (i e., se tt ing a target completion t ime) contributed to the congestion on evac uatio n r outes despite the actions by some county emergency manag ement agencies of ordering evacuations on the afternoon and evening before Opal made l andfall. Table 3 presents a comparison o f the clearance times predicted by the appr opr i ate evacua t ion s tudy and the mea sured/observed clearance t imes for the Florida countie s impacted by the Hurricane Opal evacuation s. Predicted clearance times for Category 4 hurricane s, wit h low tourist occupancies and rapid network l oading are tak e n from Table 5-2 of the US ACE s Hurricane Opal Assessment Observed clearanc e times, also taken from Table 5 2, are rep resented by the duration of subStantial evacuation traffic, measured during the Opal evacuations 7

PAGE 14

Table 3 Hurricane Opal Esti mated Clearance Times vs. Meas ured Dura tion of Substantial Evacuation Traffic (in hours) Measured Du.rati o n of County Estimated Clearance Time Substantial Evacuating Traffic Escambia 1 5.25 9.0 Santa Rosa 7.75 8.0 Oka l oosa 14.25 1 0.0 Walt o n 8.00 11.0 Bay 8.50 (with 4lane US 231) 11.0 Gulf 7 .00 11.0 F r anklin 4.75 to 9.75 8 0 Wakulla 7.25 to 9.25 1 1.0 H o l mes NA 1 1.0 Washing t on NA 11.0 Jackson I 0 00 to I 0.5 13.0 Calhoun NA 11.0 Liberty NA 11.0 Gadsden/L eon 10.75 14. 0 The Hurrican e Opal Evaluation p oints out that, "Given the conditions under which the Opal e vacuation ended, care must be taken in assigning ending times from wbich c learanc e times are to be derived, particularl y if [ clearance times] are to be evalua ted for accurac y. Evacuation dura t ions di d not allow e ven for the volume of traffic ca lcula ted by the 1986 T ri-State HES" (i.e., t he hurrican e evacuation study encompassing the five westernmost Fl o rida counties) to clear (USACE, !996). A comparison of est im ated clearance times an d the observed (measured) duration of substantial evacuation traffic wou ld not therefore, provide a good indication of the accuracy of the estimated clearance times i n t h e Opal evacuations, since evacuations were no t co mple ted before the onset of prelandfal l hazardous conditions. Furthermore the estimated clearance t im es were not reflective of 1995 land use conditions and traffic patterns, since the estimates were originally based upon land use data from t he 1 980 Census. County Evacuation Traffi c Characteristics Summaries Brief descriptions of the experiences of each county involv ed in the Opal evacuation are provided in the USACE Hurr i cane Opal Assessment. Summaries of these evacuation traffic characteristics follow. 8

PAGE 15

Escambia County Late departures and local road construction presented obstacles in Escamb ia County. Most significant of the construction obstacles was along Interstate I 0, where several bridges were under construction. Congestion along 1-10 led to major backups on the highways intersec tin g with 1-10. Minor flooding at two loca t ions on US 29 caused disru ptio ns to evacuating traffic o n that route. The evacuation nev e r cleared, and many evacuees abandoned their vehicles to seek a refuge oflast resort. Santa Rosa County Roads accessing 1-10 were congested due to 1 merging conditions. Thousands of evacuees sought s h elter at rest stops and service plazas. Several loca l roads were flooded from p r evious rainfall. Based on the observed evacuation begin and e nd times, a few hours of the Navarre Beach evacuation took place during nighttime (dark) hours. Okaloosa County Tens of thousands of evacuees ignored the evacuation orders given on Tuesday night, waiting un til the following morning to leave, resulting in chaos In southern Okaloosa County, many residents were not even able to get out of their subdivisions/neighbor hoods. There were gridlock conditions on l-10 Officials discouraged the use of US 331 and SR 85 to avoid conflicts with evacuating traffic from Walton and Santa Rosa Counties Route 85 (a four-lane arterial) was successfully three laned northbound, and officials plan to make this standard operating procedure for future evacuations. County roads were reported cleared at 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday, after evacuations in the county were "canceled" at I 0:00 a.m. when residents who had not yet left were advised to stay at home, and those still on the road were advised to seek refuge. Walton County Severe gridlock was experienced during the eleven hours of significant evacuation flow. Bay County According to the USACE's Opal Assessment, traffic counts showed that a small number of residents left shortly after 10:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 3, when the evacuat ion order (effective at 6:00a.m. the next day) was issued Still, s ignificant evacuatio n traffic 9

PAGE 16

was not experienced until about the time the order was effective, and by mid-morning, bumper-to-bumper conditions were occurring on the County's thre e primary evacuation routes. Officials were not aware of ongoing road and bridge construction in time to alter traffic control or the overall timing of the evacuation, itself To address the gridlock condit i ons, the two northbound lanes of US Highway 231 were reversed, extending into southern Jackson County. Implementation of the one-way northbound US 231 was carried out by the Bay County Sheriffs Department, with coordination with Jackson County's Sheriffs Department. No formal plan for the reversal of the southbound lane was in place. Major in t ersections with US 231 were m anned for traffic control purposes. There were unconfirmed reports that motorists turned Route 77 into a one-way roadway, without approval or assistance from law enforcement or emergency management officials. Bay County evacuation traffic slackened by late afternoon and all surge area residents were reported evacuated by I :00 p.m. Gulf County By late Wednesday afternoon, routes were gridlocked. Adding to the confusion was the la ck of media outlets with which to disseminate public information. As a result, relatively little u se was mad e of the US Highway 98 as an evacuation route, as residents believed the ro ute was flooded Franklin County Traffic counts indicate that county roads were cleared at about 4:00p. m., eight hours after the e vacuation order was issued. Wakulla County A voluntary evacuation was ordered at 9:00 p.m on Tuesday, wit h a mandatory evacuation effective at daw-n. Traffic counts indicate the evacuation flow did not begin until 9:00 a m. on Wednesday and lasted ten to eleven hours. Holmes and Washington Counties Much of the traffic was from coastal evacuees passing through these counties. Evacuees from within these counties were from mobile homes and visitors camping out at a local rodeo. Road and bridge constructio n and congestion caused delays o n J -10. Local law enforcement officials were overwhelmed with the traffic control requirements and were eventually forced to seek shelter from high winds. Major flow through the two counties began at about 7 : 00a.m. and ended at about 8:00p. m 10

PAGE 17

Jackson County US 231 in Jackson County was operated as a four -l ane roadway, northbound for about seven miles from the Jackso n/Bay County Line northward, with no major problems. Some evacuees spent the night in their vehicles in parking lots and on the roadside of SR 71. Based on the observed evacuation begin and end t imes, a few hours of the Jackson County evacuation took place during nighttime (dark) hours. Calhoun County Bay and Gulf County evacuees ovenvhelmed county roads, leading to several re ro ut ing s to reduce congestion. Prior to Wednesday, October 4, as a precautionary measure emergency management official s suggested canceling schoo l on Wednesday. U nfortunately, schools were not closed un til 12:00 p m. on Wednesday, when some evacuations had already begun. As a result, school buses further contributed to the congestion problems and were delayed in getting students to their ho mes. Liberty County Although sparsely populated, several evacuation routes pass through Liberty County. There was significant evacuation flow from 8:00a.m. to 7:00p.m. Gadsden and Leon Counties Traffic counts on l-10 indicate evacuation traffic flow continued from 9:00a.m. to 11:00 p.m. on Wednesday There was extreme congestion on 1 -10 at the Apalachicola River Bridge and other loca tions due to road construction involving lane closures Based on the observed evacuation begin and end times, a few hours of the Gadsden and Leon County evacuations took place during nightt ime (dark) hours. Post-Opal Public Response Survey A post-Opal, public response, telep hone survey was conducted in Jan uary 1996 by Hazards Management Group The purpose oft be study was to document bow the residents of the affected areas of Alabama and Northwest Florida responded to s torm advisories and evacuation orders during Hurr i cane Opal's threat Survey results in dicated that, among all respondents, 85% of the respondents evacuated from beach areas, 57% evacuated from the mainland surge areas and 30% 11

PAGE 18

evacuated from the non-surge locations. The preliminary findings of the survey, "Public Response to Hurricane Opal," are included in the Hurricane Opal Assessment. 12

PAGE 19

HURRICANE BERTHA EVACUATION TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS At about 5:00p. m., on July 12, 1996, with maximwn sustain ed winds of 10 5 mpb Hurricane Bertha made landfall just east of Wilmington, North Carolina (between Wrightsville and Topsail Beaches). A few days earlier, with Bertha approaching Florida from the southeast, forecasters had predicted the hurricane would curve away from the U nited States, bypassing Florida altogether. Figure 3 shows Hurricane Bertha's track as she passed by Florida's East Coast. Time stamps indicate dates and t imes of significant changes in Bertha's direction and intensity. When Hurricane Bertha's for ecasted turn to the north carne later than predicted, state and county emergency managemen t officials along Florida's East Coas t grew increasingly concerned. In response, Governor Chiles ordered coastal evacuations for Florida's 6 northernmost coastal counties as a precautionary measure against Hurricane Bertha, stating later that appropriate and necessary action was taken to prepare for a "worst-case scenario" to safeguard vulnerable people and property from the storm. An est i mated 500,000 residents were located in the 6-county area covered by the Governor's evacuation orders. The Governor made it specifically clear that be wanted to avoid a repeat of the confusion that surrounded the traffic gridlock during 1995's Hurricane Opal evacuations in Florida s Panhandle. The six Florida counties affected by the Governor's evacuation orders and included in the National Hurricane Center's (NHC) storm advisories included Nassau, Duval, St. Johns, Flagler, Volusia, and Brevard. While the emergency management agencies in th e two northernmost counties of Duval and Nassau di d not issue their own evacuation orders, she l ters in these counties were opened and people ev a cuated in response to the Governor's order. Duval Coun ty emergency management officials did, howev er, reiterate the Go v ernor's evacuation order shortly after the Governor issued the order h imsel f Each of the four remaining counties issued their own hurricane evac uation orders on Wednesday, July 10. Thousands of coastal Florida residents began their evacuation at the threat of Bertha s pot ential devastation. Hurricane Bertha eventually mad e her forecasted turn to the north and bypassed F lorida. Fifteen hours after the Governor issued evacua t ion orders the NHC canceled the hUrricane warning for all areas south of Brunswick, GA, and a few hours la ter, the Flo ri da counties revoked their evacuation orders None of the six Florida counties under the NHC advisories report e d the arrival of pre -landfall hazard condi t ions (i.e tropi cal storm force winds or water inundation). A chronology of N ational Hurricane Center storm advisories and county evacuation orders is presented in Table 4. Evacuation order issuan ce and revocation times were obtained from county emergency management agencies and the Florida Department of Community Affai rs Division of Emergency Management (Florida D EM) Of note is the absence of a hurricane watch advisory by th e N H C Normal procedures for the NHC would h ave involved t he issuance of a hurricane 13

PAGE 20

.. o E ... ... 14

PAGE 21

watch sometime between the tropical storm warning and the hurricane warning. NHC forecasters reportedly, h esitated to issue such a warning because of Bertha s antic i pated northward turn away from Florida, as the hurricane tracking models had predicted. The NHC's upgrading from tropical storm warning to hurricane warning caught some emergency man agement officia l s off guard. Table 4 Hurricane Bertha Advisory and Evacuation Order Chronology Tuesday, July 9 1 996 II :0 0 p.m. Nat i onal Hurrican e Center issues tropical storm warning for areas from just north of Deerfield Beach, FL to Brunswick GA Wednesday, July 10, 1996 5:00a.m. Nationa l Hurricane Center issues hurricane warning for areas from Sebastian I n let, FL to Cape Romain, SC. The warning w as not preceded by a hurricane watch, as would have bee n standard procedure 11:00 a.m. Florida Govemor Chiles orders coastal evacua t ions in Nassau, Duval, St. Johns, Flagler, Volusia, and Brevard Coun ties 11:00 a.m St. Johns County issues hurr icane e v acuation order 11:30 a m. Flagler County issues h urricane evacuation order. ll :45 a.m. Brevar d County issues hurricane evacuation order. 2:15a. m. Volusia County issues hurricane evacuat ion order. 5:00p.m. National Hurricane Cente r discontinues tropical storm warning for areas south of Sebastian I n let, FL. Thursday July 11, 1996 2:00a.m. National Hurricane Center discontinues hurricane warning for areas south of Brunswick, GA. 5:00a. m. St. Johns Flagle r, Brevard, and Volusia Counties revoke hurricane evacuation orders. Traffic conditions during the Hurricane Bertha evacuations were analyzed, primarily using traffic count data from the counties that evacuated, as well as from the areas that were impac ted by the evacuation traffic. Information from hurrican e evacuation studies previously prepared for the coastal counties was also uti lized. 15

