[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
z f ft QC 945 C83 198-1 IW regional planning council p.cx box 20e9*515 eaBt bauMwerdiH--ertcw*fbr4ds 33830 CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL HURRICANE SHELTER PLAN Prepared for Florida.Department.of Community Affairs Bureau of Disaster Preparedness By Central Florida Regional Planning Council October, 1982 The preparation of this report was primarily supported by a grant from the U.S. Office of Coastal Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdmiAistration; and the Florida Office of Coastal %J) Management, Department of Environmental Regulation through the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. Supplemental funding was provided by the Florida Department of Community Affairs. p"pe I NOAA Coastal S=s Centw Library ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Central Florida Regional Planning Council wishes to thank the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Disaster Preparedness for its guidance on this project. We also wish to thank the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council and the Withlacoochee Regional Planning Council for their cooperation and assistance. Most importantly, we wish to thank the members of the Central Florida Inland Shelter Advisory Committee (in particular, the Polk County Public Safety Division, the DeSoto County Civil Defense Department, the Hardee County Civil Defense Department, the Highlands County Civil Defense Department, the Okeechobee County Civil Defense Department, the Lakeland Area Chapter of the American Red Cross, the Ridge Area Chapter of the American Red Cross, the Lakeland Police Department andtheSchool Boards and Sheriffs Departments of DeSoto, Hardee, Highlands, Okeechobee and Polk Counties) for'their support and guidance. ABSTRACT Title: Central Florida Regional Hurricane Shelter Plan Publisher and Author: Central Florida Regional Planning Council Date of Publication: Octobert 1982 Planning Agency: Central Florida Regional Planning Council Source of Copi es: Central Florida Regional Planning Council Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Disaster Preparedness Polk County Public Safety Division DeSoto County Civil Defense Department Hardee County Civil Defense Department Highlands County Civil Defense Department Okeechobee County Civil Defense Department Lakeland Chapter, American Red Cross Ridge Chapter, American Red Cross Nwnber of pages: 260 Abstract: The Central Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan is designed to provide multi-county data on coastal and inland evacuation and sheltering demands under various hurricane scenarios. It is also designed to be part of a coordinated state- wide hurricane evacuation and shelter plan having the goal of minimizing the loss of life and property during a major hurricane. V CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL Gene Bigbie Carrie Oldham chairman Vice.Chairwoman DESOTO HARDEE Eddie Roan Sam Rawls Wayne Hasty George Heine Charles Harrison Lawrence Roberts Glen Sutphin Harry Lampe HIGHLANDS Gene Bigbie, Thelma Pyle Mary Ellen Ward William Stephenson OKEECHOBEE POLK Charles Harvey Ernie Caldwell Dowling Watford Sam Robinson Jack Williamson Carrie Oldham .Clayton White James Austin Russell Swain Merle Bishop CFRPC STAFF James Q. Duane Executive Director Glen McLendon Administrative Director Nick Stasko Kathryn Hall Lisa Cochran Marcia L. Long Karen Cumber William F. Miller D. Jeffrey Dobson Jeffrey Spence Vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o . .. . . . . . . . V CENTRAL FLORIDA.REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL STAFF . . . . . . . vi LIST OF TABLES . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . &X LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi 1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II. OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 A. Study and Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 B. Work Tasks . . . . . . . . . . I. . . . . . . . . . 3 III. HURRICANE EVACUATION ORGANIZATION AND AUTHORITY . . . . 4 A. National Weather Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. National Hurricane Center . . . . . . . . 4 2. Local Weather Service Offices . . . . . . . . o 5 B. State of Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1. The Governor. o . . . . . . . . . 6 2. Bureau of Disa; ter Preparedness o 6 C. Local Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1. Elected 0 fficials . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . 6 2. County Disaster Preparedness Agencies . . . . . 7 3.. Municipal Disaster Preparedness Agencies . . . . 7 4. Local Government Departments . . . . . . . . . . 7 D. American Red Cross . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 E. Coordination of Government Action in Emergency. 7 Evacuation Decisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Framework for Inter-regional Coordination Vii TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page IV. METHODOLOGY, BACKGROUND, AND RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . . 10 A. Coastal Evacuation and Demand for Shelter . . . . . . 10 1. Behavioral Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2. Conversion of Population to Number of Vehicles . 13 3. Regional.Traffic/Population Assignments . . . . . 13 B. Hurricane Hazards and Vulnerable Populations . . . . 14 C. Central Florida Shelter Facilities . . . . . . . . . 30 D. Shelter Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 E. Alternate Public Shelters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 V. INTER-REGIONAL EVACUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 VI. INTRA-REGIONAL EVACUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 VII. SHELTER CHECKPOINTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 VIII. COORDINATION . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 IX. RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Regional Evacuation Scenario Summaries . . . . . . . 15 2. Summary of Highways to be.used in Interregional Evacuation . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 27 3. Populations.Vulnerable to Hurricanes in Central Florida - 1980 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 4. Primary Shelters Central Florida Region . . . . . . . 33 5. Public Shelter Demand/Adequacy . . . . o . . . . . . 61 6. Alternate Shelters Central Florida Region . . . . . . 63 7. Evacuation Zones . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . 97 ix LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Framework For Inter-Regional Evacuation . . . . . . . 9 2. Tracks of Regional Scenarios, Three, Five, & Twelve. 12 3. Regional Scenario Three . . . . . . . . . . . . . . POCKET A 4. Regional Scenario Five . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . POCKET A 5. Regional Scenario Twelve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . POCKET A 6. Evacuation Time Concept . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 92 7. Road Network,, Central Florida Region, Evacuation Zones/Shelters/Check Points . . . . . . . . . . . . POCKET B .8. DeSoto County - Evacuation Zones/Shelters/ Check Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . POCKET B 9. Hardee County - Evacuation Zones/Shelters/ Check Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . POCKET B 10. Okeechobee County - Evacuation Zones/Shelters/ Check Points . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . ... POCKET B Ila. Highlands County - Evacuation Zones/Shelters/ Check Points, Northern Portion . . . . . . . . . . POCKET B llb. Highlands County - Evacuation Zones/Shelters/ Check Points, Southern Portion . . . . . . . . . . POCKET B 12a. Polk County - Evacuation Zones/Shelters/Check Points, Western Portion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . POCKET C 12b. Polk County - Evacuation Zones/Shelters/Check Points, Eastern Portion ... . . . . . . . . . . . . POCKET C 12c. City of Lakeland Shelters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . POCKET C 12d. City of Winter Haven Shelters . . . . . . . . . . . . POCKET C LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page A. Tracks of Hurricanes Passing Within 100 Nautical Miles of Tampa Bay 1886 - 1979 . . . . . . . . . A-1 B. Saffir/Simpson Hurricane Scale . . . . . . ... . . B-1 C. Report on Expected Coastal Demand for Inland Shelter Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-1 D. Tracks of Hurricane Donna Across Florida, September, 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D-1 E. Behavioral Survey Analysis and Report . . . . . . E-1 F. Examples of Letters to Owners of Alternate Shelters F-I G. Central Florida Inland Shelter Advisory Committee Membership, October, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . G-1 Xi Regional Planning Councils of Flofida' -- - -- - - Nassau ashingtors adk*n Calhoun ID ?'Libeft r Wakulla'----4 T L -4 lumbi Ulf kSuwannee Clav on un !413 to lwavet@\---" to . Sladfo Alachua St. st; Lchr Putnam Johns Fiagle, REGIONAL !M-0" P ANN,.G PLANNING MEMBER volusis L DISTRICTS COUNTIES r COUNCILS j 5 C.hus Lake'% West Florida Escambia Santa Rosa RPC Okaloosa Walton Bay an;io Hefn Orange Calhoun Leon 6. Apslachee Franklin Liberty Pasco - - - - - - - - I RPC Gadsden Wakulls olk Osceola Jackson Gulf 7- Holmes Washington Alachua Lafayette P.nellas Bradford Madison 8 7 North Central Col bia. Suwannee River- Florida RPC Harnuimitors Taylor Manal- ;a-tcle-e- -H,qhla.d t6keechobee St. Lucie Union Baker Nassau DeSoio Northeast Clay Putnam Cie$ .11.17 Florida RPC Duval St. Johns Chado Flagler Palm Beach Withlacoochee Citrus Marion 10 Hernando Sumter RPC Levy Broward Brevard Osceola E I Central Lake Seminole Flosrida RPC 6 Orange Dade Monroe DeSoto Okeechobee Central Florida Ha rdee Polk RPC 7 Hi;Iands Tampa Say Hillsborough Pasco RPC 8 Manatee Pinellas VOW on Southwest Charlotte Hendry Collier Lee Florida RPC 9 -Glades Sarasota Effective January, 1981 Treasure Coast Indian River Palm Reach RPC- 10 Martin St. Lucie Distributed by: Substate Program Development Office Department of Veteran and Community Affairs I say av South Florida Brow rd Monroe RPC Dade (904) 488-0410 xiii INTRODUCTION The State of Florida has always been vulnerable to the destructive forces of hurricanes.1 The.Gulf coast of the State has been particularly suscept- ible to damage from hurricanes due to the relatively shallow waters of , the Gulf of Mexico, and the very low elevations of the Gulf coastline. These elevations are as low as 20 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL) 20-25 miles in- land from the coast (as in Collier County). With the tremendous growth of Florida's population over the last thirty years, the.potential for loss of life and property has also increased dramatically. While the population most vulnerable to major hurricanes in the Gulf is obviously that along the coast, a substantial portion of the population of inland counties is also vulnerable. As the population of the State increases, the need for realistic hurricane evacuation and sheltering plans becomes more acute; not only for coastal areas, but for inland areas as well. Two coastal hurricane evacuation plans have been completed as of this writing. One covers the six-county Southwest Florida planning region of 2 Hendry, Glades, Collier, Lee, Charlotte, and Sarasota Counties . The other covers the four-county 3Tampa Bay planning region of Hillsborough, Manatee, Pasco and Pinellas Counties. These detailed plans illustrate the large areas of the Gulf coast which are vulnerable to the wind, flooding, and storm surges of a major hurricane. They identify the number and location of people in each county of the respective planning regions which would need to evac- uate prior to eye landfall of hurricanes of differing characteristics. They identify the number of evacuees which would seek shelter outside the regions. They identify the routes which would be used by evacuees to reach areas of safety. They summarize behavioral surveys which indicate the tendencies of people in a hurricane situation. Most importantly, however, these plans have, for the first time, quantifiedthe time required to safely evacuate vulnerable coastal areas prior to eye landfall of hurricanes of different paths and intensities. This "evacuation time" is the sum of the time it takes to move the vulnerable population from their homes to their destinations and the time prior to eye landfall when roads become inundated or when sus- tained gale-force winds begin. It is , in several cases, much greater than the amount of time (12 hours) during which the National Weather Service can accurately predict the eye landfall of a hurricane. Lengthly evacuation times (up to 1731 hours, depending on the strength and path of the storm), mean that evacuation orders must be issued earlier in relation to eye land- fall, as the Tampa Bay study points out.4 As the coastal population grows, so must the coastal evacuation times. Therefore, the Tampa Bay study asserts, there will be instances when evacuations will be ordered for areas which ultimately will be spared by lAppendix A, Tracks of Hurricanes passing within 100 nautical miles of Tampa Bay 2Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council, November, 1981. 3Tampa Bay Region, Florida, Hurricane Evacuation Plan Technical Dat a Report, Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, June, 1981. 4Ibidp p. 2 a hurricane which has changed course. "The.'crying wolf' situation is one that must now be accepted as a necessary precaution for areas of intensive coastal residential development," because more accurate hurricane for casting by the National Weather Service is unlikely in the forseeable future.9' The implications of long evacuation times and the "cry wolf! situation extend beyond the coastal counties. ' Hurricane Donna was6the last major hurricane to-directly affect the Central Florida Region. Because of the growth and development of Central Florida during the last 20 years, many communities and local officials may not be aware of the potential impact a landfalling or parallelling storm in the Gulf will have on their emergency response capabilities. This report will give local officials specific information with which they can update their local plans as they relate to multi-county hurricane evacuation scenarios. OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE The objective of this plan is to provide local elected officials, disaster preparedness and law enforcement agencies with information which will be used to prevent.or reduce the loss of life and property during a majqr hurricane. This information, presented in quantified terms, will reduce the speculation and guesswork which has predominated in hurricane evacuation and sheltering plans-_*@l No 'plan.. can predict the future with 100% certainty, however, especially when natural disasters and human nature must be considerei In fact, this plan is based on several assumptions made necessary because of a fortunate lack of major hurricane activity in this area in the recent past. (These assumptions will be noted at appropriate points in the text.) This plan, however, is based upon the best available data as well as accurate first-hand research. This plan is regional, or multi-county in scope. This is a relatively innovative approach to hurricane planning, as opposed to much of the planning of the past which has focused on local or county-wide responses to a hurricane emergency. Obviously, major hurricanes do not damage,one or two square city blocks, one or two square acres, or even one or two square miles. They can cause serious destruction in several counties or several states, as history has demonstrated many times. The State of Florida, recognizing its vulnerability and the multi-county impacts of major hurricanes, contracted with three regional planning councils (Central Florida, East Central Florida, and Withlacoochee) to draft interrelated inland shelter plans which address impacts such as the inter-regional evacuation of thousandi of people, One purpose of this plan, then, is to show local officials the "big picture" of several hurricane scenarios and outline-to them the impli- cations for their jurisdictions of a major landfalling or parallelling 5Ibid, p.2 6 Donna was classified as a Category 3 hurricane on the Saffir/Simpson Scale as it passed over Central Florida. 2 hurricane. This plan will not provide detailed local information such as the intersections at which police officers should be deployed. It will, however, provide specific information from which local officials may develop detailed plans. A. Study Area The Central Florida Region consists of five land-locked counties (DeSoto, Hardee, Highlands, Okeechobee, and Polk) covering an area of over 4,900 square miles. With the exception of the Lakeland- Winter Haven (Polk County) urban area, the region is rural with approximately 67% of the land in agricultural holdings. The 1980 population of each county and the percent increase in population from 1970-1980 are as follows: DeSoto: 19,039/45.8 Hardee: 19,379/30.2 Highlands: 47,526/61.1 Okeechobee: 20,264/80.4 Polk: 321,652/40.8 The topographic features of the Central Florida Region exhibit much the same pattern as the entire State of Florida. The four basic land formations in the region are highlands, ridges, intermediate plains, and lowlands. The highlands areas are primarily located in the northern section of the region: in Polk County, northern Highlands, and Hardee Counties. Ridge areas are scattered throughout Polk County through the western section of Highlands County. Inter- mediate plains cover the southern areas of the region. Lowlands areas are found in the northwest tip of Polk, the southwest portion of DeSoto and the northeast section of Okeechobee County. Major floodplains exist along the Peace River (extending from Lake Hancock north of Bartow in Polk County to Charlotte Harbor near southeast DeSoto County) and its tributaries of Saddle Creek, Peace Creek Canal, Bowlegs Creek and Payne Creek. Other major f1bodplains exist along the Kissimmee River,in the Green Swamp of northern Polk County, in a large portion of Okeechobee County, and in the more densely populated areas around lakes in the region. B. Work Tasks The major tasks accomplished during the ten (10) month study period are as follows: 1. Identification of potential number of inland residents that may require shelter in the event a Category 3, 4, or 5 storm strikes or parallels the lower or central Gulf coast of Florida. 2. Inventory of designated inland county public shelters, and analysis of shelter capacity. 3 3. Determination of the feasibility ofusing current public shelters in relation to. their,lo-cation', elevation, potential wind hazards, and potential flood hazards. 4. A statistically significant investigation of behavioral tendencies of potential inland county evacuees. 5. Dete@:mination of additional shelter space needed to house coastal evacuees from the Southwest Florida and Tampa Bay planning regions. 6. Determination of intra and inter-regional evacuation routes and shelter assignments. 7. Identification of shelter checkpoint sites. 8. Development of an institutional framework for a coordinated inter- regional evacuation. 9. Establishment of a regional disaster preparedness committee. Again, in ke eping with the contractural requirements of this study, and to retain a measure of continuity with existing and ongoing regional hurricane evacuation and sheltering plans, this report is not intended to serve as the detailed operations plan for each unit of local govern- ment in the region. The implementation of any evacuation plan is a local function. Therefore, the actual deployment and assignment of manpower and equipment to carry out the evacuation is best planned for at the local level. However, this report-sets forth the types and magnitude of activities that must be carried out to pr 'event large scale loss of life. The data provided by this report will enable the local governments of the region to draft specific operating procedures for the relocation of their vulnerable populations. This study does not address hurricane recovery or the direct protection of personal and real property. HURRICANE EVACUATION ORGANIZATION AND AUTHORITY The warning and response functions associated with hurricane evacuation are carried out by several entities at the Federal, State, and local levels. A.. National Weather Service There are two major elements of the National Weather Service directly involved in the hurricane evacuation process. These-are the National Hurricane Center and the Local Weather Service Offices. 1. National Hurricane Center The need for hurricane evacuation is determined from a warning system that originates from the detection and monitoring of tropical cyclone activity by the National Hurricane Center (NHC) of the National Weather Service. The NHC, located in Miami, Florida identifies such activity as a tropical depression and monitors its development into 4 a tropical storm. At this point, the disturbance is named. As the tropical storm intensifies and the maximum sustained surface winds exceed 74 miles per hour, the disturbance becomes a hurricane. Throughout the monitoring of tropical cyclones, the NHC forwards information on the characteristics of the disturbance to a network of local National Weather Service offices throughout the country. This information is normally channeled in the form of advisory bulletins to the local offices at six-hour intervals. These advisory bulletins include the location and characteristics of the storm as well as forecasts as to what can be expected over the next 12 to 24 hours. As the hurricane comes closer to striking land (hurricane landfall), the six-hour interval advisories may be supplemented by intermediate advisories every three hours or even less if needed. The advisory bulletins and other information to local preparedness agencies also include any evacuation recommendations by the NHC. In addition, local and state disaster preparedness agencies are provided restricted information on the hazard potential of the hurricane as the storm moves within 72 hours of projected landfall. This information is channeled over the National Warning System (NAWAS) and normally catp-gorizes the hurricane on a general des---' criptive scale of hazard potential. This scale, the Saffir/Simpson Hurricane Scale, defines the "category" of the