PAGE 22

Traffic Count Locat ion s The FOOT p r ovided traffic count reports for all of their traffic count stations in District s Two and Five for th e e n t i re month of July 1996. Count stations were identified for analysis based on coverage of the areas under sta t e and/or co unty evacua ti on orders duri ng the Hurricane Bertha event. In addition to the six counties unde r evacuation o rders (i.e. Nassau, Duval, St. Johns, Flagler, Volusia and Brevard) stations in Bak e r, Clay Putnam Marion Lake Seminole, and Orange Counties were analyzed for the effects of e vacuat i n g traffic from coastal areas into these i n l and locations. Some stati ons ori g i nally ide ntified were omitted from further analysis, due to incomple t e data A total of thirty tra ffic c ount stations we re evaluated to provide a summacy of th e Hurricane Bertha evacuation t raffi c charact eristics in Florida. Traffic count stations at the followi n g lo c a t ions were evaluated : five stations located on Interstate Highways 4, 10, an d 95, with one 1-4 location being in Vol usia County; one l I 0 location on the east s ide of Duval Co un ty; and three stations along J-95 with one station in so u thern Brevard County, on e station in Flagle r County, and one station in northern Nassau County, near the Florida/Georgia State Line; fourteen stations located on other major north-south routes including three stat ions on US Highway I, stretching from southern Brevard County to the Florida/G eorgia Sta t e Li n e; State Road AlA and State Road 407 in Br ev ard County; State Road 9A in Duva l County; State Road 600 in Seminole County ; State Roads 436 and 527 i n Orange County; US Highway 301 in Marion County; State Road I 9 in Lake County; US Highway I 7 and State Road 2 I in Clay County; and State Road 121 in Baker County; and eleven stations located on other major east-west routes, including State Road 520 in Brevard County; State Road 442 and US Hig hwa y 92 in Volusia County; S ta te Roads 50 and 528 (Beeline Expressway) in Orange Count y ; State Roads 46 and 434 in S emino l e County; State Road 44 in Lake County; State Roads 40 and 4 6 4 in Marion County ; and State Road 20 in Putnam County. A map showing t h e loca ti ons of the 30 FOOT traffic count stations is included as Figure 4, and specific descriptions of the count station locations are included in Table 5 For l egibility only the last three digits of the count station loca t ion nwnber are provided in Figure 4 16

PAGE 23

F igure 4. for .. ;. --' :. ..' -i' ..-' . ..... -. ; .... :._. ;c y_ 1 7

PAGE 24

TableS FDOT Traffic Co u nt Station Locations for Hurricane B e rtha Traffic Characteristics Nassa u County N /S FOOT Count Station #7 4 0132 I nter state 95, 2 mile s sout h of Florid a/Georgia State Line Duva l County N/S FOOT Count Station #720216 Stat e Road 9A south ofSR 105 EIW FOOT Count Station #720 I 09 State Road 8/lnterstate I 0 at SR 217 overpass ( south of Baldwin) St. John s Co unty N/S FOOT Count Station #780311 US Highway jus t east of Lewis P oint Road Flagler Cou n ty N/S FOOT Count Station #730263 US Highway I, 1.3 miles north of County Road 202 N1S FOOT Count Station # 7 30292 State Road 9/lnterstate 95, 2 miles north of weigh stat ion) Putnam Cou nty E1W FDOT Count Station #760240 State Road 20, just east of Rowland Road Volu sia Co unty E/\V FDOT Count Station #790 170 State Road 442, just east ofl-95 EIW FOOT Count Station #790179 I nterstate 4 east of Enterprise Road Overpass (sou th of US 92) EIW FOOT Count Station #79992 5 US Highway 92,just east of C lark's Bay Road (east ofOeLand) t8

PAGE 25

Table 5 (continued) Bre,ard County o EfW FOOT Count Station #700 113 State Road 520, just west of County Road 3 NfS FOOT Count Station #700114 State Road 5/US Highway l,just south of State Road 514 NIS FOOT Cowll Station #700134 Stat e Road 9/Interstate 95, 3.5 miles south of State Road 514 NfS FOOT Count Station #700223 State Road 407,just southwest ofl-95 NfS FOOT Count Station #700284 State Road AI A, just north of Cove Road (near State Road 514) Seminole County o N/S FOOT Count Station #770 I 02 State Road 600, 1.4 miles south of State Road 46 E/W FOOT Count Station #770197 State Road 434, 1 6 miles east of 1-4 EIW FOO T Count Station #770299 State Road 46, just west of St. Johns River Bridge Orange County EIW FOOT Count Station #750104 State Road 50, just west of State Road 520 (near Bithlo) NIS FOOT Count Station #750 154 State Road 436, 1.4 miles nonh of State Road 528 N/S FOOT Count Station #750175 State Road 527, at Butler Drive in Orlando E/W FOOT Count Station #750204 State Road 528 (Beeline Expressway), 0.8 miles west of State Road I 5 19

PAGE 26

T able 5 (con tinu ed) Marion Cou n ty NIS FOOT Count Station #360118 US Highway 301,just north of Stat e Road 326 West E/W FOO T Count Station #360249 Sta t e Road 464,just east of Avenue o E/W FOOT Co unt Station #360264 S tat e Road 40, jus t east ofNE 26"' Street Lake County F J W FOOT Count Station #110246 State Road 44, just east of Co un ty Road 44 NIS F OOT Count Station #110262 State Road 1 9, 0.6 miles north of Umatilla City Limits C la y County N/ S FOOT Co unt Station #710189 US Highway 1 7, 0 .6 miles south of County Road 22 0 N /S FOOT Co unt Station #710233 State Road 21,just north of County Road 2 1 5 B aker County NIS FOOT Count Station #270232 State Road 121, just south o f Florida/Geo rgia State Line 20

PAGE 27

Traffic Count Data Analysis Using the information supplied by the FDOT graphs for each of the 30 traffic count s ta tions were developed to compare Hurricane Bertha evacuation traffic volumes v.ith the traffic conditions a t the station during "normal" condit ions. Each graph s h ows the hou rly, directional traffic vo lumes for t he 28-hour period, beginning at 6:00a.m. on Wednesday, July 10, 1996 and ending at I 0:00 a.m. on Thursday, July I I, 1996-the period covering the evacuation orders. "Normal" operating condjtions are r e presented by the average of the traffic volumes during th e same 28-bour period, one week and two weeks after the Hurricane Bertha evacuations.' The graphs indicate that only moderate deviations from "normal" traffic volumes occurred at most stations during the evacuation p eriods. The graphs for each of the 30 count stati on locations are included in Appendix D. Level of Service The Hurricane Opal Assessment reported measurements r egarding the leve l of service (LOS) on major evacuation routes during the evacuations. Specifically th e directional service volume for LOS D, the maximum hourly directional volume during the evacuations, and the percent of the LOS D volume that was consumed on the routes during the evacuations were repo rte d. The information was derived from Traffic Count Summaries for the Hurricane Opal Evacuation Post Opal Hurricane Evacuation Assessment, by Post Buck ley Schuh & Jernigan Inc. From descriptions of the evacuations, it is clear that forced flow traffic conditions existed at many locations. The fact that observed traffic volumes associated with LOS D service volumes were not achieved at most of the traffic count l ocations should not lead to the conclusion that acceptable traffic flow conditions existed. Alt hough unintended by the authors, review o f the Hurricane Opal Assessment could lead to such a conclusion. Under forced flow conditions, traffic volumes at isolated l ocations along evacuation ro utes would not accurately reflect the level of service over a particular road segment. That is, d irectional volumes recorded by the traffic counters would provide a "snapshot of traffic flow rates at the count location, rather than a depiction o f true traffic demand. To avoid such confusion for this study, therefore, such stat is t ics are no t reported for Hurrican e Bertha. Clearance Time Estimates The Nort h eas t Florida Hurricane E vacuation Study and the East Central Flo rid a Hurricane Evacua tion Study encompass the areas covered by Governor Chiles' evacuation orders and 1 That is, the ave.rage of the volume for the period beginning at 6:00 AM on Wednesday. July 17, 1996, and ending at 10:00 AM on Thursday, July 18, 1996, and the period beginning at 6:00AM on Wedne.day July 24, 1 996 and ending at 10 :00 AM on Thursday, July 25, 1996. 21

PAGE 28

analyzed herein, with regaJ:ds to traffic vo lum e Clwance time estimates, as reported in these studies aJ:e provided in Tables 6 and 7 Table6 1995 Clearance Time Estimates (In Hours) Response Rate County Rapid Medium Slow Nassau (Category 3-5) 8 .0 8.75 9.75 Duval (Category 3) 8.5 9.25 11.5 St. Johns (Category 3-5) 7.25 8.75 9.75 Flagler (Category 35) 4.50 6 .2 5 9.25 Source. Northeas t Flonda Humcane Evacuatton Study Table7 1990 Clearance Time Estimates (In Hours) Response Rate County Rapid Medium Slow Volusia (Category 3-5) 3.0-5.0 4.0-5.0 9 .0 Brevard (Category 3-5) 11.0-13.0 11.0-12.5 11.5 13.0 . Source. East Ce-ntral FJor1da Hu.mcane EvacuatJon Study The Northeast F lo rida HES was prepared in 1988, while the East Central Florida HES was prepared in 1989. It is like l y, therefore, that clearance time estimates for each county are not reflective of current conditions. Over time, growth in population and housing units as well as improvements to the road networks, necessitate modifications to clwance time estimates. According to the OEM, both of these evacuation studies will be updated in the next 18 to 24 months. (According to its authors, periodic updates to population and housing statistics based on county permitting activity have been made to the East Central Florida HES.) Modifications to clwance time estimates in these aJ:eas are futthet necessitated, since, according to the Florida DEM, the methodolo gies and/or tools used to develop clearance time estima te s in the Eas t C en tral Florida and the Northeast F lorida Hurricane Evacuation Studies would today, be considered somewhat outdated. To improve these studies, the Florida DEM will pay particular attention toward assuring a higher level of involvement of local emergency management officials in the update process. Duration of Substantial Evacuating Traffic Clearance time--the time it takes for evacuating vehicles leaving a particu lar evacuation zone or county to reach safety (i .e., a destination outside of the areas subject to storm surge)--is 22

PAGE 29

commonly represented by the measured duration of substantial evacuating traffic. This is. a m easurement of the dur atio n of t ime tha t elapses from the point in time when the traffic volume during an evacuatio n rises above the volume associated with "nonnal" traffic conditions, to the point in time when the evacuating traffi c v o lume falls back to "normal" vol umes and trends. This definition of cle aran ce time has been supporte d in a study recent l y completed for the DEM, entitled Comparative Evaluation of Tra ns portatio n Planning Methodologies for Florida's Evacuation Response The graphs d evel ope d from the F DOT traffic coun t data w ere used to esti mate the duration of substantial evacuation traffic d urin g the Hurricane Bertha evacuati ons, a s shown in Tabl e 8 Notes : Table 8 Hurricane Bertha Duration of Substantial Evacuation Traffic (Wednesday, July 10, 1996) Evacuation Evacuation Traffic County Order Effec.tive Begin (1) End (1) Duration (1) Nassau (2) 10:00 a m 8:00p.m. 10 0 hours Duval I I :00 a m. (3 ) 9:00a. m 11:00 p .m. 14.0 hour s S t. Johns 1:3 0 p .m 8:00a.m. 4 :00 p m 8.0 h our s F lagler 11:30 a m. 7:00 a.m. 5 :00p. m. 10. 0 hours Volusia 2:15p.m. 9:00a.m. 6:00p.m. 9.0 hours Br e vard 11:45 a.m. 6 :00a.m. 4:30p.m. 10.5 hours Baker (4) 3:00p.m. 8:00p.m. 5.0 hours Clay (4) ll : 00 a. m. 6:30p. m 7.5 hours Putnam (4) 10:00 a.m. 11:00 p.m. 13. 0 hours Marion (4 ) 9:00a.m. 12:00 a.m. IS.Ohours Lake (4 ) 10:00 a.m 8:00p.m. 10.0 hours Seminole (4) 6 :00a.m. 9:00p.m. 15.0 h o urs Orange (4) 8:00a.m. 5:30p.m. 9.5 hour s (I) Evacuation begin, end, and duration time s represent the earliest begi n t ime latest e n d tim e and longest d uration for all c ount sta t ions located in each particular county (2) Nassa u County emergency management officials did not issue an evacua tion order for the county (3) While Duval County emergency management officia l s did not iss u e an evacuation order for the county, t he county did r e i terate the Governor's e vacuation ord er, which included D u va l County (4) While n o t under an evacuation ord er this c ounty may h ave been i mpacted by traffic fro m adjacent, coasta l counties. 23

PAGE 30

Comparison of Estimated and Observed Clearance Times Using caution, a comparison of an area's estimated clearance times (from a hurricane evacuation stu dy) with the duration of substantial evacuating traffic (as measured during an evacuat io n eve nt), can be used to provide insight into the accuracy of the clearance time estimates. This comparison shou l d not be considered a true indicator of accuracy, however. Since hurricane evacua tion studies are typically not updated each year, changes in population, housing, and othe r demographics, coupled with improvements to evacuation routes and the timing of a hurricane event (i.e., seasonal and time of day/week), the estimated clearance tim es cannot always be assumed to accurately portray actual study area conditions. Furthennore, partial evacuat ions such as those that took place during the Bertha event, will no t produce the eva cuation rout e loadings that would approach the estimated clearance times portrayed in a hurricane evacuation study (when clearance times are based on curr ent socioeconomic and transportation data), which are based on full evacuations. Table 9 presents the comparison of the catego ry 3 hurricane clearance time estimates with the measured duration of substantial evacuating traffic during the Bertha evacuarions in Florida. The medium response rate was use d for the counties included in the Northeast Florida Study, and the slow response curve was used for the counties included in the East Central Florida Study (as a medium respons e curve is not included in the East Central Fl orida Study) Table9 Hurrican e Bertha Estimated Clearance Times n. Measured Duration of Substantial Evacuating Traffic (in hours) Estimated Measured Duration of Substantial County Clearance Time Evacuating Traffic Nassau 8.75 10.0 Duval 9.25 14.0 St. Johns 8.75 8.0 Flagler 6.25 10 0 Volusia 9.00 9.0 Brevard 11.513.0 10.5 The res ults of this comparison ind i cate that several points should be reiter ated. First, the clearance time estimates for all of th ese counties were likely outdated when the Bertha evacuations occurred and will be revisited as part of the study updates in the next one to two years. Increases in population and housing totals and changes to the roadway networks that have t aken place over the last several years will serve as direct inputs to the updated clearance time estimates. 24

PAGE 31

Second, as suggested by the Florida OEM, critical assumptions and inputs, which were excluded from the East Central Florida Hurricane Evacuat ion Study will be included in the study update through the participation of the Volusia and Brevard County emergency manage men t officials. Data from the 1990 Census or, more preferably, current and projected housing unit counts and population estimates from county planning departme nt s and metropolitan planning organizations (i.e. traffic analysis zone data) will p ro vide m ore accura te inputs with w h ich clearance time es t imates can be developed and projected for future years. Third, it is important to realize tha t as had be en predicted, Hurricane Bertha eventually made the turn t oward the north and missed Florida completely. With regard s to evacuation response rates and behavior, the f orecast of Bertha's track was actual ly more i m portant than the track itself. As B e rtha approached F lorida, res i dents along the East Coast were told that the storm would likely n o t make landfall anywhere in their v ic inity This likely contributed to a low e v acua tion part icipa tion rate Had Bertha been forecast to make landfall somewhere o n the northeast coast of Florida, where a large portio n of the 500,000 res id e n ts were located, the evacuat i ons certa i nly wou l d h ave involved a much h ig he r participation rate. S uch a scenari o occurred duriug the Hurricane Opal event, where the sto rm was expecte d to make landfa ll somewhere along the Florida Panhandle (and where residents prepared for s uch lan dfall by evac u ating). Furthermore, to gai n any insight iuto the accuracy of a clearance time estimate, a meas uremen t of the duration of subst antial evacuat ing traffic should be use d io conjunct i on with a known evacuation participation rate. A low participation rate can occur with an evacuation that is spread out over many hours (a long duratio n of substantial evacuating traffic). In such a case, a va lid comparison could not be made with the estimated clearance time which is ba sed on a h igher parti cipat ion rate. A post-evacuati o n response survey, which could have indicated the evacuation participation rate for each county, was not condu9te d for the Hurricane Bertha event in Fl o rida since the storm did not make landfall iu the state I n add i tion to the above points, review of curre n t procedures (beyond the parame ter s of the Comparative Evaluation of Transportation Planning Methodologies for Florida's E va cuation Response) migh t provide insight toward a methodology for develo p ing more accurat e clearance time estimates. Common practice for developing c l earance time estimates is to base est im ated evacuation flow rates orl constant, lower-than-max im um service vo l umes (i.e., leve l of service D volumes, rather than leve l of service E v o lumes) for each specific evacuation route constricting point. To address the resultant generali t ies, clearance t i me estimates for future hurricane e v acuation studies might be based oo a more dynamic p ro cess that more closely reflects actual flow rate s occurring before during and a fter forced flow conditions are ex p erienced during an evacuat i on. 25

PAGE 32

CURRENT TRAFFIC DATA COLLECTION METHODS The collection of traffic data is critical during a hurrican e evacuation. Real-time traffic i nformation is needed by those evacuees who are already on the road or preparing to evacuate the area. To utilize the roadway system efficiently, and avoid unnecessary traffic congestion, the public must be made aware of traffic conditions on the evacuation routes. Perhaps more imp ortant l y, emergency management, highway, and law enforcement officials need this information to be able to correct serious traffic problems as they occur. Real-time traffic informatio n can be life saving. Evacuees must be warned of serious traffic problems that if they were to try to use the congested evacuation route, could potentially leave them behind stuck in gridlock when the hurricane strikes. It is extremely dangerous to be in an automobile when a hurricane strikes. This situation occurred during Hurricane Opal. Fortunately though, Opal lost mos t of her strength as she made landfall, and those evacuees stranded on the road syst e m were not caught in life-threatening storm conditions. Historical traffic data collected after a hurricane has passed is also important, as it helps to determine citizen reactions to the approaching danger, re a ctions to evacuat ion notices, and the location of traffic bottlenecks. Analysis of this information allows emergency managemen t offic i als and traffic engineers to better plan for future hurricane evacuations. Current Florida Department of Transportation (FOOT) Traffic Data Collection Methods Detector Functionality The FOOT has an extensive traffic counting program that captures hourly data such as volume, speeds, and veh icl e class i fication. The program consists of a network of 250 automatic traffic recorder sites throughout Florida There are four different counter functionalities that collect the following types of data: I) traffic volumes only; 2) traffic volume and speed; 3) traffic volume speed, and vehicle classification; and 4) traffic volume speed, vehicle classification, and the weight of each axle (weigh in motion (WIM) sites). 26

PAGE 33

Detector Technologies Most of the sites use ind uctive loop detectors to gather the traffic data This method of traffic data collection is very common, but there are significant drawbacks to this technology when coll ecting real-time traffic during a hurricane evacuation First, i f a veh i cle is stopped over one of these loops for an extended period of time the detec tor assumes there is an error and resets itse l f The t raffic detector will the n indicate that no veh i cles ar e trave ling o n the roadway when in fact the road is so congested t h ere is no movement occurring Conveying i naccura t e informatio n s uch as this during an evacuation could have serious ramifications This leads to the second drawback of loop detectors which is the inability of emergency m anagement officials to "see exactly what is h appening on the roadway and pass o n this v ital information to the p u blic. I n the next section, several traffic detect ion technologies that allow the controller to s ee" and understand the actual traffic si tuation as it occurs, w ill be discussed. The use of these types of detectors is encouraged--particularly on major evacua t ion routes Some agen cies have already begun to install Close d C i rcuit Television (CCTV) cameras for u se in m anually observing traffic. For example, FOOT District Five h as installed many cameras along I-95, l -4, and SR 1 9. These cameras are controlled by sophis ticated Monitron software tha t allows the user t o contact any of the cameras, obtain a real time vid eo feed from the camera and adjust the camera (both aim and picture quality) D istrict Five is curre n tly the only agency w ith functio n a l connections to t hes e particular came ras b u t they are encouragi n g severa l other agencies (e.g., the City of Orlando, the Orange County Police Departmen t, Seminole County) t o purchase the software (for approxi m ately $15,000) and connect t o the cameras. One other obvious location to distrib ute this live video feed to wou l d be the State Emergency Managemen t Center. Power Source s The FOOT's inductiv e loop cou nter s are powered by an internal, lead-acid battery. This battery is charged by solar powe r collected from solar pane ls i nstalled on each counter. A fully charged batt ery will power a counter for two t o three weeks However with older counters, such as the ones current l y in use, once the b attery loses a ll power, the counter's memory is erased, and any data that was collected is lost. Newer counters hav e overcome this problem by saving the data to a m e mory module powered by a long-lasting ( five year) lithium battery. If a counter's solar pane l i s destroyed d uring a hurricane, the counter v.i ll c ontinue t o function on b attery power for two to three weeks. Information will continue t o be collected and commun i cated to the centra l office, and only after the battery loses power will a problem be discovered This would lead to traffic data lo ss two to three weeks after the h urricane, which is usually not particular l y important data except during extended recovery periods (as a fter Hurricane Andrew). 2 7

PAGE 34

In the case where a counter loses both its so lar panel and phone line connection during a hurricane (which can easily happen), data will contin u e to be collected until the battery lo ses power. H owe ver this data will not be communicated during thi s time and will then be lost once the battery loses power. This situation presents a greater problem than when only a solar panel is desttoyed, as some post-hurricane recovery data will be lost This data should be safe ly stored in memory that will not be erased after such a short period. However, the most important data, the evacuation data, would have been collected before the phone line s were damaged. Communication and Data Retrieval The most common m e thod for data retrieval is to download the information stored on the counters by modem over phone lines. The FDOT Statistics Office "polls" their counters nightly (after midn ight) to collect the previous day's data. This information is then stored at their Statistics Office, but is not r eadily accessible to anyone outside this office. It is recommended that some of the more recent data be housed in a convenient location (e.g. the FOOT Web page), thereby allowing traffic engineers and researchers to better ac cess and u til ize the data. View Mode Approximately 50% of FOOT's traffic counters h ave an option called the "view mode." This feature allows the user to see the informat ion that is being collected by the counter in real time. For example, if the counter collects speed and volume data, then whenever a vehicle passes over the counter it will be indicated and its speed displayed. However, once a user downloads summary informat ion from that site, the counter would reset itself and erase its memory. Therefore historical data wou ld be lost in the effort to caprure realtime data. Recommended Changes As noted previously, one of the changes recommended is that all furure counters installed should save the traffic data to a memory module that has a long-las ting battery. Many of the newer traffic counters (e.g the Peak ADR-3000, used in South Florida on the Turnpike) have this capability. With th is mod ifica tion, the cri tical traffic data collected during the hurricane evacuation would be saved, even if the counter loses its mo dem connection and solar panel and c eases to function when its battery wears out. Power Joss, and the counter's subsequent loss of memory, may have lead to the extensive Joss of data that occurred after Hurri can e Opal. Hurricane Opal struck the Florida Panhandle in early October 1995 In examining the traffic data collected in District 3 (the Panhandle), during 28

PAGE 35

October 1995, it was found that only 63% of the data was "good."' In comparison, the data for Ju l y 1996 for Districts Two and Five (when Hurricane Bertha just missed hitting these two districts) was 90.6% good data. The FOOT has examined the feasibility of making the equipment less susceptible to a hurricane However in order to accomplish this, expensive upgrades would be required. Since the counters generally function untH the hurricane strikes, when all vehicles should be off the road, the expense is difficult to justify. CUTR agrees with this decision. As long as the counters can collect and disseminate information i n real-time and can store data for lo ng periods of time, no addit io nal weather resistance i mprovements should be n ecessary. The second and more critical prob le m is the lack of availability of real-time information during the evacuation. New traffic counters are needed to supply emergency manageme nt personnel with real-time traffic information Traffic information is now available to emergency management personnel, but in a disorganized manner. Some emergency managem ent agencies receive information from local law enforcement officers who are on the street directing traffic. They can also receive dated information from the FOOT Statistics Office. This lack of informa tion makes it difficult for emergency management officials to make informed evacuation decisions. New traffic counters need to be able to provide realtime data, losing any historical counts. The FOOT's current plans include the installation of five new permanent counter sites that will allow the collection of real-time data. The five sites were selected based on their im portance to hurricane evacuation routes. The FOOT will also begin conversion of existing count stations to stations that can provide real-time traffic information very soon. Twe nty-nine stations have been slated for conversion during the first year alone. This is an excellent start towards the goal of easily accessible, real-time traffic information during an evacuation The FOOT should now make this real-time traffic information available to those groups and agencies that need it (especially emerg enc y man agemen t agencies), and possibly to all that want it through a continuous cable television broadcast, a dedicated radio station, and the internet. 2 There were 2,345 good" d ays of data (i.e ., days that data was not missing or marked "bad") collected at the 60 sites during the month of October. The total possible number of good days was: 60 sites"'2 directions per site .. 31 days= 3, 720. 29

PAGE 36

ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES During an evacuation, it would be desirable for emergency management officials to be able to obtain traffic in formation from a wide range of sources. This section examines some of the alternative traffic data collection technologies available and in use today. These include inductance technologies, magnetic detectors piezoelectric sensors, infrared, microwave/radar, sonic and ultraso nic devices, video, cellular phones, CBs, aerial observation, and call boxes. All of these technologies have the ability to supply real-time and historical data depending on the counter mod el selected and the communication method used. These technologies offer many advantages, and some disadvantages, compared to the inductive loop method. These advantages and disadvantages will be investigated with special focus on those technologies that offer the user a live v ideo feed of traffic conditions. Inductance Detectors There are three main types of inductance detectors, including inductive loop, magnetometers, and magnetic detectors. These detectors work in two ways: pulse and presence. In the p u lse mode, the veh icle generates an electric current, or pulse, when it passes over the loop In the presence mode the loop generates an output as long as the vehicle remains over it. Presence mode is more useful for traffic signal presence detection, while pulse mode is more commonly used in vehic le counts on open stretches of road. The inductiv e loop detector is the most prevalent detection device in use today. One or more turns o f wire are cut in to a loop in the pavement and covered over with a sealant. When a vehicle passes over this l oop of wires the electric current characteristics are altered, s ignifying the presence of a ve hicle This informatio n is recorded and ofte n sent by modem, over phone lines, to a central office where the data are stored. The FOOT uses this t yp e of counter extensively as discussed in the previous section Magnetic Detectors These devices are installed and work similar to inductive loop detectors. They are placed in the pavement and have the ability to sense a vehicle's passage over the detection zone. Vehicles are detected due to the change in the earth s magnetic fi eld when a vehicle passes over th e m This change can indicate the vehicle's presence size, and spe ed. However, these detectors respond to changes in the mag netic field over a large area and, therefore have poorly defmed fields o f detection. Also, the y requ ire a certain minimum speed1 and are, therefore not as useful during 30

PAGE 37

evacuations, when there is the potential for vehicles to be stopped over the devices due io congestion. When pavement conditions are poor, these devices are generally more reliable than loop detectors, and they are generally easier to in stall than loop detectors. Piezoelectric Sensors Piezoelectric sensors are installed in the pavement When a vehicle travels over the sensor the weight of the vehicle causes pressure to be app lied to a crystalline substance in t he sensor, altering its electric polarity. This allows for the collection of axle weight, vehicle classification, and speed data'. Installation costs are similar to the installation of loop detectors. However, the devices are significantly more expensive t o purchase than l oop d e tectors. Microwave Radar Sensors Microwave radar traffic detectors use ele c tromagnetic radiation to determine the presence and passage of ve.hicles. The two primary types of microwave detection devices are pulse and co ntinuous radar Pulse radar emits pulses in a frequency-modulated, contin uous wave pattern directe d at a target area on the roadway. The sensor then records th e time it takes for the pulse to reflect back. T he time and pulse are analyzed to determine if a vehicle is in the roadway, and, if so, the speed of that vehicle. Co ntinuous radar emits electromagnetic radiation on a continuous basis and analyzes the return signal using the Doppler principle. This method can be used to obtain data on vehicle presence and speed. No pavement cutting is required t o install these devices. They can be mounted on the roadside or, preferably, overhead. Their cost is competitive to that of loop detectors. Infrared Sensors Infrared devices detect the change in infrared radiation caused b y the passage of a vehicle in the target area These devices can be active (where a beam of radiation is emitted, and t h e returned signal is analyzed for vehicle presence) or passive (where the detector focuses on the background radiation emitted from a particular location and monitors changes). Both types can detect vehicle pres ence density, speed, classification, and volume. The technology is not affected by day or night conditions, but passive devices are susceptible to sudden changes in background radiation (e.g., sudden rainstorms). Active devices can have difficulties with c ertain materia ls such as plastic car bodies. In addition, high installation costs could make this technolog y inappropriate for use by the FOOT. An example of the output of an infrared sensor can be seen in Figure 5. 31