hurricane based on several measurable characteristics or parameters of the storm. The scale appears as Appendix B. 2. Local Weather Service Offices As the NHC forwards.information on the hurricane to local National Weather Service offices, each office records and interprets the information relative to how it could be expected to affect its area of responsibility. DeSoto, Hardee, Highlands and Polk Counties fall under the responsibility of the Tampa Area Office of the National Weather Service located in Ruskin, Florida. Okeechobee County,falls under the Palm Beach office of the National Weather Service. As the hurricane approaches a particular coastal area (e.g., the Tampa Bay Region), the local weather service office adds local statements to the advisory bulletins from the NHC - These local statements are forwarded via NAWAS to those county disaster preparedness agency communications centers included in the area addressed by the advisory bulletin. Local statements include recommended.precautionary.and response actions to be carried out and estimated times by when they should be completed. They include existing local conditions of winds and tides as mon- itored by local wind and tide gage systems. Local statements from the Tampa area office also include a description of any areas recommended to be evacuated from the approaching hurricane. Currently, such general descriptions entail the listing of estimated distances in blocks or miles from water bodies of land areas that should be evacuated. These areas are defined entirely by land elevations. Currently, Tampa office local statements would include one of two general lists of areas to be evacuated: (1) areas vulnerable to a 10 foot storm surge, or (2) areas vulnerable to a 20 foot storm surge. 5 B. State of Florida The two major entities at.the state level directly involved in the hurricane evacuation process are the Governor and the Florida Bureau of Disaster Preparedness. 1. The Governor Authority to order'evacuation from approaching hurricane is conferred to the Governor by Chapter 252.36 (5) (e); stating that the Governor may: "Direct and compel the evacuation of all or part of the population from-any stricken or threatened area within the state if he deems this action necessary for the preservation of life or other disaster mitigation, response, or recovery.11 2. Bureau of Disaster Preparedness The Bureau of Disaster Preparedness under the Division of Public Safety Planning and Assistance, Department of Community AffaiXs is responsible for directing and coordinating disaster mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery activities of the State. Included in the many duties under these activities is the power to make official recommendations for prevention and preparedness measures designed to eliminate or reduce disasters or their impact. Consequently, the Bureau performs the primary staff function to the Governor during disaster emergencies and recommends to the Governor the nature, extent, and timing of the issuance of the evacuation order. The Bureau is linked to the NHC and local weather service offices by communications channels including NAWAS. In addition, emergency communications with local governments are maintained over NAWAS and through a network of four area coordination offices throughout the State. C. Local Government At the local level; elected officials, local disaster preparedness agencies, and other departments of local government all become involved in the evacuation process. 1. Elected Officials The same power to order evacuation from an approaching hurricane conferred upon the Governor under Chapter 252.36 (5) (e), Florid Statutes, is also delegated to the governing body of each political subdivision of the State by 252.32 and Executive Order 80-29. The term 11political subdivision" is defined under the Statute as "any county or municipality created pursuant to law." Therefore, the chief elected official of both counties (chairman of the board of commissioners) and municipalities (mayor) is delegated the power to order the evacuation from an approaching hurricane. 6 2. County Disaster Preparedness Agencies Just as the Bureau of Disaster Preparedness recommends emergency measures to be ordered by the Governor, county disaster pr epared- ness agencies serve the same staff function to the governing body of the political subdivision. Hurricane evacuation orders are normally issued by the-chief elected official based on the recommendation of the director of the county disaster preparedness department, or previously established disaster advisory council/ committee. Such recommendations should be based on previously formulated evacuation plans. 3. Municipal Disaster Preparedness Agencies Although not mandated by Chapter 252, Florida Statutes, as counties are, municipalities are authorized by the same Statute to create and establish a local disaster agency for disaster operations and planning. Just as with counties, the decision of the governing body to order an evacuation normally results from a recommendation from the municipal disaster preparedness director or disaster advisory council. 4. Local Government Departments The actual execution of an evacuation requires local resources normally based in several key county or city departments. These key departments include law enforcement, fire, public works, utilities, health services, and traffic engineering. Disaster preparedness or response activities of the manpower and equipment of such departments are coordinated by the local disaster prepared- ness department upon declaration of emergency conditions. Although normally directing a departmental function in day-to-day govern- mental operations, the disaster preparedness director automatically assumes the direct line function of primary advisor to the governing body for disaster activities. D. American Red Cross The local chapters of the American Red Cross are responsible for the overall management of public natural disaster shelters as designated by local government. This includes the provision of trained staff, food supplies, and registration procedures throughout the duration of the shelter stay. Such responsibility has been delegated by Con- gressional charter under Public Law 58-4. E. Coordination of Government Action In Emergency Evacuation Decisions The descriptions of organizational authorities in the preceding sections of this chapter show that the decision-making and evacuation ordering power has been conferred or delegated to three different levels of government; state, county and municipal. Further, the advisory authority of the National Weather Service at the Federal level is an essential component of the warning and evacuation procedure. Such emergency powers at the various levels of government.are innate 7 - responsibilities of the particular jurisdictions to safeguard the lives of their citizens. However, this diffusion of the authority to issue an evacuation order demands firm interjurisdictional coordination. , An uncoordinated evacuation order could have a devastating impact on the safety of not only the citizens of the jurisdiction issuing the order, but also the surrounding jurisdictions of an urban region. Chapter-252, Florida Statutes, the Governor's Executive Order 80-29, and the Florida Natural Disaster Plan empower any local political subdivision (county or municipality) to order an evacuation of its endangered population without prior order by other levels of govern- ment. Therefore, in the event that the state fails to order evacuation as early as required by specific local conditions, a county may order evacuation within its physical boundaries. However, evacuation orders of higher levels of government are binding upon lower levels of govern- ment. For example, a State order is binding upon counties and a county order is binding upon a municipality. There is an obvious need for coordination of emergency action with other levels of government and private agencies to ensure the avail- ability of adequate resources to support evacuation. As long as,the evacuation decision-making forum includes all relevant jurisdictional entities communicating while analyzing the approaching hurricane hazard from a common data base, negative impacts of an evacuation should be minimized.6 1. Framework for Inter-regional Coordination Because of the great strain that will be placed on manpower and resources in the Central Florida Region by an evacuation of coastal areas, it is imperative that Civil Defense and law enforcement agencies in Central Florida be informed about a coastal evacuation. The framework for this notification process centers on the Bureau of Disaster Preparedness Area Coordinators. (The Central Florida Region falls under two Bureau of Disaster Preparedness Areas., the South Florida Area, which covers DeSoto, Highlands and Okeechobee Counties; and the Central Florida Area which covers Hardee and Polk Counties.) The timely relay of a message regarding coastal evacuation to Central Florida counties is essential for these inland counties to initiate plans for the reception or pass-through of evacuees. Inland Civil Defense directors, upon being notified by the Area Coordinators, will inform their county commission chairmen, their county law enforcement agencies, the Red Cross, and other applicable departments and agencies about the impending coastal evacuation. During evening hours, or other periods when Civil Defense directors are off duty, the county sheriff would be notified firsta The sheriff would then notify the Civil Defense director who will notify the commission chairmen, etc. Concurrent to the notification process, all intra-county emergency activities will take place per each county's emergency operations plan. Figure I illustrates the proposed institutional framework. 6The preceding outline on Evacuation Organization and Authority is reprinted from the,Tampa Bay Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan, pp. 7-11. 8 FIGURE FRAMEWORK FOR INTER-REGIONAL EVACUATION Tampa Bay Region Southwest Fla. Region Central Florida Region County Commission Chairman Bureau of Disaster Preparedness Area Coordinators vil Defense Inland County Other Central East Central Fla. Director Civil Defense Florida Counties & Treasure Coast Director Counties FoCunty Commission Law Red hairman Enforcement Cross/Shelter Management Network Activate EOC Begin Evacuation Activate EOC Begin intra-county Activities IV. NETHODOLOGY, BACKGROUND, AND RESEARCH The formulation of a comprehensive and quantitative hurricane evacuation plan requires extensive data collection and analysis. Because a hurricane is created by nature and responded to by man, the unpredict- ability of both forces must be addressed through various assumptions when planning for-an evacuation. This planning effort includes several such assumptions. However, attempts were made to quantify as many of the factors contributing to hurricane-vulnerability as possible with available resources. The methods by which the factors were quantified and brought together as the findings of the study, Lar-e described below. Included are the identi- fication of the sources of existing data, and data analysis procedures. A. Coastal Evacuation and Demand for Shelter Prior to the eye landfall of a major hurricane (or the close approx- imation to the coast of a major parallelling hurricane), the Central Florida Region will receive thousands of coastal residents who have been ordered to evacuate the most vulnerable coastal areas. To accurately estimate this probable demand, estimates of the potential number, location and probable destinations of evacuees in the South- west Florida and Tampa Bay regions were taken from the evacuation plans completed in those respective regions. These data were then augmented by information provided by the Bureau of Disaster Preparedness, which outlined the number of vehicles and vehicle occupancy rates per evacuation route entering the Central Florida Region for each of 12 hurricane scenarios.7 (Appendix C) The 12 scenarios deve-loped by the Bureau represent possible hurricanes of varying paths and intensities in the Gulf of Mexico. "Regional Scenarios" 1 through 4 represent worst-case (Saffir/Simpson Category 5) hurricanes making landfall in Pasco, Pinellas, Hillsborough, and Manatee Counties respectively (the Tampa Bay Region). Regional Scenarios 5. 6V and 7 represent worst-case landfalling hurricanes in Sarasota, Char- lotte and Lee/Collier Counties. Scenarios 8 through 11 represent less- than-worst-case landfalling hurricanes in Southwest Florida, and Scenario 12 represents a worst-case parallel storm. Each of the 12 regional scenarios generates differing numbers of evacuees in each of the coastal counties. Thus, aside from differing regional weather conditions in each scenario,, the demand on the regional road network in Central Florida and the demand on shelters in the Central Florida Region will be different in each scenario. In other words, just as Regional Scenario 3 (a worst-case hurricane striking Hillsborough County),will create the most severe conditions in Hillsborough County 7Report on the Expected Coastal Demand for Inland County Shelter Facilities from the Tampa Bay and Southwest Florida Planning Regions, Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Disaster Preparedness, 1982. 10 and less severe conditions in adjacent coastal counties, Scenario 3 will, in the Central Florida Region, create the most severe demand on roads and shelters in Polk County and less severe conditions on roads and shelters in the region's other four counties. On the other hand, a worst-case hurricane striking any Southwest Florida County (Scenarios -5 through 7) will affect the Tampa Bay area very little, while severely taxing the entire Central Florida road and shelter network. This latter condition is due to the fact that the more rural counties of DeSoto and Hardee (which would receive coastal evacuees from Southwest Florida first) would be unable to shelter the majority of those evacuees and would have to pass them through to other counties in the region. For the purposes of efficiently completing this plan, and as a matter of coordination with the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council which is conducting a similar study, the CFRPC staff has selected three possible worst case hurricane scenarios for detailed analysis. The three scenarios selected are: 1) A worst-case storm making landfall in Hillsborough County; 2) A worst-case storm making landfall in Sara- sota County; and 3) The worst-case parallel storm.(See Figure 2) These scenarios were chosen because, in terms of vehicles and evacuees generated, they represent the worst case landfalling storms in the Tampa Bay and Southwest planning regions, and the worst of possible parallel storms, From summaries of the number of potential coas tal evacuees in each regional scenario (Table 1), and the summary of routes to be used by evacuees entering the Central Florida Region (Table 2), one can see that, depending upon the storm track, the number of v ehicles and evacuees, as well as the evacuation routes used, will vary signi- ficantly. It is important to note the effect of a major hurricane striking the lower Gulf coast, causing a large number of coastal evacuees to directly enter DeSoto and Hardee Counties and to indirectly enter Polk and Highlands Counties. It is also important to note the effects of a landfalling storm in the Tampa Bay region as well as a parallel storm. A landfalling hurricane in the Tampa area will cause a large number of evacuees to enter Polk County. A worst-case parallel storm will generate evacuees from Tampa Bay to the lower Gulf Coast. It is assumed, however, that a parallel storm will not generate evacuees from this region, as the wind and rain fields will not extend far enough inland to cause significant damage. The three selected-scenarios as they affect Central Florida in terms of inter-regional evacuation routes, and the number of vehicles and persons evacuating, are illustrated in Figures 3,4, and 5. With regard to the numbers of vehicles, evacuees, and evacuation routes entering this region, the following summarizes the assumptions made in the Bureau report on shelter demand: 1. Behavioral Assumptions (a) Of the population evacuating out of the Tampa Bay Region, the following may be seeking shelter in interior counties: Pasco County, 49.5%, Pinellas County, 33.8% Hillsborough County, 38.6%; Manatee County, 34.0% (Source: Tampa Bay Hurricane Evacuation Plan Technical Data Report). A L A B A M A G E 0 R G I A HOLMES F7 SANTA r7 @r Ili-l- I- _.e,- IJACKSON ROSA i P ko I SDEN -7 .,o,N-./ L. GAD @HAMILTON \. 11 0+ jCALHOUN, - MADISON DUVAL If LEON I e f SAY i I* "T! BAKER r- 4UWANNEEj WAKULLA LIBERTY TAYLOR /UNION/ CLAY ST. JOHN$ GULF FRANKLIN A 0 ALACHUA JPUTNAM DIXIE -n- FLAGLER J LEVY MARION VOWSIA FIGURE 2 CITRUS\ LAKE TRACKS OF REGIONAL SCENARIOS9 LSEMINOLE\ THREE, FIVE & TWELVE DD.- I ! MER14AN ORANGE PASCO -------- OSCEOLA POLK !BREVARD A rZAN' lu RIVER bb ...... MANATEE HARDEE ------- !ST LUCIE i HIGHLANDS DESOTO . i r-1. 0 SA.A.-TAi I r ' MARTIN ...... ........ ... T 0 CHARLOTTE i GLADES ft ki LEE HENDRY PAL. BEACH ------------ CIO OROWARD COLLIER .2 co MONROE DADIE Prepared By The CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL S3 PLANNING COUNCIL October 1982 12 (b) 34% of the Southwest Florida Planning Region's population effected by hurricanes will evacuate out of the region (Source: Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan). (c) 45% of the Southwest Florida Planning Region's population effected by hurricanes,@@illseek shelter (Source: South- west Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan). (d) That portion of the population seeking shelter who cannot find it due to an inadequate supply within their county will evacuate out of both Tampa Bay and ...Southwest Florida Planning Regions. 2. Conversion of Population to Number of Vehicles (a) Vehicle occupancy rates for the Tampa Bay Region were derived from 1970 Census Data updated to 1979 data (Source: Tables G-11 through G-15, Tampa Bay Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan Technical Data Report). (b) Vehicle occupancy rates for the Southwest Florida Region were derived by dividing the number of people evacuating out of each county by the number of vehicles to be used in such an evacuation (Source: Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan). 3. Regional Traffic/Population Assignments (a) Traffic assignments on routes out of the Tampa Bay Region were derived from Appendix G, Tampa Bay Regional- Hurricane Evacuation Plan Technical Data Report. (b) Traffic Assignments on routes out of the Southwest Florida Region were based on the routes' abilities to handle traffic based on their roadway capacities. In this manner, maximum use of the regional transportation networks is achieved while providing the shortest evacuation time possible. . That portion of a county's population evacuating on 1-75 would remain on that route until they leave the region. . Evacuees using U.S. 41 would gravitate towards 1-75 as they leave their respective counties. . Evacuees from Collier, Lee, Charlotte, and Sarasota remaining on 1-75 will be routed northeast on 1-4. . Traffic entering Manatee County on U.S. 41 and U.S. 301 from the Southwest Florida Planning Region will be routed east on S.R. 70. 13 . Traffic entering Sarasota-County on U.S. 41 from Collier,, Lee and Charlotte Counties will be routed east on S.R. 72. . S.R. 765 in Lee County will not be used as an eva- cuation route by those evacuees from Collier County. o S.R. 775 in Charlotte County will not be used as an evacuation route by those evacuees from Lee and Collier Counties. . S. R. 31 in Charlotte County will be used primarily by evacuees from Lee County. The behavioral assumptions listed above were based on a telephone survey of residents of the Tampa Bay Region,,and a newspaper survey of resi- dents of the Southwest Florida Region. The main question asked in these surveys was,to paraphrase, "If you were to evacuate, what would be your destination?" By combining the percentage of those who said they would go to a public shelter and the population expected to . I evacuate out of the coastal region(s), the demand for public shelter in Central Floridawas derived. B. Hurricane Hazards and Vulnerable Populations Because of its relatively close proximity to the Gulf coast, and because of its topography, the Central Florida Region will be the area where most coastal residents who evacuate out of their region(s) will seek shelter. Moreover, depending upon a hurricane's characteristics and path, there will be evacuees from Central Florida who will be seeking public shelter as well. To determine the number of inland residents which will need to evacuate in the event of a hurricane, an analysis of the hurricane-related hazards which may threaten the lives and property of Central Florida residents was appropriate. The most destructive force of a hurricane is the "storm surge". This mound of seawater pushed ahead of a hurricane (reaching as much as 18 feet above the level of the tide) is the biggest killer of coastal residents. It is the threat of the storm surge and accompanying salt- water flooding, along with the threat of high winds, which will trigger coastal evacuations. The storm surge is obviously not a threat to Centra Florida residents. Two other hazards related to hurricanes will threaten residents of the Central Florida Region, however. These are freshwater flooding caused by heavy rain, and hurricane-force winds. 14 TABLE '1. 1 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO WORST CASE: Pasco VEHICLES/PERSONS' RECEIVING COUNTY E DESOTO HARDEE HIGHLANDS OKEECHOBEE POLK TOTAL V A C Pasco -- C 0 A U Pinellas 20477/44973 20477/44973 T N Hillsborough 14341/30005 14341/30005 Manatee 1001/2716 7613/20399 -- 6814/23115. I T Sarasota -- -- 0 Y N TOTAL 1001/2716 7613/20399 34818/74978 43432/98093 TABLE 1.2 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCE14ARIO 2 WORST CASE: Pinellas VEHICLES/PERSONS' RECEIVING COUNTY E DESOTO HARDEE' HIGHLANDS OKEECHOBEE POLK TOTAL V A C ?asco -- -- C 0 Pinellas 31104/70690 31104/70690 A U. 22461/52540 22461/52540 T N Hillsborough -- -- Manatee 1001/2716 9410/25754 -- 10411/28470 I T 0 Y Sarasota -- -- N TOTAL 1001/2716 9410/25754 53565/123230 63976/151700 TABLE 1. 