PAGE 38

Figure 5. Autosense II Image (active-infrared technology) Schwartz Electro-Optics, Inc. Sonic and Ultrasonic Devices Ultrasonic devices emit pulses or continuous ultrasonic energy at a specific target area. The device monitors the reflected ultrasonic energy and analyzes the change caused by the passage of a vehicle. These devices were used in the United States in the 1950s for presence detection at intersections, but low reliability ended their use. Technological advances have improved these devices to the point where Japan uses them extensively (Japan does not allow the cutting of pav eme nt).' Us e d in pairs these devices can collect information on vehicle presence, speed, size, and counts. They can be mounted overhead or by the side of the road. Unfortunately, these devices Jose some of their effectiveness in adverse weather conditions (such as heavy rain and wind) and are not recommended for use in Florida.' Sonic devices, or passive acoustic devices detect the sound energy created by the vehicles. s The device analyzes the sound and compares it to the sounds of known classes of vehicles in order to obtain vehicle count, volum e, and classification information. 32

PAGE 39

Video-Based Systems Several types (or generations) of video imaging systems ell:ist on the market today. The first generation was tripline/tripwire detection, then video tracking was developed, and finally multi resolutional tracking was developed All systems analyze the pixels in the camera's image for chan ges. These changes are analyzed in order to determine vehicle pre sence and other characteristics, such as speed, classification, and headway. Tripline or tripwire systems focus their analysis on a few, specific pixels in one or more rows on the screen. When these pixels change, the system analyzes this c hange to determine vehicle passage. The first non-military use of this technology was Autoscope, which was developed at the Un iv ersity of Minnesota in 1984 and first field tested in 1989 The next generation of video-based traffic data collection devices, video tracking, examines all pixels in the camera's field of vi ew. When an object is detected through a change in pixel color the object is tracked as it passes through the v ide o image. This method provides additional traffic data, above that pro vided by trip line systems. However, the computer processing time and power required to accomplish this analysis is expensive and these technologies could not compete with loop detectors. The latest technology, mult i-resolution tracking captures the video image in high resolution and reduces it to a very low resolution (in some cases eight-by-eight pixels for the entire image). If there are changes in this reduced resolution image the resolution is increased to the l owest resolution possible that will still yield an accurate analysis and is then analyzed. This saves considerable p rocessing time, as far fewer pixel s must be analyzed every )/30th of a second. These machine vision devices are being used in many locations throug hou t the United States and are proving to be a reliable method of data collection Appendix E summarizes the information collected on machine vision traffic data collection vendors in the United States. It should be noted that only one of these devices, the VideoTrak-900 from Peek Traffic, has been investigated and approved for use b y the FOOT. During CUTR's interviews with ma chine vision vendors, the vendors were asked if they h a d any experience collecting data during a hurricane. None of the vendors had any such expe ri ence. The communication technologies for these devices have similar susceptibilities to high winds as do the communication lines for th e loop detectors. In both cases, comm uni catio n can be lost due to high winds. In addition, exces sive swaying and motion can cause the machines to malfunction. As indic a ted in Appendix E, these devices have the ability to automatically detect vehicles and determ in e vehicle speed, classifica t ion, queue lengths, incidents, and headway. Total l ifeti m e costs (i.e., purchase installation, operation and maintenance) are comparable to that of loop detectors since no pavement cutting is required, and one camera can monitor several lanes. A 33

PAGE 40

significant advantage of these devices over loop detectors is that personne l monitoring the camera im ages can see what is happe ni ng on the road d u ring an evacuat ion. CCT V devices are already in use by v arious agencies around the sta t e to gather traffic information an d make signal timing changes during events (co ncerts hurricane evacuations etc.). Howe v er the video feeds from these devices do n ot a lw ays reach th e age nc y that needs the feed the most (i.e. Emergency Management). It is recomme n ded that FDOT gather info rm ation on all cameras in use around the state that may be useful for traffic moni toring. Informat ion s uch as the location of each camera, w hat roads can be monitored by the camera who owns and operates the camera, where the video feed i s curre n tly r eceived, and the costs in vo l ve d in connecting local emergency management operation s centers and the State E mer gency Management Operations Center i n Tallahassee to the cameras should be investigated. Cellu la r Phones With the i ncreased availability and use of cellu l ar phones, this method of traffic data collection can be very useful during an event such as an evacuation. It provi des real -t ime information and information on exactly how t raffic is flowing along various roadways. However, this information is not always accurate as drivers may get t hei r location confused, exaggerate a si tuatio n, or even deliberately provi de false information T herefore, before emergency management officials wer e to act on informat ion gathered in this manner the information would h ave to be sub stantiated in some way, such as verifica tion from multiple cellular call s or some other met ho d Also, there sho u ld be one phone number that eva cuees know to use, and this numb er mu s t be well staffed to handle the influx of ca lls. Currently th e FHP" (F l orida Highway Pa tro l) number links motorists to the highway patrol, and this number is alre ad y used to alert police to incidents on t he h i ghway Therefore it is recommended t h a t the FDOT and FHP examine the issues surrounding making this the official number f o r people to call with traffi c i n formation during emergencies. Citizen Band Radios (CBs) The increased use of cellular phones by motorists has largely limited the use of CBs t o the truc king industrY.' However there is one channel (channel 9) used for emergency broadcasts tha t i s st ill monitored by the FHP and other emergency services. In this manner informat io n gathe red by CB can serve to augment info rmati on ga thered elsewhere 34

PAGE 41

Aerial Observation I n this method of traffic observation, data is gathered from a helicopter or small plane. This method has the advantage of being able to cove r wide areas very quickly, as long as visibility and weather conditions permit. One of the largest traffic surveillance companies Metro Traffic Control (MTC), owns and operates a fleet of ai rcraft in most major ci ties around the United States. In exchange for this information, radio stations offer MTC a certain amount of air time which MTC then sells to advertisers. Despite the fact that a hurricane is approaching, this form of traffic surveillance could still be used during a hurricane evacuation. Since the evacuation is to be completed before gale force winds (39 mph) hit land, there is still the opportunity to collect data during the early to mid portion of the evacuation and not endanger the airplane pilots. This cou ld prove to be an excellent sourc e of additional data as it would give emergency management officials an overview of road conditions during the early part of the evacuation and allow them to alert motorists to trouble areas. It is recommended that the FDOT em erge ncy management officials, and MTC develop a plan to collect data through aerial observation as soon as possible. MTC, in an initial discussion, i ndica ted that they had a great reluctance to sending their aircraft into the air with a hurricane approaching. Call Boxes Du ring an evacuation, call boxes may function as add itional cellular phones, providing the public another method of reporting problems to the FHP. However placing these boxes along all stretches of highw ay would be prohibitively expensive. Due to cost considerations, they are generally located along stretches of heavily traveled, rural roads, primari ly the interstate and turnpike sys te m. Due to the popularity of cellular phones, there are likely to be many people already alerting FHP to problems along these routes using their cellular phones. Therefore, this method of data collection can augment information collected from cellular phones, but should not be thoug h t of as a primary source of information. 35

PAGE 42

THE POTENTIAL ROLE OF THE INTERNET The need for real-time traffic data was greatly increased by the Intermodal Surface T ransportat ion Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991, which made the development of co ng e st ion management systems (CMSs) mandatory for many urban areas The main putpose o f the real tim e traffic data is to identify areas of congestion, both recurring and incidental t o provide tra v elers with accurate information on which t o base their trips, and t o serve as a guide for placing messages on variable message s ig ns D i fferen t organizatio n s use d i fferent methods to collect and interpret t he data obtained fro m the field. Many of the methods used were discussed in the previous sect i on. A World Wide Web (WWW) site can then be used to display the real-time travel time data at checkpoints a l o n g a highway network. Users can query by segment and use the corresponding data for t h ei r benefit. Many sys te ms allo w the users to select the segment of their i n terest by c li cking on a point on a map and then the system gives information regarding the segment and the summary of the speeds in real-time The use of the interne t to disseminate real-time traffic information is beco mi ng more an d mor e common (see Table 10). Users (such as emerg enc y management offic ia ls or the general public) can obtain critical inform a t ion during a hurricane evacuation through the use o f on-screen maps In most o f the s ites now on the internet, color-coded map displays are used. The co l or-coding allows t h e user to quickly read and und erst an d the prob lemat ic (i. e., conges t ed) sections of the highway. Different co l ors are used to i ndi cate directiona l traffic speeds in ranges. With some systems the u ser can obtain segment-specific information by clicking o n the segme n t portrayed on the map. Such informat i on can incl ude the road name, the beginning and ending points using cross street names, seg ment l ength, and the most recently co llec t ed trave l t ime and average speed. These data would allow emergency management offi cia ls or the general public to avoid prob lem segments of highways, ther eby enhancing evacua tion route selection and trip planning decision makin g Additi o nal data elemen ts avai l able on so me of the more advanced internet sit e s include liv e traffic im ages incident r eports, road c l osures, constructio n information, and c on gestion levels One feature avai la b le a t th e Houston intern et si te allows the user to build and plan a customi ze d travel rou te The si te has software th a t takes in to account current c o ngest ion le vels, construction zo nes, and hi ghway spee ds The software will then determine the best route for the user to travel based on the data avai lable Other sites allow the user to see Jive images of current t raffic on a vari ety of roadways. The user simply clicks on the camera l ocati on for which they wis h t o receive an image, and a Jive i mage of the highway segment or in tersectio n is transm itte d. The ability t o zoom in on an area is ava ilable at a few sites Several si tes now h ave the ability to transmit a sound bi t e or recordi ng of the last traffic report given out over th e radio. 36

PAGE 43

Table 10 Real Time Traffic Information on the Internet Location Web Address Contact Short Description Atlanta GA http:llww georgiaTodd Long gives freeway speed, traveler.comlrrcifficlrtmap .htm Georgia DOT traffic camera (404) 635 images, incident reports road closures Boston, MA http:lll1-ww. smartrave/er.c o mltraffic (6 17) 374-1234 live image of traffic map .ht ml Chicago, IL http:l!www ai.eecs.u i c edu!GCMI dillenbu@eoes.uic.edu congesti o n levels CongestionMap.html Detro it, Ml http://campus.merit net/mdotl Merit Network Inc. & congestion levels at largeview.html MITS intersections Houston, TX http:!ltraffic .tamu. edultraffic.html www@traffic.tam u edu detailed report of speed and Route Builder software Los Angeles, CA http:llww.scubcdcomlcaltransl/a! Maxwell Technologies speeds and trouble MiMeapo lis, MN Jmp: //www.traffic.connecu.com trafficnet@. connects. speeds and camera com on the locatlon Orange County CA http://www .m axwell com/ Maxwell Technologies speed and incident yahoorraffic!OC!OC W!map. html location Phoenix, AZ http://www.azfm s.ccmiTravel! info@dot.state.az.us speed and freeway html camera images San Diego CA http : IIWW.scubed.comlcalrrans!sdl Randy Peterson, speed tables ,Incident (707) 996-8766 reports. and road FAX (707) 935-1700 closures Seattle WA hllp:ll/98 238.212 10/regions!north Mi chele Fort>es, Greg congestion levels, "-est!NWFLOW Legge, Paul Cho, camera images, which Washington State DOT can be selected for the (206) 440-4790 location needed Montgomery, AL http://webserv dot.co.monlgomery hnp :/ /webserv .dot.co. live camera images md.uslatmspagel montgomery.md. us/ and transit feedbac k html informatio n Rhode I sland http : I!Rhodelslandcom/cglsltraffic/ construction warnings traffic.htm and .. speed traps .. San An tonio TX htt p://transguidewwwsen.er.datasys Streets and Traffic camera images. traffic .swri .edul Eng., signal chang es wi th (210) 731-5223 incidents and (210)207-7720 changing advisory signals 37

PAGE 44

With the increased popularity and availability of the World Wide Web, it is like ly that interest in placing real -time traffic data on the Web will rise. As shown in Table 10, there are already a large number of organizations that hav e placed their real-time traffic information on the Web. During the 1996 Atlanta Olympics and the Riderlink demonstration project in Seattle, it was found that real-time informati o n was being used by many travelers in ord er to avoid congestion. As outlined previously, there are many methods available for the collection of real-time traffic data tha t would provide adequate traffic information to the WWW site. In fac t, the new er lo op detectors that the FDOT is now installing can provide the information required. With the e merge nce of interactive t e l evision and \VWW television, use r s (potential evacuees) have increased access to internet-based inform ation. Interactive television allows the us er to communica te with the cable company through the telev isi on. A set-top box is connected to the television that allows two-way communication between user and cable station. In this manner the user can select tra ffi c information specific to their own situation. \V\V\V televis ion simply allows the user's t e levision a keyboard, and a connection to work similar to a computer connected to the internet. In this manner the user without a computer has the same access to the traffic information outlined above. During a hurricane evacuation, television and radio news broadcasts could use information gathered from the \VWW site and disseminate it to the public that may not have access to the WWW In this respect, current methods used by the media to provide information to large numbe rs of people can be enhanced dramatically. Evacuees could rece iv e continual upda tes of t raffic cond itio n s even after they have left their homes, via the ir automobile radios. Also tourists, likely unfamiliar with local road networks, would receive vita l informat io n during an evacuation, possibly reducing the confus i on levels inherent during a hurricane evacuation. Dissemination of real-time traffic data, when coupled with effective public education and in formation progr.uns, has great po tential to improve hurricane evacuation events and decrease the like lihood of a catastrophic loss of life due to congested traffic conditions. 38

PAGE 45

Endnotes 1 Post Buckley, Sch uh & Jernigan, Advanced Traveler Information System: Final Concept Reporr, A report pr e pared for Florida Department of Transportation T urnpike District, March 1995. 1 Center for Urban Transportation Research, Tampa Bay Area Integrated Transportation Information Station, A report prepared for the Florida Dep artmen t of Transporta t ion, September 1993 p. 9 Center for U rban Transportat ion Research, Tampa Bay Area Integrated Transportation Information S ta tion, A report prepared for the F lori da D e partment of Transportation, Sep tem ber 1993, p. II. Post, Buckley, Sc huh & Jernigan Advanced T ra veler biformation System : Fi na l Concept Report A rep ort prepared for Florida Department of Transportation Turnpike District March 1995, p. 5-1 4 s M inn esota Department of Transportation, Field Test of Monit or ing of U rban Vehicle Operations Using N on-Intrusive Technologies, Volume I :Initial Technology Review, April, 1996,p.l6. 6 William Sowell, It's All in the Pixels -A Look at the Evolu tion of Vid eo Detection, p r epared f o r Peek Traffic Transyt Corporation, USA. Pos t, Buckley, S chuh & Jernigan Advanced Tra veler Information System : F inal Concept Report, Schuh & Jeringan, Inc. A report prepared for Florida Department of Transporta tion Tu rnpike District March, 1995, p. 5-7. 39

PAGE 46

Bibliography Ballingrod David and Kit Troyer. As Bertha Misses Turn, 500,000 Told to Evacuate. The St. Peters bum Times, July II, 1996. Center for Urban Transportation Research. Tampa Bay Area Integrated Transportation Information Station. A report prepared for the Florida Department of Transportation, September, 1993. Chiles, Governor Lawton. Statement by Governor Lawton Chiles Regarding Hurricane Bertha Aftermath. July II, 1996 Cottrell, B.H. Evaluation of a Video Image Detection System. Virginia Transportation Research Council, Charlottesville, VA, May !994. Demetsky, Michael et a!. Evaluation of the Use of Live Aerial Video for Traffic Management. Virginia Transportation Research Council, Charlott es ville, VA, January 1995. H i ckman, D. Houston's Real-Time Traffic Reponing System. T exas Transportation Institute Presented a t the National Traffic Data Acquisition Conference, Albuquerque, NM, 1996. Kane, Gary. Florida Not Rid of Bertha. The Pa l m Beach Post Ju l y I 0, 1996. LaiNTence, Miles B. Preliminary Report: Hurricane Bertha 05-14, July 1996. August 4, 1 996. McLachlin, Mary. Bertha's Wake Leaves Some Questioning Evacuation Orders. The Palm Beach Post, July 12, 1996 Minn esota Department of Transportation. Field Test of Monitoring of Urban Vehicle Operations Using Non-Intrusive Technologies. Volume 1: Initial Techn ology Review: April !996. Patterson, Steve. Storm Threat Sends Thousands Packing Away from Coast. The Florida Times Union, July 11, 1996. Pinkham, Paul. Residents Brace for Bertha' s Force. The Florida Times Unio!!, July II, !996. Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. Advanced Traveler lnform(ltion System: Final Concept Report A report prepared for F l orida Department of Transporta tion Turnpike District, March, 1995. 40

PAGE 47

Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan Inc. Traffic Count Summaries for The Hurricane Opal Evacuation Post Opal Hurricane Evacuation Assessmenr A report prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District, January 1996 Quiroga, C.A. D Bullock and C. Schwehm, Dissemination of Travel Time Informarion Using the World Wide Web. 76th Annual TRB Conference, Washington, DC, January 1997. Shaw, Robert. Fleeing 'Canes Can Be Deadly. The Tampa Tribune Florida/Metro, page I June 7 1 996. Sowell William. All in the Pixels A Look at the Evolution of Video Derection, prepared for Peek Traffic-Transyt Corporation USA. Stout Tom and D ouglas Terry. Data Communications Technology for Traffic Control and Surveillance Systems 57th ITE Annual Meeting, Compendium of Techn ical Papers, New York, NY, August, 1987, pp. 338-344. T ampa Bay Eng ineering, Inc. Punta Gorda/Charlotte County Computer System Fe asibility Srudy. A report p rep ared for F l orida Departmen t of Transportation, Septe m ber, 1996 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia District. Hurricane Opal Assessment : Review of the Use and Value of Hurricane Evacuation Srudy Products in the Hurricane Opal Evacuation Alabama and Florida October 3 -4, 1995. A report prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Eng in eers, Mobile District and the Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV, September, 1996 4 1

PAGE 48

APPENDIX A Summary of Traffic Count Summaries for the Hurricane Opal Evacuation, Po s t-Opal Hurricane Evacuation A s sessment 42

PAGE 49

Summary of Traffic Count Summaries for the Hurricane Opal Evacuation Post Opal Hurricane Evacuati o n Assessment Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc January 1996 The Traffic County Summaries for the Hurricane Op a l Evacuation Post Opal Hurricane Evacu a tion Assessment document (the "Traffic Volume Report") prese nts traffic data from various locations in t he Florida Panhandle area that participated in the Hurricane Opal e vacu ati ons or wer e impacted by traffic from evacuating c oun ti es. Acc ord ing to the Florida Department of Community Affairs Divisi on of Emergency Managem e nt, the information co n tained in that report was used in the development of the US Anny Corps of Engineers' document titled, Hurricane Opal Assessment Review of the Use and Value of Hurricane Evacuation Study Products in th e Hurricane Opal Evacuation, Alabama and Florida October 3 -4 1995. Traffic Count Locations The Traffic Volume Report is largely comprised of a series of graphs depicting the hourly dire ctional traffic vo lumes for twenty-nine traffic count locations in the Florida Panhandle. The traffic volumes are presente d f o r th e twenty-four hour period, beginning at I 0:00 p.m on Tuesday October 3, 1995, and ending at 9:00p. m. on Wednesday October 4 1995. The FOOT provided t he traffic count data for the count stations operating during H u rrican e Opal. Traffic count stations analyzed in the tra ffic volume report are all loc ated in the Florida Panhandle, in the counties of Bay, Escambia, Gad sd en Jackson, Jefferson, Liberty, Okaloosa, Santa Rosa, Wakulla, Walto n, and Washington. Speci fi cally the report includes information o n : seven sta t ions locate d along Interstate 10, stretching from the western end ofEscarnbia (near the Florida/ Alabama State Line) to th e eas t ern end of Jefferson C ounty; six stations located on othe r major east-west rou tes, including three along US Highway 98, stretching from n ear the Esc ambia/Santa Rosa County Line t o Wakulla Count y; two a lo ng US Highway 90, one b e i n g l o cated near the Escambia/Santa R osa Co un ty Line and the other in centra l Okaloosa Coun ty ; and one on State Road 2 0 in Eastern Bay County; e i gh t st a t ions locat ed on major north-sout h routes, including US Highway 29 in Escambia County ; Sta te Road 83 in Walton County; US Highway 23 1 in Bay County and Jackson County; State Road 1 2 in L i berty County; State Ro ad 267 in Gadsden County; U S H i ghway 319 in Wakulla County; and State Road 59 in Jefferson County; and 4 3

PAGE 50

eight stations at various Tallahassee and surrounding urban area locations, including stations on Capital Circle SE Moccasin Gap Road Killarney Way, Tharpe Street, Oakridge Road, and US Highway 27 east of the Capitol (all EB/WB in Leon County); State Road 363 (NB/SB in Leon County); and State Road 267 (NB in Wakulla County). Traffic Count Data For each of these count locations (except the Tallahassee and surrounding urban area locations), the Traffic Volume Report also provides the following information in tabular form : a description of the count station location; the duration of the major evacuat ion traffic flow; the maximum hourly directional traffic volume; the level of service (LOS) D directional servi ce v o lum e of the rou te a t t h e count station; and the theoretical maximum directiona l service volume. According to the Traffic Volume Report, evacuation trafflc along Interstate 10 (at the 1-10 count stations) began as early as 5:00a.m., on Wednesday, October 4, and ended as late as 12 :00 a.m. on Thursday, October 5 The duration of the major evacuation flow ranged from nine hours at the westemrnost, westbound count station, to seventeen hours, at the easternmost eastbound count station. Si milarly, evacuation traffic along the other six maj or east/ west routes began as early as 12:00 a.m. on Wednesday Octobe r 4 and ende d as l ate as 4 :00 p.m. on the same day The duration of the major evacuation flow ranged from six to thirteen hours. Evacuation traffic along the eight major north/south routes began as early as 5 :00 a.m. on Wednesday, October 4 and ended as late as 8:00 p m that evening. The duration of the major evacuation flow ranged from nine to thirteen hours. Based on the inform ation included in the Traffic Volume Report, evacuation patterns on the eight routes in the Tallahas see and surroun ding urban areas are difficult to dis t inguish from the normal traffic patterns associated with these CBD and fringe areas. As mentione d above volume graphs for these count l ocations are included in the Traffic Volume Report, b u t statistics for th e stations are not inchided. Level of Service According to the LOS 0 directional service volume reported in the Traffic Volume Report, only one of the traffic count stations (the northbound station at US Highway 29, north of US highway 90 in Escambia County) experienced a maximum hourly directiona l volume that exceeded LOS D. Furthermore, the FOOT's Florida Highway System Plan Level of Service Standards and Gui delines Manual (1995) indicates that the l evels of se rvice at the permanent count stations 44

PAGE 51

reported in the traffic volume r eport ranged from LOS A to LOS E (no t including the eight stations at various Tallahassee and surroundi ng urban area locations, for which directional volume and LOS information was not summarized). The LOS at each of these count stations does not, however, represent the true operating conditions of t he road segments on which the traffic counters were located With the congested traffic conditions experienced during the Hurricane Opal evacuation, relat ively small numbers of vehi cles passed over the counting devices, indicating low to moderate traffic volumes and, thus, acceptable levels of service. Standstill or near standstill traffic will indicate a low volume at a count station, while the LOS is actually poor or fail ing over a particular segment. Road Construction The traffic volume report also includes a list ing of the major roadway construction sites that impacted the Opal evacuation and traffic counts, in cluding six locations along Interstate 1 0 and two locations alo ng US Highway 23 J. 45

PAGE 52

APPENDIX B Summary of Hurricane Opal Assessment Review of the Use and Value of Hurricane Evacuation Study Products in the Hurricane Opal Evacuation, Alabama and Florida -October 3-4 1995 46

PAGE 53

Summary of Hurricane Opal Assessment Review of the Use and Value of Hurricane Evacuation Study Products in the Hurricane Opal Evacuation, Alabama and Florida October 3-4, 1995 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia District, September 1996 Post Hurricane Assessments This document presents the results of an assessment of the use and value of the hwricane evacuation study p roducts that were available to the coastal areas of Alabama and West Florida that were impacted by Hurricane Opal on October 3 and 4, 1995. The report was prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Studies like the Hwricane Opal Assessment report on the actual evacuation ex periences from major hurricane events. They are intended to b e used as a tool to compare the observed evacuation experiences with the projected and estimated h urricane evacuation scenarios (e.g., evacuating traffic clearance times) set forth by hwricane evacuation studies. A major objective of such pos t-h wrican e analyses is to learn how hwricane evacuation studies can be used more effectively as an evacuation planning tool. Hurricane Opal Evacuations Severa l factors contributed to the difficult Hurricane Opal evacuation scenario, which culminated with e vacuat i ng traffic still on the evacuation routes at the arrival of pre-eye landfall hazard conditions. Opal rapidly intensified to a Category 4 hurricane. This ca ught some counties which had already planned for an evacuation based on a less inten se storm, off guard. When the vulnerable population awoke on October 4 to find a more threatening hwricane heading their way (than they believed was th e case the night before), evac uatio n routes quickly became congested as an "all-at-<>nce load ing" began. Making matters worse, capacity along Interstate I 0 and various o ther major evacuation routes was constrained due to ongoing construction projects. Additionally, le ading up to the evacuation, a religious holiday and media co verage of the O.J. Simpson trial were said to have further complicated matters, acting as competition to the public information efforts o f emergency managem ent agencies. The Hurr i can e Opal Assessment suggests that even if the above problems bad not played a role in the evacuations outdated h ousing and population data (for projecting clearance times) from the region's hurricane evacuation study could, alone, have caused serious evacuat ion problem s It is fur ther suggested that several county agencies were no t familiar enough with the evacuation decision making data and tools provided by evacuation studies to use such info rmation to i ts fullest potential during the Hwricane Opal event. 4 7