3 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 3. WORST CASE: Hillsborough VEHICLES/PERSONS RECEIVING COUNTY E DESOTO HARDEE' HIGHLANDS 'k- OKEECHOBEE POLK TOTAL V A C C 0 Pasco -- A U Pinellas 31090/70690 31090/70690 T N Hillsborough -- -- 25857/58187 25857/58187 Manatee 1001/2716 7468/20110 -- 8469/22826 1 T Sarasota 11496/25291 8208/18058 19704/43349 0 Y N TOTAL 12497/28007 15676/3816'8 56947/12887 85120/195052 TABL5. 1. 4 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 4 WORST CASE: Manatee VEHICLES/PERSONS RECEIVING COUNTY E DESOTO HARDEE' HIGHLANDS OKEECHOBEE POLK TOTAL V A C .Pasco C 0 Pinellas 18210/36329 18210/36329 A U Hillsborough -- -- 15897/33214 15897/33214 T N Manatee 2145/5996 10447/28360 -- 12592/34256 I T Sarasota 27050/54100 16089/32178 43139/86278.. 0 Y N. 29195/59996 26536/60538 TOTAL 34107/69543 89838/i9OO77 co TABLE 1. 5 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 5 WORST CASE: Sarasota VEHICLES/PERSONS RECEIVING.COUNTY E DESOTO HARDEE. HIGHLANDS 'OKEECHOBEE POLK' TOTAL V A C Pasco C 0 Pinellas U U Hillsborough A N Manatee 2145/5896 10477/28360 12622/24256 T T Sarasota 27050/54100 16089/32178 -- 43139/86278 I y Charlotte 13029/23451 8417/15151 2363/4238 23089/42840 0 Lee 23596/51912 31954/70293 9203/20247 64753/142452 N Collier 2129/4470 8101/17012 1714/3599 11944/25081 Glades -- -- 259/259 301/301 560/560 Hendry -- -- TOTAL 67949/139829 75038/162994 13539/28343 301/301 156927/331467 TABLE .1. 6 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 6 WORST CASE: Charlotte VEHICLES/PERSONS RECEIVING COUNTY E DESOTO HARDEE HIGHLANDS OKEECHOBEE POLK TOTAL V A C Pasco C 0 Pinellas U U Hillsborough A N Manatee T T Sarasota 13800/30360 8208/18060 22008/48420 I Y Charlotte 13029/23451 8417/15151 -- 21446/38602 0 Lee 23596/51912 31954/70293 9203/20247 64753/142452 N Collier 3490/7330 13277/27882 2809/5899 -- 19576/411'11 Glades -- -- .259/259 301/301 560/560 Hendry TOTAL 53915/113053 61856/.131386 1227.1/26405 301/301 128343/271145 .TABLE 1. 7 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 7. WORST CASE: Lee/Collier VEHICLES/PERSONS. RECEIVING.COUNTY E DESOTO HARDEE HIGHLANDS OKEECHOBEE POLK' TOTAL V A C Pasco C 0 Pinellas U U Hillsborough A N Manatee T T Sarasota I y Charlotte 13029/32451 8417/15151 -- 21446/38602 0 Lee 23698/52202 32134/70695 9256/20363 65088/143260 N Collier 3844/7686 14639/29278 3098/6196 -- 21581/43160 Glades -- -- 259/259 3011301 560/560 Hendry TOTAL 40571/83339 55190/M124 12613/26818 301/301 108675/225582 -TABLE. 1. 8 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 8 VEHICLESjFERSONS RECEIVING COUNTY E DESOTO HARDEE HIGHLANDS OKEECHOBEE POLK'' TOTAL V A C Pasco C 0 Pinellas U U Hillsborough A N Manatee T T Sarasota 10725/24668 6379/14672 17104/39340 I Y Charlotte 4603/8746 2974/5651 7577/14397 0 Lee 10489/23076 14204/31249 4091/9000 28784/63325 N Collier 1868/3924 7108/14927 1504/3158 10480/22009 Glades -- -- .259/259 301/301 560/560 flendry -- -- TOTAL 27685/60414 30665/66499 -5854/12417 301/301 64505/139631 tQ TABLE 1. 9 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 9. VEHICLES/PERSONS RECEIVING.COUNTY E DESOTO HARDEE HIGHLANDS OKEECHOBEE POLK' TOTAL V C Pasco C 0 Pinellas U U Hillsborough A N Manatee T T Sarasota 20008/42016 11900/24990 31908/67006 I y Charlotte 4601/8746 2974/5651 7577/14397 0 Lee 10461/23015 14166/31165 24627/54180 N Collier -- -- -- Glades 259/259 301/301 560/560 Hendry -- -- TOTAL .35007 2/7 3777 29040/61806 259/259 301/301 646,72/136143 TABLE 1.10 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 10 VEHICLES/PERSONS RECEIVING COUNTY E DESOTO HARDEE HIGHLANDS OKEECHOBEE POLK TOTAL V A C Pasco C 0 Pinellas U U Hillsborough A N Manatee T T- -Sarasota I Y 'Charlotte 2677/5086 1730/3287 -- 4407/8373 0 Lee 22916/51912 31954/70293 9203/20247 64073/142452 N Collier 3490/7330 13277/27882 2809/.5899 19576/41*111 Glades -- -- 259/259 301/301 560/560 Ilendry -- -- TOTAL 29083/64328 46961/101462 1227.1/26405 301/301 88616/192496 TABLE 1. 11 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 11, VEHICLES/PERSONS RECEIVING.COUNTY E DESOTO HARDEE HIGHLANDS OKEECHOBEE POLK' TOTAL V A C Pasco C 0 Pinellas u u Hillsborough A N Manatee T T Sarasota I y Charlotte 0 Lee 5264/12107 7128/16394 12392/28501 N Collier 3843/7686 14639/29278 -- 18482/36964 Glades -- -- 259/259 259/259 Hendry TOTAL 9107/19793 21767/45672 259/259 31133/65724 un TABLE 1. 12 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 12 WORST CASE: Parallel VEHICLES/PERSONS RECEIVING COUNTY E DESOTO HARDEE HIGHLANDS OKEECHOBEE POLK'' TOTAL V A C Pasco -- -- C 0 Pinellas 16811/37762 16811/37762 U U Hillsborough 13814/28375 13814/28375 A N Manatee 1011/2716 6931/18259 -- 7942/20975 T T Sarasota 13800/30360 -- 13800/30360 I Y Charlotte 9669/17403 6250/11250 -- 15919/28653 0 Lee 23728/52202 32134/70695 9256/20363 65118/143260 N Collier 3844/7686 14639/29278 3098/6196 -- 21581/431'60 Glades -- -- 259/259 301/301 560/560 Ilendry TOTAL .52052/110367 59954/129482 12613/26818 301/@01 30625/66137 155545/333105 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF HIGHWAYS TO BE USED IN INTERREGIONAL EVACUATION Central Florida Planning Highway Number/Name From TO 1-4 Hillsborough County Polk County U.S. 92 Hillsborough County Polk County S.R. 60 Hillsborough County Polk County S.R. 574 Hillsborough County Polk County S.R. 640 Hillsborough County Polk County S.R. 674 Hillsborough County Polk County S. R. 676 Hillsborough County Polk County S.R. 62 Manatee County Hardee County S.R. 64 Manatee County Hardee County S.R. 70 Manatee County DeSoto County J-75 Sarasota County Polk County Via 1-4 U.S. 41 Sarasota County DeSoto County Via S.R. 70 U.S. 301 Sarasota County DeSoto County Via S.R. 70 S.R. 72 Sarasota County DeSoto County U.S. 17 Charlotte County DeSoto County Kings Highway Charlotte County DeSoto County S.R. 31 Charlotte County DeSoto County U.S. 27 (N) Glades County Highlands County 27 Rainfall- cannot be predicted for any given hurricane. There are no rainfall standards that may be applied to the regional hurricane scenarios developed by the Bureau,for example. As a rule of thumb, however, a hurricane can be expected to produce from 6 to 12 inches of rain. Hurricanes can be "wet" (producing much more than 12 inches in a short period of time), or "dry" (producing very little rain). With regard to heavy rainfall, most of the Central Florida Region is relatively secure from large-scale freshwater flooding. Again, the populated areas most vulnerable to flooding are along the Peace River (particularly in DeSoto County), parts of Okeechobee County, and the more densely populated areas around lakes. other less populated areas susceptible to flooding are in northern Polk County (the Green Swamp area) and along the Kissimmee River. While flooding in the Green Swamp or along the Kissimmee may not threaten many lives, flooding along the Peace River and around lakes may threaten hundreds of lives.. Flooding in any or all of the above-mentioned areas may hinder evacu- ation or transportation through those area(s). Even before the onset of flooding, rainfall will slow traffic movement on the regional road network because of poor drainage of road surfaces. This problem is especially acute on older, two-lane roads, which make up the bulk of the regional road system. There were several problems related to analyzing flood hazards in Central Florida. First, up-to-date floodplain maps and information generally were not available. Second, ascertaining the exact threat posed by flooding was difficult. Questions remain as to how high flood waters will rise in 100 year or 500 year floods. In June, 1982, DeSoto County experienced a 10 year flood which caused the evacuation of low- lying areas near the Peace River, inundated cars and other vehicles near the River,and caused at least one regional road to be closed tem- porarily (S.R. 72). According to the National Weather Service, the Central Florida Region can expect to experience a storm no stronger than a Category 3 hurricane on the Saffir/Simpson Scale (Appendix B). This is because hurricanes lose strength as they move overland, and a Category 4 or Category 5 hurricane would be expected to dissipate to a Category 3 by the time it reached this region. Obviously, the wind speed of a hurricane is easily measured and cate- gorized. Wind damage can thus be more easily predicted than flood or rain damage, as the descriptions of the categories of the Saffir/Simpson Scale in Appendix B illustrate. The only unpredictable wind hazards related to hurricanes are gusts, which can be considerably higher than the storm's sustained winds; and tornados which may be generated in or near a hurricane. Aside from severe damage to signs, utility poles, and trees (and possible road blockage as a result), other wind damage will occur. 28 Buildings of differing structural integrity will withstand hurricane force winds differently. Large, well constructed buildings will sustain little damage in a Category 3 storm. Similarly, well constructed homes will sustain minimal wind damage. The housing type which is most likely to sustain serious lif e-threatening damage is the mobile home. By .their nature, mobile homes are light weight and can be easily overturned by high winds as has been demonstrated many times in all parts of the country. Although some mobile home residents believe that they live in a relatively new unit with its required tie-downs, and that their unit will weather a hurricane, they should know that state regulations do n.ot.require the mobile home to withstand hurricane force winds. Sim- ilarly, tie-downs cannot be counted on to secure the mobile home in high winds. Moreover,- windborne debris can severely damage the most securely tied down mobile home. (Appendix D illustrates the path and intensity of Hurricane Donna, a Category 3 storm as it crossed Central Florida in September, 1960. Note the sustained wind speeds, wind gusts, rainfall amounts, and the extreme drop in barometric pressure recorded at Ft. Myers and Lakeland.) The most vulnerable populations in the Central Florida Reigon, then, have been determined to be mobile home residents and people residing in flood prone areas (Table 3). While mobile home residents can be enumerated with reasonable accuracy, people living in flood plains can only be estimated due to the lack of up to date flood maps and the absence of any previous census of these residents. The following esti- mates are relatively accurate; however, they should be considered con- servative. Residents-in-flood-plain estimates are for 100 year flood plains. Available maps for the Region do not indicate significantly larger areas for 500 year flood plains, so it is assumed that the pop- ulation in a 500 year flood plain is not substantially larger than that in a 100 year flood plain. Regarding differences in storm magnitude, both of these vulnerable pop- ulations in totality would be evacuated prior to the onset of gale- force-winds. Since the onset of gale-force winds generally approximates the onset of freshwater flooding in a hurricane, both mobile home and flood plain residents would become vulnerable at the same time. There is some overlap between mobile home and flood plain residents; however, the exact number of mobile homes in flood plains is not known. Estimates of the mobile home population assume a household size of 2.2 persons and a seasonal vacancy rate of 25%. The vacancy rate was applied across the board even though vacancies vary by type of resident. That is, a retiree is likely to be a permanent resident of a county whereas a 11snowbird" is not likely to reside in the county during the hurricane season. In mobile home parks, the seasonal vacancy will vary with the tenure of its residents. Some parks experience a vacancy rate as high as 30%, and some less than 25%. 