PAGE 54

Hurricane Opal Assessment Recommendations and Conclusions Recommendations are made throughout the Hwricane Opal Assessment, some of which are made to specifically improve future hurricane evacuation studies, while others more generally regard improving hwricane preparation and evacuation procedures. The recommendation s and co n clusions are made so that act i ons can be taken, both in the areas impacted by Hurricane Opal, and in as other hwricane-prone jurisdictions, to avoid the confusion experienced during the Opal evacuatio ns The major recommendations and conclusions, categorized under six subject areas are summarized below. Hurricane Evacuation Study Program and Analyses Regional approach toward ev acua tion studies and actual evacuation im p lementation/traffic issues Up to date evacuation studies v.ith current socioeconomic data Distinct evacuation zones, their meaning, and eva cuations based on surge probability Evacuation Decision Making Training and Review General education on the use of evacuation study data and decision making tools Education of elected officials and support agencies relating to the importance of cooperative efforts of each during an evacuation event Coo rdinated decision making among juris dictions to minimize conflicts and redundanCies, especially in regio n al evacuation scenarios Traffic Control Evacuation concerns in highway construction and maintenance of traffic plans Use of traffic counters for gathering evacuation traffic data Additiona l evacua t ion route signage Public Education, Public Information, Public Warning Availability and content of hwricane thr eat and evacua tion brochures for tourist/visitor populations Development and communication of policies regarding specific popula t ions that should and should not evacuate and under what circumstances Improved public educat ion regarding evacuation terminology and improved dissemination of such info rmation Improved dissemination of evacuat ion route conditions and alternative rout ing 48

PAGE 55

Communicat i on s Mit i gative measures to proteCt vital communications facil ities Sheltering Ident ification of additional shelter l ocations and cooperation with representati ves of poten t ial shelter sites Sheltering as a regional concern Public education relating to the need to see k (or not see k ) shelter Shelt erin g issues for those with special needs 4 9

PAGE 56

APPENDIX C Hurricane Bertha Evacuation Traffic Volume Graphs 5 0

PAGE 57

2000 1800 I 1600 ... 1400 :I 0 :I: 1200 "' ... Q) Q. 1000 In Q) (,) 800 -.c Q) > 100 400 200 0 - .. .. 0 Wednesday,07/10/96 I95 Southbound ( # 740132) South of State Line Nassau County ... ... ... .. 1: :Time of Day :: : Thursday, 07/11/96 This location was not u nder an evacuation order .. .:: -+-Bertha --11-Norrnal

PAGE 58

... ::I 0 :::t: ... Cl> "' 0. .., en Cl> (,) -.c Cl> > I95 Northbound ( # 740132) South of State Line, Nassau County 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 BOOt 600 400 200 : : 0 Wednesday, 07/10/96 ... N a. .. a-a. 0 Time of Day N :: : Thursday, 07/11/96 This location was not under an evacuation order .. : --Normal g

PAGE 59

SR 9A Southbound ( # 720216 ) South of SR 105, Duval County 2500 -------------------------------. ... ::1 0 2000 :I: 1500 ... Gl 0.. !II Gl > 500 \ 0 ,___ :: g Wednesday,07/1 0/96 a. N -... N a. m a. 0 Time of Day :l :l : Thursday, 07/11/96 This location was not under an evacuation order .. .: 0 --+-Bertha -+-Normal

PAGE 60

v. ... .. ::l 0 SR 9A Southbound ( # 720216 ) South of SR 105, Duval County 2500r-----------------------------------------------------------------------------, 2000 :::t 1500 .. Ql D. 1 /.\ \\ I \ 11---B ertha ....._ N o rmal -J:. Ql > 500 0 : I t ................. I I I I I I I I 8 .. 0 N N : ... 0 !: !: : : : g Wednesday,0 7 /10/96 Time of Day Thursday, 07/ 1 1/96 This location was not unde r a n e v acu ati o n o r der

PAGE 61

>-I'll 0 ... Q) 0.. "' 1/) "' Q) u -.r:. Q) > I -10 Eastbound ( # 720109) SR 217 Overpass South of Baldwin Duval County 1$00 ... 1 400 1200 I \ 1000 100 I \ 100 400 I 200 a a a 0 N N = .. 0 Wednesday, 07 /1 0/96 Time of Da y il il :: Thu rsd ay 07 / 11/96 This location was not under an evacuation orde r I J :: II -+-Bertha -e-Normal .. g p

PAGE 62

I-10 Westbound ( # 720109) SR 217 Overpass South of Baldwin, Duval County 3000y------------------------------------------------------------------, 2500 200 0 ... ::J 0 :1: ... "' 1 600 t / / \ 1 1-+-Bertha .,. / \ -+-No r ma l .c ;; 1000 &:00 oil : : g /$ ll ll :: : :: g -Wednesday,07 / 10196 Time of Day Thursday, 07/ 1 1196 This l oca tion w as not under a n ev acu ati on order

PAGE 63

US -1 Northbound ( # 780311 ) North of Lewis Point Road, St. Johns County 1$00 I 1400 1200 --' -... :I 0 :I: 1000 ,J/ \ \ I u ... I -+-Bertha ell 0.. --Normal "' ._, Ul ell 600; I I t Evacuation (,) ' .c order issued ell > 400 .l y Evacuation order revoked 200 0 ._,_ 1 I a. a. a. a. ll ll : w .. w 0 .. .. 0 .. .. 0 Wednesday,07/1 0/96 Time of Day Thursday, 07/11/96

PAGE 64

"' 00 US 1 Southbound ( # 780311 ) North of Lewis Point Road, St. Johns County 2000 I 1800 1&00 L.. 1400 :I 0 :r: 1200 .... Q) Q. 1000 Ill Q) <.> BOO -s::. Q) > 600 400 200 0 .. t'-'"! ,-:;-! : I I I I a 4 CO 0 N N ... \D GO 0 N .... .... ... ... .. .., .. N Wednesday 07/10/96 Time of Day Thursday, 07/11/96 :J 0 -+-Bertha _,._Normal -Evacuation order issued Evacuation order revoked

PAGE 65

"' 'C US 1 Northbound ( # 730263 ) North o f CR 202, Flagler County 300 --, 260 I w "A I j 2001/1\ \\ I -+-Bertha ,...._N o rmal Ql a. 150 "' f '6''" \ \ 1 // V Evacuation Ql -' Order Issued u -,c -\ -*\. I 1001 I Evacuation Order Revoked I 1// I ' 60 :: .:: g .. .. .. .. .. ... lJ; .. m 13 13 :: :: .:: g Wednesday, 07/10/96 Time of Da y Thursday, 07/11/96

PAGE 66

... ::s 0 :z: ... Cll D. 11'1 Cll u .c US 1 Southbound ( # 730263) North of CR 202, Flagler County 300 260f l \ I 0\ \ J -.-Bertha -+-Normal 200 t ---v: \ \ I I f t Evacuation rder I ssued 160 I \ \ Ill I Evacuation Order Revoked 100 60 0 I I I I I I :1 I I I =r: : I I lllllltl I I f 1 1 :: : g 1!: 1!: W e dnesday, 07/10/96 .. .. .. Time of Day : :: : g Thu rsday 07/11/96

PAGE 67

..... ::1 0 :I: ..... Ql Cl. ... Ill Ql 0 -.&:. I -95 Northbound ( # 730292 ) North of Weigh Station Flagler County 2100 I 2000 ' ' I / I I 1600 t f \ I 1000 t I ' 100 --+B e rth a --N ormal / I" Evacuation Order Issued I / I Evacuation Order Revoked = 0 Wednesda y 07/10/96 Jt Jt t ... w ... -.. 0 Time of Da y :: :: !J :: : : Th u rsday, 07/11 /96

PAGE 68

1800 T---1600 I 95 Southbound ( # 730292 ) North of Weigh Station, Flagler County --W 0 N N 0 N N : = g : Wednesday, 07/10/96 Time of Day Thursday, 07/11/96

PAGE 69

... :::1 0 :I: ... Ill e D. Ill Ill -u -.t::. Ill > SR 20 Eastbound ( # 760240 ) East of Rowland Road Putnam County 410 400 310 300 210 t \ II I 200 110 100 -1. 10 o l 1 , , 1 1 1 1 ' 1 1 I Wednesda y, 07 / 10 1 96 .. N -to 2; .. .. 0 Time o f Day :5 Thursday, 07111 196 Thi s location was not und e r a n e vacu ati o n order .. -:! --+-B ertha -tt-N onnal

PAGE 70

"' .. SR 20 W e stbound ( # 760240 ) East of Rowland Road Putnam County 100;------------------============------------------------------------------------------700 1 00 .. ::I Osoo :I: .. Cll Q. oo Ill Cll I /----.1 '\ \ I u -.c: 300 t Cll > \ \ II 100 < I o L I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 11! ,.......-I I I I I I :J g .. N .. .. .. :s Wednes d ay 071 1 0 196 T i me o f Day Thursday 07111196 This location w a s not unde r a n e vacuation o rd e r :J g -+-B e rth a --N o rm a l

PAGE 71

400 I 310 SR 442 Eastbound ( # 790170 ) East of I -95, Volusia County 0 t I I I I I I I : I I t I t t I I I '!::! f l I I I I I I : 0 Wednesday, 07/10/96 .. .. .. -... 0 Time of Da y .'l Thursday, 07111/ 96 -.. g r

PAGE 72

... :I 0 X ... "' "' Cll a.. VI Cll u -= Cll > SR 442 Westbound ( # 790 170) East of I -95, Volusia Co u nty 600 40-0 .... 300 .. 200 I \-_ I --100 + :: :: Wednesday, 0 7/ 10 / 96 ' ' ... a. .. 1: T i m e o f Day N : b ,r :: Thur sday, 0 7/ 1 1/96 \ M .. I 0 -+-Bertha ....... Normal --E v a cuati o n Orde r Issued _Evacu ation Order Revoked

PAGE 73

... :I 0 :X: ... Ql "' a. -..J Ill Ql u -J::: Ql > r------------------------------------------------------------, I -4 Eastbound ( # 790179 ) East of Enterprise Road Overpass, Volusia County 3000 -------------. 2600 2000 1600 \'\ Iff I I --+Bertha I \ ...... IH I I ---Normal 1000 t "6\ .It I Evacuation Order Issued Evacuation 500 + \\ I I I O r der Revoked 0 I I I I .. -r--...,..__..-., I I I I I l : : 0 Wednesday, 0 7 /10/96 ... N 0. ... .. 0. 0 Time of Day !J Thursday, 07/11/96 .. : g

PAGE 74

.. :I 0 J: .. Cll 0. 1/) Cll -u -s;; Cll > I4 Westbound ( # 790179) East of Enterprise Road Overpass Volusia County 3000 I ; 2500 2000 1500 I \\ ' 1000 600 18 -+-Bertha _.,_Nonnal I Evacuation Order Issued I Evacuation i Order Revoked .: : : Wednesday, 07110/96 ... N ... N ... .. ... ... a. .. 0 T i m e o f : .: : g Thursday, 07/11/96

PAGE 75

... :1 0 J: ... ell ll. r/1 ell (J -r. ell > US 92 Eastbound ( # 799925 ) East of Clark's Bay Road Volusia County 800 700 coo mll \ I ' "" ' ........ Normal ' , 400 3J ' I I Evacualion ' rder I ssued . Evacuall on 200 1 "' ' ,Order Revoked 100 .. ol r r r r r t: r 1 1 1 1 1 1 :::t=:, Y::: I I I I I I t - .. .; Wednesday, 0 7 / 10 /96 .. N .. N .. Time of day -N :: : Thursday, 07/11/96 = = -0

PAGE 76

... :I 0 :I: ... .... G) 0 0.. Ill G) c.> -..c: US 92 Westbound ( # 799925 ) East of Clark's Bay Road Volusia County 800 700 coo t I I 400 4 00 ' 3 00 Jl 200 . 100 0 J 1 /l I I I o I I I I : 0 Q, N I!; I I I :Wednesday, 07H0/9S \ \ ..... I Ill .::::1 J I,.,, Q, .. Q, Time o f Da y I! Thursday, 07/11196 -+-Bertha -+-Nonnal n .I I I I I I .. .. : i! rder Revoked

PAGE 77

SR 520 Eastbound ( # 700113 ) West of C-3, Brevard County 2100 200 0 0 J I I I t I ,: I I I I I t I I I I I I :::--,: I I I I I I I : a -Wednesday, 07/10/96 ... N ... N ... -... 0 Time o f d ay Thurs day, 07/11/96 : = :!

PAGE 78

;:l ... :I 0 2100 2000 :X: 1500 ... Gl 0. 1/) Gl -u :c 1000 600 SR 520 Westbound ( # 700113) West of C-3, Brevard County .............. ... ............... .......................... ... L__ ,.,,. __ . ... ...... .......... ......... . -...... ... .. i ; I t I 1 1 -+-Bertha : Normal I Evacuation order rssue d : Evacuation order iRevoked 0 I ' ' ,' I I ' I ' I I I I l : : : Wednesday, 07/10/96 !'$ 0. w Time of Day ll :: : II Thursday 07/11/96

PAGE 79

.. :::l 0 :t: .. Q) .... Q. "' f/1 Q) u .c Q) > SR 5 Northbound ( # 700114) South of SR 514 in Malabar Brevard County .. ...... ...... -7--......... 600 600 I r. .... -/I / I I -400 300 f \ \ I fl II _._Bertha ....,._Norma l 200 t \ \ II Evacuation ' Order Issued ' Evacuation Order Revoked I .... " I 100 ol 1 1 t , : , 1 1 1 1 1 I I t I \ I "' .. g Wednesday, 07/10/96 ... "' ... .. Time of Day N ; Thursday, 07/11/96 :: :: 0

PAGE 80

SR 5 Southbound ( # 700114) South of SR 514 in Malabar Brevard County 100 ... . .. ........ ...... .. .. .. -' 700 0 I I I I I: I I I I I I I I :-:!:::! ? 'f.... I I Ill llltil .. 0 -Wednesday, 07 /10/96 it it ... :-:-Tim e o f Da y $! IS : Thursday, 071 11/16 :: -

PAGE 81

.... :I 0 :I: .... __, "' Ql 0.. f/1 Ql u -.s:: Ql > I -95 Northbound ( # 700134 ) South of SR 514, Brevard County 1000 900 . 800 700 800 600 400 300 200 100 ; .: .. 3 Wednesday, 07/10/96 .. ... .. .. .. 0 Time of Day :1 ll : Thursday, 07/11/96 .: .. g -+-Bertha -s-Normal Evacuation Order Issued Evacuation Order Revoked

PAGE 82

.. ::I 0 J: .. ..., "' Q) a.. 1/1 Q) u --= 1-95 Southbound ( # 700134) South of SR 514, Brevard County ....................... .......................................... ............... --............................................................ ................................. ...... ....................... -........................ .... 120 0 .,.....,.,.,.,..,,_ ,--...,.. .,, ....... .., ..... ..,,.. I 1000 BOO ' \\ ;;;_--' /t l -+-B e rtha ' 8 0 0 _,._ N o rmal I If ( E vacuation ' Order Iss ued 400 .. '" ' Evacuation Or der Revoked / II I 200 ...... 0 .f-+--1 -+--+-.. --t--+--t--t--t--+-t--+--+--+-+--t-+--1 4 4 0 N N Wednes day, 07/10 /9 6 Time of Da y N N : Thu r s d a y, 07/11/96 .. 1:

PAGE 83

SR 407 Northbound ( # 700223 ) Southeast of 1-95, Brevard County 400 ... w .................. . ........ . .......... .... ....... . .... .. , .... ........... .................. ................... . . _ .. .......... .... -" . ............. ..... ... ................... . ... -... ........... ...... _ , ........................ 60 .. Wednesday, 07/ 1 0/96 .. Q. .. : .. .. 0 Time of Day -: 07/11/96 .. .. 0

PAGE 84

... :I 0 :I: ... Q) ..., D. 00 Ul Q) u -.c Q) > 300 I 280 200 SR 407 Southbound ( #700223 ) Southwest of I 95, Brevard County 150 t \ !/ \ \ !If 100 l \ \ tl 50 . ... \ j-+-Bertha .... Normal Evacuat ion rder Issued Evacuation ,_ r der Revoked = = Wednesday, 07/10/96 ... i g. Time of Day = :J ::1 ::1 ; = Thursday, 07/11/96

PAGE 85

::;, 0 :X: Ql ..... '() n. II) Ql (j -.c SR A1A Northbound ( # 700284) North of Cove Road, Brevard County 400 ... -----------3150 300 I I "/\ ....r\ \. I I 250 200u \ \ I I f ' noJ \ \ I 11 ' 100 10 -.-Bertha X \.I -+-Normal Evacuation Order Issued Evacuation er Rewked .1 I l I I I : I I I I I I I I I I =: J I I I t 1 .. :: g p Wednesday 07/10/96 p It ,. .. ,. -p Time of Da y i! : Thursd1y, 07/11/96 .. --

PAGE 86

... :::J 0 ::t ... 00 Q) 0 Q. (/) Q) C) -s::. Q) > SR A1A Southbound ( # 700284) North of Cove Road, Brevard County ._ ............ _, ___ , __ ,...., ................ . ............ .... ....... ....... . .................................................................. "" ............................... .. --..... ....... -.................................... ;-500 ..,.,..,,.,._..,., , .. ,...,.,.......,. I 4SO 400 I I \ I I -350 t 1 \ 1\ I I-+Bertha ' -tt-Normal 300 j 1--..)( \ I 1 Evacuation Order Issued 250 200 t fp-/ \ \ I ' \ er Revoked 150 100 50 I 0 .I I I I I I 11 I I f f f I I I l I I ,q I fl I I I I : 0 Wednesday, 07/10/96 It .. N t .. .. .. Time of Day N ; Thur sday 07/ 11/96 : : -

PAGE 87

2000 1800 1800 .... ... 1400 :J 0 :X: 1200 ... Q> 00 1000 Ill Q) -u 100 .r: 800 400 200 0 .. .. .. .. .. 0 a. .. Wednesday 07/10/96 SR 600 Northbound ( # 770102 ) South of SR 46, Seminole County a. .. t !} a. .. '" o N Tim e of Day II Thurs day, 07/ 11/96 This locat i o n was not u nder an evacuation order : .. d .. 0 --+-Bertha --Normal

PAGE 88

l:l SR 600 Southbound ( # 770102 ) South of SR 46, Seminole County 1800 1800 1400 5 1200 0 X 1000 Ql n. Ill Ql 100 u -.c 100 + Ql I I > I I I 400 200 4 A W 0 ft -0 N N -... : We dnesday, 07 / 10 / 96 Time of Da y Thursday, 07/11 /96 This location was no t un d e r a n e v a c ua tio n orde r .. 0 !--B ert h a -.-Normal

PAGE 89

... ::I 0 :I: ... Gl .. w 0.. Ul Gl CJ -s::. Gl > SR 434 Eastbound ( # 770197 ) East of 1-4, Seminole County 1800r-------------------------------------------------------------------------------, 1 600 ----/-1400 1200 1000 800 ij h 11-+-Bertha -+-Normal 800. b ' -400 200 .. .. 0 Wednesday, 07/10/96 a. N a. 1$ a. .. a. 0 Time of Day :: This locati on was not under an evacuation order N : Thursday, 07/11/96 = = g -

PAGE 90

SR 434 Westbound ( # 770197) East of 1-4, Seminole County 1800,-----------------------------------------------------------------------, 1600 I II """'' / 6 \ l ... 101)0 Cll .. a.. .. rn Q1 800 1 ..-U ij soot > 400 200 0 !.! .:1 0 It Wednesday, 07/10/96 Jt .. .. .. .. 0 Time of Day This location was not under an evacuation order .:I :: :: T h ursday, 07/11/96 : .. 0

PAGE 91

SR 46 Eastbound ( # 770299 ) West of St. Johns River Bridge, Seminole County 450 400 350 ... ::I 0 ::I: 300 ... Q) a.. 260 v -.... co 2001 \\ II -.-Bertha ... Normal Q) > 160 100 50 0 I I I 1--1 .. .. fl' ... ... Q. Q. .. .. : "' .. 0 .. .. "' .. 0 N .. "' : : Wednesday, 07/10/96 Time of Day Thursday, 07/ 11196 This location was not under an evacuation order

PAGE 92

.. :::s 0 :I: .. (I) 00 < 0.. U) (I) u -.s::: (I) > SR 46 Westbound ( # 770299 ) West of St. Johns River Bridge, Seminole County 4<10 360 .. 300 260t v v \\ I -a-Normal 200 160 100 60 0 I g : Wednesday, 07/10/96 .. "' ... it .. .. 0 Time of Day : Thursday, 07/11/96 This Location was not under an evacuation order : .:: g

PAGE 93

1000 900 800 .. 700 ::s 0 ::r .. Q) 00 D. 500 _, Q) u 400 -.s::. Q) > 300 200 100 0 .. SR 50 Eastbound ( # 750104) West of SR 520 Near Bithlo, Orange County ... --... .. M .. 0. N Wednesday 07/10/96 :t !t 0. .. 0. .. Time of Day This location was not under an evacuation order : : : : Thursday, 07/11/96 --aertha --Normal

PAGE 94

< 00 SR 50 Westbound ( # 750104) West of SR 520 near Bithlo, Orange County 1200 l 1000 '-800 ;:1 0 J: .. Cll D. 600 Ill Cll (,) -.s::. 400 t \" II I I '\_'\ I I 200 0 1--f--I .. ., ... Q, 0. a. a. a. C10 0 N N .. 00 .. :: :: II Wednesday, 07/10/96 Time of Day Thursday, 07/11/96 This location was not under an evacuation order .. = .. 0 [-+-Bertha .... .... Normal

PAGE 95

.. '<> SR 436 Northbound ( # 750154 ) North of SR 528, Orange County 2600r------------------------------------------------------------. 2000 ... ... ::l 0 ::: 1600 41 0. I Cl) 41 "' :c 1000 41 > 600 0 t----1--4 = : 4 0 Wednesday, 07/10/96 0. N ft 0. Time of Day 1!1 : Thursday, 07/11/96 This location was not under an evacuation order :: = 11-+Bertha ---Normal g

PAGE 96

... :I 0 J: ... .., Cll "' Q. en Cll u -.c SR 436 Southbound ( # 750154 ) North of SR 528, Orange County 2500,-----------------------------------------------------------, 2000 1500 .. 1 I 1000 600 :: : l'! Wednesday, 07/10/96 0. N ft N 0 N N -Time of Day Thursday, 07/11/96 This location was not under an evacuation order :: .. <> -+-Bertha Normal

PAGE 97

..... :s 0 :I: ..... Cll 0.. '<> VI Cll u -.c Cll > SR 527(0range Avenue) Northbound ( # 750175) At Butler Dr., Orange County 1800 ... / 1600 1400 1200 1000 BOO \ BOO 400 200 _., 0 ,_, ,___, "' .. Wednesday, 07/10/96 ... N {!; ft ft g. Time of Day This location was not under an evacuation order -: Thursday, 07/11/96 : = 0 -+-Bertha -to-Normal

PAGE 98

;s SR 527 (Orange Avenue) Southbound ( # 750175) At Butler Dr., Orange County 1100 1800 I 1400 ... ... :::1 0 J: 1200 .... Q) i 1000 l 100 .r. I I ItO 400 200 1 :: :: 0 Wednesday, 07/10 /96 .. N .. .. .. 0 Time of Day .:1 .:1 !Z Thursday, 07/11/ 96 This location was not under an evacuation o rd e r :: :: 0 --e-Norm al

PAGE 99

... :I 0 :I: ... 01 "' "' a. Cl) 01 (.) -.c 01 > SR 528 (Beeline Expressway) Eastbound ( # 750204 ) West of SR 15, Orange County 2600r-------------------------------------------------------------. 2000 1600 I II \\ /I 1000 600 0 ,_,__, .:! .. .. .. .. .. .. 4 .. 0 "' "' .. .. m 0 N .. .. m 0 Wednesday, 07/10/96 Time of Day Thursday, 07/11/96 This location was not under an evacuation order 1-+-Bertha --11-Nonnal

PAGE 100

2000 . 1800 1600 ... 1400 0 ::t: 1200 ... Cll D.. 1000 ... Ill Cll u -800 .c: Cll > 600 400 200 0 w SR 528 (Beeline Expressway) Westbound ( # 750204 ) West of SR 15, Orange County .. __ "" ....-'.---n n I I I I I I I .. Q. Cl. a. Q. Q. 0 N N .., C10 ... 0 Wednesday, 0 7 /10/96 Time of Day N : Thursday, 07/11/96 This loca tion was not under an evacuation order :: = 0 --Bertha ........ Normal

PAGE 101

.. :I 0 :I: .., "' .. Cll D. Ill Cll 0 -.r. US-301 Northbound ( # 360118 ) North of SR 326(W) Marion County 1000 800 80 0 oo T 1 11-+-Bertha 1 II 1 200 0 "" It "" .. .. A !J : a .. .. .. --Wednesday, 07/10/96 T i m e of Day Thursday, 07/11/ 96 This location was not under an evacuation order

PAGE 102

.. :::1 0 ::1: .. "' 0. Cll D. Ill Cll u -.s::. Cll > US-301 Southbound ( # 360118 ) North of SR 326(W), Marion County 800 100 600 soo 400 \\ I 300 200 100 0 ........J .. .. 0 Q, Q, Q, 0 :: :: !J Wednesday, 07/10/96 Time of Day Thursday, 07/11/96 This location was not under an evacuation order : .. .. .. 0 !-+-Bertha -41-Nonnal

PAGE 103

... = 0 ::J: ... "' Cll _, 0.. Ill Cll u -Cll > SR 464 Eastbound ( # 360249 ) East of 47th Avenue, Marion County 1000 L & 900 .... 800 ... 700 800 600 400 300 I 200 100 0 .. v \..... f J J--Bertha .... Normal ......_'\ I I A 4 G 0 N N W 0 N N --.1: .:1 Wednesday, 07/10/96 Time of Day Thu rs d ay, 07/11/96 This location was not under an evacuation order

PAGE 104

900 ,--.....,.-----800 100 .. SR 464 Westbound ( #360249 ) East of 47th Avenue, Marion County 0 .. .. g Wednesday 07/10/96 1: a. "' ... .., !$ .. .. .. 0 Time of Day This location was not under an evac uation order N :: Thursday 07 / 11/96 .. .. g

PAGE 105

:8 SR 40 Eastbound ( # 360264 ) NE 24th Street, Marion County 14GGr----------------------------------------------------------------------------, 12GG 1GOO ... :I 0 :I: l.o 800 I I /"" til ..! 600 I / I I I > 400 200 0 -t--1 -+ I I I I I I I I a Wednesday, 07/10/96 ... N ... .. ... ... 0 Time of Day N :: : Thursday, 07/11/96 This location was not under an evacuation order :: 0 -+-Bertha -+-Normal

PAGE 106

... ::I 0 ::c ... Ql Q. -Ill 0 Ql 0 C.) -..c: Ql > SR 40 Westbound ( # 360264 ) East of NE 24th Street, Marion County 1200,----------------------------------------------------------. 1000 800 soo i 400 200 .. 0 -1--r-ll ..,_ _,.._,>-+--+_,>--+--< <'Ill ... .. 0. 0. 0. \0 1:10 0 N N Wednesday, 07/10/96 \\ .. .. .. m :; Time of Day ;'I .'1: Thursday, 07/11 /96 This Location was not under an evacuation order r : : c 0 ..... Normal

PAGE 107

.. :I 0 :I: .. Gl Q. 0 1/1 Gl u .c Gl > SR 44 Eastbound ( #11 0246 ) East of CR 44, Lake County 3 5 0 300 260 200 150 l I 100 60 0 t--f .__. 1--I I .., 10 Q. Q. Q. CL. Q. Q. .. 1'0 .., "' 0 N N W m 0 N N m ,.. ... --g Wednesday, 07/10 / 96 Time o f Day Thursday, 0 7 /11/96 Th i s locat i on was not u n de r a n e v a c ua t ion o r der -+-Berth a