29 The estimates which follow in Table 3 were derived from several sources; the University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research (Florida Statistical Abstract, 1981), the U.S. Bureau of the Census, available flood insurance and.other flood plain maps, and various local department and agency representatives. TABLE 3 POPULATIONS VULNERABLE TO HURRICANES IN CENTRAL FLORIDA - 1980 County Mobile Home Residents* Flood Plain Residents* DeSoto 4,118 8,000 Hardee 1,892 5,000 Highlands 11,400 5,500 Okeechobee 4,660 9,000 Polk 57,900 42,000 Region 79,970 691-500 *Estimates Source: CFRPC, 1982 C. Central Florida Shelter Facilities The second task of this study (following the formation of the Central Florida Inland Shelter Advisory Committee) was to inventory the desig- nated public shelters in the five-county region. This time-consuming effort has yielded the most complete set of data on public shelters ever compiled in any of the counties. Using an inventory form similar to that developed by the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council, detailed information was gathered on each shelter's location, construction sources of power, wastew.ater and potable water facilities, and areas of safety, based on 20 and 40 square feet per person. CFRPC staff originally tried to visit each shelter to conduct an inventory but later relied on individual school principals or school board repre- sentatives, clergymen, and other building owners to complete an inventory form as best they could and return it to the staff. The accuracy of! the most important information on the inventory sheet (shelter adequacy and capacity) is thus limited by the judgement of the person who completed the inventory. While CFRPC staff has no evidence to show inaccuracies in the shelter data, Red Cross and/or Civil Defense officials may want to verify the information contained on the inventories, and as part of this process, involve a local building official to reassess each struc- turels ability to withstand hurricane forces. Several buildings desig- nated as shelters in the Region were found to be unfit for one reason or another. More than one school was found to be inadequate because it was constructed in a finger wing configuration with fully one side of each wing on the campus being glass. Moreover, these schools had rest- rooms which were separate from the wings (i.e., one must go outside to 30 another wing to use the restroom). Several of the newer schools in the Region have been designed to be dependent on air conditioning systems. These schools generally have a small number of windows (if any), and are without auxiliary power. Thus, if the power is cut off during a storm, such schools will be without lights and ventilation. It will be recommended that these schools, if used, house a minimum number of evacuees. With the exception of.about five designated shelters, auxil- iary power is unavailable to shelters. Schools in unincorporated areas generally are served by package wastewater treatment facilities. These treatment facilities obviously would be inoperable if power was cut off. Nearly all designated shelters (with the exceptions of obviously unfit buildings alluded to above) may be used to shelter evacuees in the event of a hurricane. All appear to have structurally sound shelter areas and relatively adequate parking facilities. Most shelters, however, appear to be unequipped or underequipped to provide extended meal service, communications, transportation, first aid, and again, auxiliary power. The Central Florida Regional Planning Council has found that formally trained shelter managers in' the Region are in short supply. As of October, 1982, Red Cross and Civil Defense officials in most Central Florida counties were recruiting volunteers to be trained as shelter managers. School principals are expected to participate in managerial duties at their respective schools, and CFRPC staff, in its contacts with principals in the region, have found most to have an intimate knowledge of their facilities. Staff was surprized, however, to find several principals who had a poor knowledge of their school's layout; especially areas which may be used to shelter evacuees. Several others, while being knowledgeable about their facilities, had never considered how the facilities would be used in a hurricane emergency or how they would participate in emergency activities. Because of the great strain which will be placed on disaster-response agencies during a major hurricane, "on the job training" of shelter managers or assistant mana- gers should be avoided to the greatest possible extent. The school boards, Red Cross chapters and Civil Defense officials should, at the very least, instruct principals as to exactly what will be expected of them during an emergency. Designated public shelters in each Central Florida county which were inventoried and determined to be adequate to withstand hurricane hazards are listed below in Table 4. Note the county totals at the end of each county list. Shelter locations for DeSoto, Hardee, and Okeechobee are mapped in Figures 8,9, and 10 respectfully. Shelter locations in High- lands County are mapped in Figures 11 (a) and 11 (b). Shelters in Polk County are mapped in Figures 12 (a), 12 (b), 12 (c) and 12 (d). This list of shelters should not be considered permanent and inflexible. The list will be evaluated periodically by local officials and individ- ual shelters may be added or deleted as necessary, thus changing the total shelter capacity of the individual counties and the Region. D. Shelter Usage While Table 3 illustrates the estimated number of Central Florida resi- dents who will be most vulnerable to wind and flood hazards, not all of 31 - I I I I I I I TABLE 4 i PRI14ARY SHELTERS CENTRAL FLORIDA REGION I I I I I I I I I I I M M M = = M M = @JWEWMW. M = ENWAXW& PAJWG ME StoorkRYMI NdOO%M DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER @ACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY DESOTO COUNTY Planned <j C, (V PRIMARY SHELTERS Capacity 14 J, C7 0 Q/ ?@ 0 0 @y CO @-y 20 sq.. 40 sq. Q/ V feet Cl 0 Identification feet 1. Brownville School 2 Classrooms @ 1944 194 97 x x x 0 140 x x 2. First Baptist Church Fellowship Hall N/A NIA x x N/A 500 x x x 3. DeSoto County CA Middle School Library 300 150 x x x 50 560 x x 4. DeSoto High School Gym 664 332 30.Classrooms @ 445 sq. ft. 667 333 1,331 '@65 5. West Elementary South Bldg. 11 Classrooms @ 600 sq. ft. 330 165 x x x 40 40 x Limited 6. Memorial Grammar Cafeteria 100 50 School Conference Room 20 10 1st Floor Hallway 10 5 130 65 x x x x 30 700 x x WASTEWATER @WIMUM PARKING SANITARY FOOD DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPAB ILITY' DESOTO COUNTY PRIMARY SHELTERS Planned b, Capacity a, CO Q _q 0 Q, V 0 00 "Y . . I ..I CY 0 A, 20 sq.. 40'sq'. CO Ide itif ication feet feet A, 0 7. Nocatee.Elementary Me4a, Center 150 75 @.x x x 70. 420 x one x TOTAL 2,435 1,217 J@ @ M M M = M M = - NVEWNW. = = NEWAXWO PAWWG EN SOWRYM @OOFWN DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY HARDEE COUNTY Planned PRIMARY SHELTERS Capacity 191 Jr. 0 0 0 @-y 41 Cqj -@y 20 sq.. 40 sq. Q/ A. Identification feet feet 0 1. Bowling,Green Elementary 300 150 x x x 50 ? x 2. Hardee Jr. High Gym 350 175 North Campus Hallways 150 75 South Campus Hallways 25 .12 Industrial Arts Building 75 37 600 299 x x x x 25 500 x x x 3. Hardee Sr. High Gym 500 250 x x X 35 400 x x 4. Zolfo Springs Civic Center 150 75 x x 50 75 x 5. Zolfo Springs 'Main Building Elementary Library 90 45 10 classrooms 420 21.0 8 classrooms 360 180. 2 classrooms 98 49 968 484 x x X 50 700 x x TOTAL 2,518 1,258 WATER '.. WASTE MAXIMUM PARKING SANITARY FOOD DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILI'TY" Planned HIGHLANDS COUNTY Capacity 0 A, Jr., PRI14ARY SHELTERS 0 0 ly 0 ly 20 sq.. 40 s "y q, Ar 0 jdel@ntification feet feet 1. Missionary Church Fel'lowship Hall 40 20 Office 5 2 Primary Classroom 6 3 Youth Room 6 3 Adult Classroom 6 3 Sanctuary 55 27 Halli 12 6 130 64 X X X 250 420 x X 2. Walker Memotial 00 Jr. Academy 500. 250 X X. X 150 70 X x 3. First Baptist Church Social Hall 100 50 Recieation Bldg. 110. 55 210 105 -x X X 200 0 X X .4. Avon Park High B 11ding 1 School Rooms 25.4' 127 A, Building # 2 3,0 Rooms 1,000 .500 Buil,ding # 3 Rooms 401-412 750 375 GYM 1,05.0. 525 3,054 1,527- X X x 200 1,400 X X Limited SUBTOTAL 310 W46 ENJM@ PAjWG MN SINIVRYM WWOOUN DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY Planned HIGHLANDS COUNTY Capacity 0 -IN Q A, .. '6 Oq IV Qj A,- PRIMARY SHELTERS ? 00 C2 -Y 40 sq. Q/ Q, 20 sq. Co Identification feet feet 5. South Florida Jr. Gym 1,178 589 College Building 8 Second Floor 434 217 1,612 806 x x x 650 1,000 x x 6. Sebring Middle Commons 200 100 School Library 150 -75 Cafeteria 130 65 Rooms 135-139 159 78 Rooms 100-108 360 180 Band Room 100 50 Music Room 50 .25 1,149 573 x x x 75 700 x x x 7. City Pier Youth Center 125 fi2 x x 75 0 x 8. Highlands County Courthouse Basement 65 32 x x x 200 420 ..x x SUBTOTAL 2,951 1,03c. WASTEWATER MAXIMUM PARKING SANITARY FOOD DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY Planned HIGHLANDS COUNTY ..Capacity 0 Q/ 0. 0 PRIMARY SHELTERS .1y V - - " i -C' . .I .I -Y q* 'j@ 0.1-:k !@- A? 20 sq., 40 s' Q/ Identif ication feet feet 0 ;P 4V e? 9. lst Presbyterian Church Education X 200 ? X. Building 400 200 X 10. Fred Wild om 150 75 Elementary Ma n Building 172 86 322 161 X X X 150 420 Limited 308 154 X Xi X 200 700 X X 0 11. Agricultural Center 12. Lake Placid GYM 600 300 High School Co ons 385 .192 9M 985 492 x x 200 280 x X X If power available x l0a N/A N/A N/A X 13. Miller Warehouse NIA NIA X x SUBTOTAL 2,015 1; 007. n@6 m N@ M MIJIAXN0 PVWG M0 S@ARV= MKOOj= DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY Planned Aj Capacity HIGHLANDS COUNTY 0 0 -Y 0 CO Zy y PRIMARY SHELTERS 'I, Qj C, 20 sq.. 40 sq. @bl C', C7 Identification feet feet 0 14. St. Regis Paper Co. Warehouse 500 250 X Battery X x 200 2,000 x x 15. Lake Placid Grove Warehouse 250 125 x x x 1,000 0 x x SUBTOTAL 750 375 J- TOTAL 9,610 4,801 WASTEWATER MAXIMUM PARKING SANITARY FOOD DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPAB ILITY OKEECHOBEE COUNTY Planned Aj PRIMARY SHELTERS A@, .Capacity 't@o @y Aj @q C2 0 0 @y 0 A 20 sq.. 40 sq6 Q R 0 Identification feet feet C9 ;P 1. Moose,Lodge Lod@',9'e Room 81 .40 Clu,,,@ Room 64 32 145 72 X x 35 100 x X 2. Okeechobee Jr. Hig h Gy@! 356 178 X X X 50 2,520 X x x 3. Okeechobee Sr. High Gym 530 265 41 NJ Science Bldg. 180 90 710' .3@5 5 x x X 200 55,000 X. x Limited 4. Okeechobee City Hall Cou@hcil Chambers 46 23 Pub,'@ic Works Ofc 15 8 Firi@ Station 2,0 .10 CleFk's Ofc 40 20 121 61 x x X X 40 420 x x .5. 6th Grade Center 2 Hallways 12 6 X Battery x X 40 1,260 X X. 0 Aw 41 CO 0 SUBTOTAL 1,344 672 Mir va PAJWG SAMURXRY EdOODIM DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY OKEECHOBEE COUNTY Planned Capacity Aj 0 (0 PRIMARY SHELTERS 0 @q IR 0 0 @y 41 0 1-Y GO,- 20 sq.. 40 sq. V Q/ @j q . rt 1@ Cl 0 Identification feet feet 6. North Elementary Cafeteria 130 65 Hallways, Class-@- rooms Limited no auxiliary power, no windows 486 243 X X X 85 840 X Limited 7. South Elementary Media Center 172 86 X Battery X X 100 2,000 X One X SUBTOTAL 658 329 TOTAL 2,002 1,001 'WASTEWATER MAXIMUM PARKING FOOD SANITARY DE�,IGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY Planned Capacity 0 0 Aj er I A 0 POLK COUNTY Ily 0 A., Q, -1y 0 4p PRIMARY SHELTERS 44 Aq, - A; 20 sq.. 40 sq. ci $@y qj (V qj 11@ 0 _A, 0 Identification feet feet A@ 1. Kathleen Elementary School Classrooms 400 200 x x x 20 70 x x 2. Lake Gibson Jr. High School 500 250 x x x 90 1,400 x x x 3. Padgett Elementary Primary Teaching Area 600 300 x x x 35 420 x x 4. Griffin Elementary Lib,@ary 66 33 Hali. 90 45 Classrooms 156 78 312 156 x x 25 280 x x North Lakeland X x Elementary Library 270 135 X x 30 560 SUBTOTAL 2,082 1 04l.. JW EWa*. M*AXIM PANWG on S4MWRY= Nof OO%W DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY Planned Aj POLK COUNTY fl, Aj 0 PRIMARY SHELTERS Capacity 0 0 0 @y i - A? 20 sq.. 40 sq. eq, Q/ lz@ -A, q 1@ Cl 0 Identification feet feet C9 44y 6. Winston Elementary Library 270 135 X X X 40 420 X X 7. Kathleen Sr. High Band Room 90 45 School Choral Room 60 30 Library 400 200 Hall 90 45 Hall 60 30 Hall 80 40 Hall 80 40 860 430 X X X 200 1,400 X X X 4- 8. John Cox Elementary Building 1 Rooms 001-008 231 116 011-014 ill 56 017-022 161 82 025 96 .48 Lunchroom 101 52 700 354 X X X X 15 0 X X 9. Combee Elementary Media Center 314 157 Dining Room 168 84 482 241 X. X X X 50 ? X None X SUBTOTAL 2,312 1,160 WASTEWATER MAXIMUM PARKING SANITARY FOOD DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY Planned POLK COUNTY 4511 Capacity Qj Aj 0 Aj PRIMARY SHELTERS 0 41 .161. , .. - @P .16 A *,Y -1r., qj 0- 0 00 v Qj @-y Cl 0 20 sq.. 40 sq.. qj .1@ Identification feet feet C1. All Qj 0. All 10. Seth McKeel Jr. High' 75% of Facility 1,000 500 x x x 125 280 x x x f 11. Jessee Keen Weg,tAddition 300 150 Elementary Halls 200 100 500 250 x x x 30 280 x x 12. Lakeland Sr. High 400 200 x x x x x 300 1,400 x x x 4- ON 13. Crystal Lake Jr. Library 165 82 High Mus.ic Room 60 30 Hall 200 100 425 212 x x x 100 480 x x x 14. Southwest Jr. High Library 186 93 Band & Music 150 75 336 168 x x x 50 140 x x x A SUBTOTAL 2,661 1,330 Eli M = M M M = M M . MWEWNW. M MkWUM PANWG SMWRYM 0MOOqjj0 DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPAB ITY PbLK COUNTY Planned PRIMARY SHELTERS Capacity 41 oq 0 ly 0 20 sq.. 40 sq. 4@1 qj Cl 0 Identification feet feet A!, 15. Cleveland Court Elementary Cafeteria 73 36 x x x x 35 On Street X None x 16. Oscar Pope Pod 170 85 Elementary Pod 210 105 380 X. x x 75 140 x x 17. Carlton'Palmore Elementary 2 Pods 300 150 x x x 25 140 x x 18. Polk Opportunity School Auditorium 417 208 .,x x x 25 70 x x 19. Crystal Lake Elementary Media Center 200 100 x x x x 75 280 x One x SUBTOTAL 1,370 684 /x WASTEWATER @1AXIMUM PARKING SANITARY FOOD DE ,SIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY POLK COUNTY PRIMARY SHELTERS Planned Capacity Cli Aj "y 0. 0 0 Cl Z, -Y y @y - "I 20 sq.. 40 sq. "y Qj V Q1 4@ 'Ar, Aj Identification feet feet Cl 0 xv 20. Polk Vocational 75i of Total Technical Facility 1,000 500 x x x 150 560 x x x 21. Lakeland Highlands 80% of Total Jr. High School 900 450 x x x 150 420 x x x 22. Medulla E16mentary We�t.Wing 11 Classrooms 400 200 Primary Building X- I 00 6 Classrooms 250 Cafeteria 156 78 806- 403- x x x X, 56 0 x One x 23. Scott Lake Elementary 75% of Bldg. 600 300 x x 70 280 x 24. Mulberry Elementary Building #008 Room #005 225 112 x x x 30 960 x x SUBTOTAL 3,531 1,765 M 4@WAM M M NWIM@AR@ IMANMY 00 MD DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY POLK COUNTY Planned PRIMARY SHELTERS Capacity Q/ C0 0- .0 Ily Aj ly !@ - CO 20 sq. 40 sq. C., Q1 1.11@ @f Q/ Ar CO 0 'Identification feet feet 19@1 25. Mulberry Sr. High Library 360 180 x x x N/A x x x 26. Highland City - Elementary HallTdays 150 75 x x x 311 420 x x 27. James E.'Stephens Primary 1,000 500 Elementary Secondary 1,000 500 4- 2,000 1,000 x x x 75 140 x One x 28. Bartow Middle Lunch room/ School Auditorium 151 75 Library 80 40 10 Classrooms 467 233 698 348 x x 25 1,120 x One x 29. Bartow Sr. High Library 264 132 Music Room 58 29 322 161 X x x 150 280 x x x SUBTOTAL 3,530 1,764 WASTEWATER MAXIMUM PARKING SANITARY FOOD DE SIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER. FAC.IILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY POLK COUNTY PRIMARY SHELTERS Planned Capacity C, IQ 0@1 0 20 sq. 40 sq. ly co Q/ Id Pntification feet feet A C2 30. Bartow Jr. High Classrooms 049-052 150 75 Library & rooms 200 100 Classrooms 005-010 210 105 Classrooms 021-023 110 55 @1 670 335 X X X 100 1,400 X X X 31. Union Academy. Mulsic Room 62 31 X X X 100 420 X X X ul* 32. Polk City Poa Annex 350 175 Elementary Hallways 60 30 410 205 X X X 20 140 X X 33. Lena Vista Elementary Pod 500 250 X X X 75 420 X X 34. Auburndale Sr. High Library 300 .150 Band Room 65 32 365 .182 X, X X 75 280 X X X -SUBTOTAL 2,007 1,003 jffi@EWA@ IMM IME NWXI@@AR@ IMANMY ME @D DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY POLK COUNTY Planned PRIMARY SHELTERS Capacity q) CO r7 .0 0IR 111@ 0 0 CO Q, @y Ay 20 sq. 40 sq. !@ - A0 CO feet CO 0 feet Identification 35. Auburndale'Jr. High Band Room 78 39 Chorus Room 78 39 Conference Rm. 45 22 Conference Rm. 45 22 20 Classrooms @ 900,sq. ft. 900 450 1,146 572 x x x x 100 560 x x x 36. Walter Caldwell Elementary Pod 400 200 x x x 25 280 x x 37. Auburndale Central Cafetorium Elementary Building # 8 Room 010 140 70 X Fuel Oil x x 30 140 x None x 38. Lake Alfred Elementary 3 00 15Q x x x 35 280 x x SUBTOTAL 1,986 992 V WAsT.EWATER MAXIMUM PARKING SANITARY FOOD DE.SIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIE.S CAPABILITY Planned qj 10 01 CO POLK COUNTY Capacity '0 q Q 4@ a 00 1 0 PRIMARY SHELTERS "'y 04 0 1 ly AV Q, -Y 44 q - Aj 20 sq. 40 s * .0 1? qj q. V co ro 0 feet feet Identification 39. Ridge Vocational student Service Technical Center Center 200 loo X X X 400 1,400 X X Limited 40. Garner Elementary Library Bldg- 7 85 42 Admin. Annex 9 300 150 X 385 '192 X X X 100 600 X X X 75 280 X X acility 1,000 .500 X ,,,.41. Jewett Elementary Entire F 42. Northeast Jr. High Reading Bldg. 300 150 X X X 90 140 X X X 43. Westwood Jr. High, Music ro6m,& Hallways 400 200 X X X 75 280 X X X 44. Inwood glementary.. Building 001 Rooms 001-008 320 160 X' X X X 50 ? X None X 2,605 1,302 ,SLJZTOTAL 100 4WWA@ M OWIMMOARIWW INOANIMY on goD DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY Planned POLK COUNTY CO Capacity PRIMARY SHELTERS .0 011@ 0- ly CO ly Q) 0 AV 20 sq. 40 sq. @%ql @% CO Z- J, A, 0 Identification feet feet 45. Elbert Elementary Classrooms 600 300 x x x .30 280 x x 46. Dension Jr. High 75% of Bldg. 900 450 x x x 100 140 x x x 47. Winter Haven Sr.- Band & Music 150 75 High Lecture Room 100 50 Classrooms 100 50 350 175 x x x 200 280 x x x t-n 48. Lake Shipp Elementary Classrooms 350 175 x x x 35 140 x x 49. Snively Elementary Building'# 1 Lunchroom 168 84 Hallway 144 72 312 156 x x x x 700 One Limited 50. Garden Grove Elementary. Entire Facility 900 450 x x 40 280 x x SUBTOTAL 3,412 1,706 WASTEWATER MAXIMUM PARKING S'ANITARY FOOD DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER. FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY POLK COUNTY Planned PRIMARY SHELTERS Capacity 0 "Y S 0 0 20 sq., 40 sq'. Q1 0 qj <j 'Identification feet feet A- qj 4v CO. 51. Eagle Lake Elementary Entire Bldg. 900 450 @x x x 75 140 x x 52. Alturas Elementary Bldg. 5 400 200 Bldg. 2 185 92 585 29 2 x x x 30 420 x x 53. Fort Meade Jr./Sr. Building A High Room 1 37 18 Room 1A 51 25 Room 1B 5 2 Room 5 46 23 Room 6 63 31 Room 7 98 49 Room 8 247 123 Room 10 40 20 Room 18 66 33 Room 19 38 19 Gym 800 400 X 1,491, 743 X Battery x x 177 5,000 x x x 54.. Lewis Elementary Main Hall 155 77 .Lunchroom 160 .80 315 157* CO SUBTOTAL 3 291 1 642 nftXIM@AR@ IWANMY ON @D M D9SICNATED AREAS.OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY POLK COUNTY Planned PRIMARY SHELTERS Capacity q, <j Q; 09- .0 Ql@ Q- ly 0 CO R 20 sq. 40 sq. Aj ly- AQ, Cc Cj 0 0 A, Identification feet feet 0 55. Fort Meade*Middle School Cafeteria 150 75 x x x 40 500 x x x 5-6. Davenport Old Building Elementary Basement 6 rms. 145 72 - Kindergarten 4 rooms 163 81 Ist, 2nd, 3rd, Grade Pods 690 345 Library 323 160 1,321 658 x x X* x 70 420 x x 57. Bethune Elementary Library 90 45 x x x 20 480 x x 58. Eastside Elementary Learning'Center 225 112 Reading Room 240 120 465 232 x x x 20 480 x x SUBTOTAL 2,026 is,010 WAS'TE14ATER @IAXImum PARKING SANITARY FOOD DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER. FACILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY POLK COUNTY Planned PRIMARY SHELTERS Capacity Q Q/ 11@ 0- 0 00 Q, Q, @-y co 20 sq., 40 sq'. Q0 AQ, A4 CO Identification feet feet CO @A .0 59. Haines City Sr. High Bldg. 100 500 x x x 150 560 x x x 60. Haines City Jr. Library 375 187 High Industrial Arts included above x x x 50 700 x x x 61. Alta Vista Bldg. Elementary bining Area .129 64 Bldg. # 2 Rooms 12-24 360 180 489 244 x x x 65 420 x x x 62. Janie Howard Caferorium. 35 17 Wilson Elementary Library 25 12 60 29 x Oil x X. 36 700 x One x 63. Lake Wales High School All rooms 2,000 1,000 x x x N/A 900 x x x SUBTOTAL 3,024 19960 M @AN@Y DISI(;M M M M M M M WWWWAaft M M gWIMjMARYdM IMD NATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FA@ILITY WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY Planned 4j @Q POLK COUNTY A@, 4@1 Capacity 0 I(Ij 0 PRIMARY SHELTERS 0 A4 cr 0111, (V Q; 0- .0 A, Q7 ly QIY ,j % 20 sq. 40 a 'SQ, q. Cj Q/ qj Aj 'Identification feet feet q Co 64. Roosevelt Elementary Admin. Bldg. 75 37 Library 110 55 185 92 x x x 40 280 x x x 65. Spook Hill New facility Elementary completed soon No info now. 500 '250 x x x 50 480 x x 66. Polk Avenue Elementary Hallways 187 93 x x x 30 280 x x -67. Hillcrest School Cafetorium 157 78 .-x X x x 40 280 x None x 68. Lake Wales Jr. High School Bldg.