PAGE 108

0 N ---------, SR 44 Westbound ( #11 0246 ) East of CR 44, Lake County 450r-----------------------------------------------------------------------------, 400 3 5 0 ... 300 :::l 0 :::t: ... 26 0 Cll c. 200v ----' j .c 1 50 100 50 0 : 0 --l'l-a. .. a. a. <0 a. 0 --: Wednesday, 0 7 /10/96 T i m e o f Day Thursday, 07/11 /96 Thi s l o c atio n was not u nder a n eva cu atio n o rde r : <0 :! --+-Bertha Normal

PAGE 109

450 400 350 ... :l 300 0 ::I: ... Cll 260 -Q. Ill Cll 200 0 c. u -.c 150 Cll > 100 50 0 : .. SR 19 Northbound ( # 110262) North of Umatilla City Limits, Lake County Ia-f a. .. .. .. .. 0 .. 0 N N .. : Wednesday, 07/10/96 Time of Day Thursday, 07/11/96 This location was not under an evacuation order = g -+-Bertha ........ Normal

PAGE 110

SR 19 Southbound ( # 110262 ) North of Umatilla City Limits, Lake County 300 J(/ \._\ 0 I! '\ ... 250 t :s 0 :I: ... Cl) 0.. 0 .. :(! u -.s::. Cl) > 200 150 ' 100 ' ' so """' ......., : ft 0 Wednesday, 07/10/96 .. .. .. 0 Time of Day .tl :1 : Thursday 07/11/96 This location was not under an evacuation order : = g _._Bertha -11 -Norlllal I -----

PAGE 111

... ::I 0 J: ... cu -a.. 0 "' 1/) cu (,) -J: cu > US 17 Northbound ( # 710189) South of CR 220, Clay County 1000 aoo 600 4 J \\ ff I I --Bertha Normal 200 0 I I I :l tl; tl; .. .. .. .. .. .. 0 :1 Wednesday, 07/ 1 0 / 96 Time of Day Thursday, 07/11/ 96 T his location was not under an evacuation order :l

PAGE 112

.. ;:I 0 :X: .. Q) -Q. 0 "' Ill Q) u -.c Q) > US 17 Southbound ( # 710189) South of CR 220, Clay County 1200 10 0 0 800 800 IJ v 400 20 0 0 --+--t--1 1--f--t--._.--1--1---11--1-I I I _..J -Wed nesday, 07/ 10/96 Time of Day Thursday 07/11/96 This location was not under an evacuation order -+-Bertha -+-Normal

PAGE 113

-0 ... SR 2 1 Southbound ( # 710233 ) North of CR 215 Clay County 600 aoo ... :I 0 :X: '-.40 0 p-Ill \ D. Cll 1 Ill -300 u -.z; Ill > 200 100 01 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I Ifill I I I I I :s :! .. .. ... !; .. .. .. 0 :5 :5 W ednes d ay, 0 7 /10/9 6 T i m e of Day Thursda y 07/1 1 /96 This location w a s not u nder an eva c u a tion o rder :s :s :! --Bert ha N o rm a l

PAGE 115

.. :::s 0 :X: .. 0 "' Q) c. 1/1 Q) u -.:: Q) > 120.,--100 80 . ----------------. SR 121 Southbound ( # 270232) South of State Line, Baker County -------------------60 1 v \ fl -+-Bertha ---Nonnal 40 20 0 --1-----1--t--t--1 --l----ll l --l l--t--l---1--.,--1-1---1---l---f--1--1--1--1 < A A A A A 4 < < 0 N N 0 N N --Wednesday, 07/10/96 Time of Day Thursday, 07/11/96 This location was not under an evacuation order

PAGE 116

APPENDIX D Closed Circuit TV Cameras for Monitoring Traffic 110

PAGE 117

REVIEW OF VARIOUS CC TV CAMERAS AVAILABLE Name of Type of Features Type of Data Type of Experience Corporation and Technology Transmission Mounting Location Technology COHU, lnc., 6 types of cameras Can provide a Electronics are available : maximum view Division, Coral I) 2130 Series, up t o 3 miles Springs, FL l'v1onochl'Ome with 16mm(Florida Division) 2 ) 4940 Series, 160mmzoom High performance lens. Monochrome 3) 2100 Series, Accurate, Monochrome because of high 4) M i croprocessor resolution of 580 Camera Control TV l ines and 460 -System (MPC TV lines for -Series) monochrome and 5) 8240 Series, color High performance respectively color environmental Possess the CCD camera ability to perform 6)1300 Series speed counts, High performance queue lengths color CCD camer a fable continued on next page

PAGE 118

Name of Type of Features Type of Data Type of Mounting E x perience Corporation and Technology Transmission Location Technology Autoscope, Autoscope Wide Capable of a Video Signals can Installation is Reliable and Neptune Beach, Area Video variety of be transmitted by done primarily proven technology FL (Florida Vehicle Detection detection types different cables above ground and can be used as Division) System like Speed, Count, like Coaxial a direct Directional, Cable, fiber Optic replacement for Presence, Stopped Cable, Twis tedloop detectors. or vehicles, Queue Pair Wire, to support entirely detectors and Wire l ess RF, or new traffic con trol Incide nt detection Microwave applications and the corporation is Can withstand one of th e leading temperatures players in the field between -34C to of develop i ng +74Cand technical N Relative humidity components used from 0% to 95% in traffic surveillance Covers a wide area and it is variable from I meter to 30 meters depen ding upon the video camera height and I 00 or more zo nes can be distributed across up to 4 cameras Table continued on next page

PAGE 119

Name of the Type of Fea tures Type of Data Type of Mou nting Experience Corporation and Technology Transmiss i on Locatio n T e chnology PEEK TRAFFIC, Video Trak---900 C apabl e o f Transmiss i on Can be in s t alled One of the l ea ding P e ek Traffic--p e rforming through Coa xial on the ground, corpor a tions i n T r ansyt Volu me/counts, Cables and also provides United States in Corporation Lane Occupancy, an affordab l e the field of T allahassee, FL Speeds and above ground developi n g traffic Average Speeds alternative for surveilla nce Den sity accurate detection. systems Headway, Length, Delay, Red t raffic In ca s e of above signal runners, ground Vehicle prese n ce i n stallation, >1= in seconds or brackets and minutes, p edestals have to monitoring lane be used to change s minimize sway an d moti on. Compatible wit h both monochrome and co l or cameras Detection accuracy for presence and volume will excee d 99%, ----T a ble continued on next page

PAGE 120

Name of Typ e o f Features Type of D ata T y p e o f Experience Corporatio n and T echn ology Transmiss i o n M ounting Localion Technolog y Philips Man y types of Commu nication s cameras are & Security available, but t h e i r Systems, applicability i n Tequesta, FL transportation (Flor ida Division) areas is not readily available. Different cameras available: TC 952 Series LowcostCCO -.. camera, TC 972 Series Economical CCO camera, T C SSO A S eries gen eral purpose ceo camera, e t c .. --Table continued o n next p age

PAGE 121

Name of the Type of Features Type of Data Type of Mounting Experience Corporation and Technology Transmissi o n i Location Technol ogy i Int e lligent I 60 W ide Field Mainly useful for No requirement of C a n be mou nted R e l atively new Highway ofV iew surveillance at fiber optics since at different company Sys t ems Inc Surve illance intersections, toll cable length to hei ghts above the (incorporated in White Plains, NY System plazas, rotaries controllers is ground, I 993) and has divided freeways nonnally J ess than depend ing upon demonstrated a parking Jots. 60 feet. th e accuracy of few appli c ations output desired w i th the A s ingl e sensor technology i n that provides New York area fixed scaling that t o o only in between roadway the surveillance of and image plane rotary circ les and with a field view inte rs e ctions that exceeds 440 f eet along the diagonal 360 feet alo n g the hori zo ntal and 270 feet along the vertical from an i n stallation h e igh t of 40 feet. Lane changes, right and left turns U turns could be monitor ed. Table continued on next page

PAGE 122

Name of the Type of Fea t ures Type of Data Type of Mounting Experience Corporation a nd Technology Transmission Location Technolog y Rockwell, TraffiCam-S for Multiple detection Can b e Overhead Installed in many Anaheim, CA velocity zones can cover transmitted o ver mounting t o states, including occupancy, and m ultiple lanes twisted wire pair vertical or Ca lifornia, Utah, volume with a single or wireless. h o rizontal poles, Washington, camera light or traffi c Georgia, and standards. Te xas T raffiCam1 for Low resolu tion presence detection Asnapshots: can a t i n te rs ections be obtained from the machine No live video feed "' available. Has an operating range of3 t o 400 feet. ------

PAGE 123

Possible Subject Areas of Study for Hurricane Evacuation Traffic Analysis and Operational Measur!<:i. Phase II Traffic/Intersection Operations One way/reversible lanes major evacuation ro utes (RS&H RePQrt) Preset evacuation mode signal operating plans at critical intersections Mast arm vs. sp a n wire i nstallatioos Manual signal control at critical intersections Training program for manual traffic control by volunteers, civic groups etc. at minor intersections to allow law enforcement officials t o concentrate on critical i ntersections and inciden t management Specific consideration of maintenance of traffic at construction locations during hurricane season, including contingency plans to expedite preparation of such locations for an evacuation scenario (on short notice) V Identification of design standards for major evacuation routes Signal installatio ns (e .g., mast arm vs. span wire control box elevation) Sign-special mounting poles Clear zones on shou ld ers; no major trees, etc. Utility poles (e g., concret e vs. wood, row1d vs. square) Measures to spread evacuation start t imes to minimize que ue (Ed's graphs) ...J Integration of real-time traffic conditions data for use by emergency management officials V Survey of selected emergency management directors on perceived effectiveness of various operational measures Shelter Stock Needs of auto less population Needs of homebouttd res id cnts. nursing homes, etc. Identification of additional shelter locations to decrease travel time for evacuees Seek cooperation from major employers (private and public sector) for sheltering of employees and their families (Dan Trescott's study SWFRPC) Review land use codes for developer contributions to shelter stock (as in Southwest Florida in place sheltering education programs, contribut ion toward improvement of potential shelter location to make them inhabitable) Impact Fee/All Haz.ards Tax for retrofining schools, etc. for sheltering capabilities S tud y potential of widespread vertical evacuation to decrease number of mandatory evacuees (like 9J-2.0257 Special Hurricane Preparedness District) Hotel/motel vertical evacuation Further measures to reduce VMT during an evacuation Police powers to assign residents to shelters

PAGE 124

Possible Operational Measures for Improving Hurricane Evacuations Traffi c/In terse ction Operations o One way/reversib l e l anes major evacuation routes. o Preset evacuation mode s i gnal operating plans at critical intersections o Manual signal control at critical intersections. o Training program for manual traffi c control by volunteers, civic groups, etc at minor intersections to all o w law enforcement officials to concentrate on critical i n t e rsections and in cideot management. o Specific cons id eration of maintenance of traffic at constntction locations during hurricane season inc l uding contingency plans to expedite preparation o f such locations for an evacuation scenario (on short notice) She lte r Stock o Identification of additional shelter locations to decrease travel time for evacuees. o Seek cooperation from major employers (private and public sector) for sheltering of employees and their families. o Review land use codes for developer contributions to shelter stock (as in Southwest Florida -in place sheltering, education programs, contribution toward improvement of potential shelter location to make them inhabitable). o Impact Fee/All Hazards Tax for retrofitting schools, etc. for sheltering capabilities. o Study vertical evacuation potential to decrease number of mandatory evacuees. Education/Publ ic Informa tion/Public Service Announcements o Education programs/media campaigns to enco u rage early evacuation, in advance of evacuation orders. o Educat ion to ensure public's know l edge of their respective evacuation zone and the ramifications of tbeir zone in a hurricane event. Tbis i ncludes knowing wben to stay at home.

PAGE 125

.51, (Vi) .. .(>.a s(j 3 o, 6Vt> r

PAGE 127

Possible hurricane evacuation measures: Reversible roadways Gary gave us a report on this done by RS&H. Manual traffic contwl Mast arm vs span wire Special design standards on major evacuation routes: Signal installation Si gn standards-specia l mounting poles Clear zones--no major trees, etc. Utility pole standards S houlders Measures to spread e vacuation to minimize queue-Ed's graphs Traffic condi t ions data to EMS people Autoless people Homebound, nursing homes etc. Pets Shelter poli cies--trying to minimize VMT Public shelters--police powers to assign people? Friends/re lat ives--Formalize affinity groups Sister communities Sister churches Booster clubs Businesses Hotel/motel LU actions to disc ourage development in evacuation areas. Flood in suranc e policies


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader nmm 22 Ka 4500
controlfield tag 008 s1997 flu|||| |||||| eng
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00156
040
FHM
0 245
Hurricane evacuation traffic analysis and operational measures :
b interim technical report /
c prepared by Douglas P. Zaragoza, Edward A. Mierzejewski, Mark W. Burris, Vikash Palisetti.
260
Tampa, Fla. :
Center for Urban Transportation Research, College of Engineering, University of South Florida,
1997.
500
"May 1997."
Study conducted on behalf of the Florida Dept. of Transportation.
650
Evacuation of civilians
z Florida.
Hurricane protection
Florida.
Hurricanes
Florida.
Traffic surveys
Florida.
1 700
Zaragoza, Douglas P.
Mierzejewski, Edward A.
Burris, Mark Whitman,
d 1970-
Palisetti, Vikash.
710
Florida.
Dept. of Transportation.
2
University of South Florida.
Center for Urban Transportation Research.
049
FHmm
773
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].
4 856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?c1.156