- 1,000 500. x x x 100 420 x x x SUBTOTAL 2,029 1,013. WASTEWATER ttAXIffUM PARKING SANITARY FOOD DESIGNATED AREAS OF SAFETY POWER FACILITY. WATER CAPABILITIES FACILITIES CAPABILITY POLK COUNTY Planned IQ PRIMARY SHELTERS J(@, Capacity Q/ CO ra 0 0- 00 A.1 QIQ Ily Ily CO 20 sq. 40 sq. -Y A., qj qj Aj 4@ I entification feet feet Co 1@1 q -t@ Co 0 d z, 4) 41 r@, 46 69. Babson Pari C. ;R. Pod 200 100 Elementary Library 160 80 360 180 x x x 20 140 X@ x 70. Frostproof Jr./Sr. High Sc hool Bldg. 1,000 500 x x x 100 560 x x x 71. Frostproof Reading Room 470 .235 00 EleTnentary Learning Center 390 195 860 430 x x 'X 30 x x SUBTOTAL 2,220 1,110 TOTAL 38,086 19,482 these residents will evacuate to public shelters in the Region. Some may evacuate to a more substantial conventional home of a friend or relative. Some may seek shelter at a hotel or motel. Some may evac- uate out of the Region, and unfortunately some will refuse to evacuate at all. The majority of the vulnerable inland populations are expected to seek public shelter, however. To better evaluate the tendencies of inland evacuees, the CFRPC con- tracted with the University of South Florida to conduct a survey of residents of each county. The telephone survey of 1,257 people was representative of each county's mobile home and non-mobile home pop- ulations. Because mobile homes are most vulnerable to hurricane hazards, mobile home residents were slightly oversampled. Information derived from the 13-item questionnaire-is presented in tabular form in the University of South Florida's report (Appendix E); and is broken down by county. Some of the most important highlights are as follows: 1. The population in general and especially those who live in mobile homes is elderly. (Appendix E, Table 5) 2. Although-a relatively small percentage of the residents need special assistance to evacuate or are without transportation, in absolute numbers this could be a substantial amount of people. (Appendix E, Tables 7,8,9) 3. Although a substantial percentage of the respondents indicated experience with hurricanes, this experience except for Okeechobee County was with Donna in 1960. (Appendix E, Table 15) 4. The National Weather Service is the source of advice, as to whether and when to evacuate, that people most frequently mentioned. (Appendix E, Table 19) 5. Most people will evacuate when ordered to do s o, and mobile home dwellers would tend to evacuate prior to the order to do so. (Appendix E, Table 21) 6. If-family members are home, respondents indicated they could be ready to leave almost immediately. (Appendix E, Table 20) 7. In general only one vehicle per resident will be used. (Appendix E, Table 26) 8. Most people would evacuate to public shelters within their own county. Based on these data, there will be a great demand placed on public shelters. (Appendix E, Table 29) 9. A substantial proportion of respondents do not know where their public shelter is. (Appendix E, Table 28) 59 The most important finding of the survey relates to anticipated public shelter use by inland residents. Referring to Table 29 of Appendix E, it is clear that a majority of mobile home residents in each county who named the type of shelter they would seek,.indicated they would go to a public shelter. However, if one adds the percentage of mobile home residents who don't know where they would go to the public shelter" respondents, the potential demand for public shelter is tremehdous. Further, if the percentages of non-mobile home respon- dents who said they would seek public shelter or don't know where they would go, actually seek public shelter, the demand for public shelter in Central Florida increases dramatically. It is therefore important that local officials discourage people who live in substantially con- structed conventional homes (and others who know of a non-public shelter), from going to a public hurricane shelter. If one compares the expected coastal and inland demand for public shelter in Central Florida with the total shelter capacity in this Region, a deficit of space is evident for each regional scenario (Table 5). E. Alternate Public Shelters Knowing that a substantial public shelter deficit would exist, CFRPC staff developed a list of potential alternate shelters (Table 6). This list was derived mainly from crisis relocation plan host area facility listings, and other sources in the business and religious communities. It is a resource to be used to shrink the gap between the potentially tremendous number of evacuees seeking shelter, and the total number of designated shelters and shelter spaces. As a caution, the buildings listed are potential alternate shelters. The majority of owners of the facilities listed were contacted with regard to using their facilities in a hurricane emergency (Appendix F), and as of October, 1982, approximately thirty (30) have responded in the affirmative. The counties of DeSoto, Hardee and Okeechobee, which already have a minimal number of designated shelters,, also have a minimal number of potential alternate shelters. Because of the rural nature of these counties, businesses, civic association buildings and other potential shelters are small - most too small to be considered for use as shelters. A secondary objective in developing this list obviously was to reduce the tremendous volume of traffic which would enter the Region from coastal areas. In terms of safety, law enforcement, and traffic control, the more cars that can be removed from the regional road net- work, the better. The question of an adequate pool of shelter managers to serve at these facilities resurfaces here. Aside from-the fact thatthesepotential shelters have not been inventoried, a shelter manager would be needed at each facility if it were to be used. 60 TABLE 5 PUBLIC SHELTER DEMAND/ADEQUACY Regional Scenarios 2 3 4 5 6 Total Shelter Demand (Coastal & Inland 71,641 90,852 149,947 176,724 367,358 334,331 Evacuees)l Total Shelter Capacity2 55,290 55,290 55,290 55,290 55,290 55,290 Shelter Sdrplus (16,351) (35,562) (94,657) (121,434) (312,068) (279,041) (Deficit) DeSoto DeSoto Central Florida Counties Polk Polk Hardee Hardee All All Evacuating Polk Highlands Polk ....... ..... . TABLE 5 (continued) PUBLIC SHELTER DEMAND/ADEQUACY Regional Scenarios 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total Shelter Demand (Coastal & Inland 288,769 163,166 168,'656 215,367 98,893 298,806 Evacuees)l Total She@ter Capacity2 55,290 55,290 55!290 55,290 55,290 55,290 Shelter Surplus (233,479) (107,876) (113,366) (160,077) (43,603) (243,516) (Deficit) DeSoto DeSoto DeSoto DeSoto' Central Florida Counties Hardee Hardee. Hardee Hardee Evacuating All Highlands Highlands Higiilaads Highlands None Okeechobee Okeechobee Okeechobee Okeechobee 1"Inland Evacuees" consist of estimates of vulnerable mobile home & flood plain residents expected to seek public shelter, and are broken down by county as follows: DeSoto 5,200 Okeechobee 4,500 Hardee 2,500 Polk 37,000 Highlands 9,000 Region 58,200 2 Designated primary & secondary shelter space based o n 20 sq. ft.,per person TABLE 6 ALTERNATE SHELTERS CENTRAL FLORIDA REGION HARDEE COUNTY ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY @ 20 sq-ft@L @ 40 sq. ft.. Ist Baptist Church of Bowling Green P.O. Box 398 Bowling Green, Florida 33834 84 42 lst Baptist Church of Wauchula P.O. Box 548 Wauchula, Florida 33873 838. 419 Gardner Baptist Church Rt. 1 Zolfo Springs, Florida 148 74 St. Michael's Catholic Church Rt. 2 Box 8 Wauchula, Florida 33873 336 168 ist Assembly of God 813 South 8th Avenue Wauchula, Florida 33873 170 85 Riverview Heights Baptist 207 Park Drive Wauchula, Florida 33873- N/A N/A South Side Baptist P.O. Box 515 Wauchula, Florida 224 112 Oak Grove Baptist Rt. 1 Box 367 Watchula, Florida 33873 316 158 Faith Presbyterian Church P.O. Box 1480 Wauchula, Florida 33873 266, 133 lst Christian Church P.O. Box 96 Wauchula, Florida 33873 N/A N/A lst United Methodist P.O. Box 116 Wauchula, Florida 33873 698 349 New Hope Baptist Rt. 2 Box 357 Wauchula, Florida 33873 670 335 63 HARDEE COUNTY ALTERNATE SHELTERS (cont-inuedY- ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY @ 20 sq. ft. @ 40 sq. ft. Northside Baptist 912 North 8th Avenife Wauchula, Florida -33873 .208 104 Ft. Green Baptist Church Rt. 1 Box 144A Bo' 360 180 wling Green, Florida Zolfo Springs Church of Go.d. P.O@ Box 145 - I Zolfo Springs, Florida .206 103 Wauchula Church of God North 7th Avenue P.O'. Box 582 Wauchula, Florida 306 153 lst Baptist Church Zolfo Springs -P.. 0. Box 14 Zolfo Springs, Florida -31@ 158 'East Side Baptist Mission 407 Walton Avenue Wauchula, Florida N[A N/A lst Presbyterian Church P.O. Box 8 Wauchula, Florida N/A NIA lst United Methodist Church P.O. Box 236 Bowling Green, Florida 33834 147A N/A TOTAL 5,146+. 2,57.3+ 64 HIGHLANDS COUNTY ALTERNATE-SHELTEkS --(c6fitiriued). ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY 2Q! sq. ft. @ 40'. sq. ft. Church of-the Brethren - 700 Pine Street Sebring, Florida 1,164 582 lst Baptist-Church Bldg. A 22@ Lemon Street Sebring, Florida.- 824 412 Salvation Army 120. Ridg-6,466d Drive e-br-ing, da 262 S Flori 131 Sparks Disco Circle Avenue Sebring, Florida 354 177 Chamber of Commerce 309 Circle Avenue Sebring, Florida 42 21 _7 BPOE Elks Club -Lakeview Drive - Sebring, Florida 462 231 Sebring Civic Center Center Avenue Sebring, Florida 306@ 15'3 Thee Pier Recreational Center (1) Center Avenue @.- Sebring,-Florida .50.. 25 Thee Pier Recreational Center (2) -Center Avenue7- Sebring, Florida 208@ 104 VFW Lakeview Drive Sebring, Florida 234 117 Southside Baptist Sanctuary Commerce Avenue Sebring, Florida 596 298 Southside Baptist Fellowship Hall Commerce Avenue Sebring, Fl @rida 274 137 6@ HIGHLANDS COUNTY ALTERNATE SHELTERS (continued) ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY 20 sq. 40 sq. St. Catherine Catholic Church 827'-Hickory-StreeL- Sebring, Florida 354- 177 lst Presbyterian Church 319 Poinsettia Avenue Sebring, Florida 182-- -91 Christian Science Society 146 Franklin Street 70-' Sebring, Florida .35 Ist Baptist Church Bldg. B 225 Lemon Street Sebring, Florida 128- .-64 TOTAL 5,510 2,755 66 DESOTO COUNTY ALTERNATE SHELTERS (continued) ESTIMATED CAPACITY- FACILITY S91 f @ 40.- sq. ft, Church of God U.S. 17 Brownville, Florida 100. 50 Trinity Methodist Church 14..Oak Street Arcadia, Flo*rida* 457 Calvary Baptist Church S.R. 70 Arc'a-dia, Florida 350- 195 lst.Assembly of God Church Tenth Avenue Arcadia, Florida -16 38 lst Assembly of.God Tenth Avenue Arcadia, Florida 142 71 Church of God of Prophecy .215 Hickery Street Arcadia, Florida 96 48 Temple Baptist Church Mills Avenue Arcadia, Florida 82 41 lst Christian Church Elverano Avenue Arcadia, Florida 94, 47 l6t Christian School Elverano Avenue Arcadia, Florida 86 43 Central Missionary Baptist Church Cypress Street Arcadia, Florida 126 63 Church of God Oak Street Arcadia, Florida 154 77 Heritage Baptist Church 21 Polk Avenue Arcadia, Florida 860 430 67 DESOTO COUNTY ALTERNATE SHELTERS (continued) ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY @ 20 sq. ft. 40 sq. ft. Presbyterian Church Education Bldg. 209 Hickory Street- Arcadia, Florida 266 133 Church of Christ Hickory Street Arcadia, Florida 82 42 Lutheran Church of Arcadia 1004 Hickory Street Arcadia, Florida 114 57 Apostolic Church of Je*sus Christ 205 Luther Avenue Arcadia,,Florida 176 88 St. Pauls Catholic Church .1208 Oak Street Arcadia, Florida 182 91 :United Methodist Church Education Bldg. Gilcrest Avenue Fort Ogden, Florida 124 62 1st Baptist Church Classrooms Gilchrist Avenue Fort Ogden, Florida 276 138 New Testament-Baptist Church U.S. 17 Fort Ogden, Florida 76 38 lst Baptist Church Bldg. A U.S. 17 Nocatee., Florida 76 38 lst Baptist Church Bldg. B U.S. 17 Nocatee, Florida 78 39 Church of God Bldg. A U.S. 17 Nocatee, Florida 74 39 Church of God Bldg. B U.S. 17 Nocatee, Florida 58 29 68 DESOTO COUNTY ALTERNATE SHELTERS ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY 20 sq. ft. @ 40 sq. ft. Mt. Ephraim Baptist Classroom S@R.@-661 Nocatee, Florida 86 43 Pine Level Methodist Church Old Pine Level Pine' Level, Florida 68. 3-4 TOTAL 5,108 10,216 69 POLK COUNTY ALTERNATE SHELTERS continued) ESTIMATED CAPACITY @ 20 sq. ft. 40 sq. ftI- FACILITY Ist Baptist Church 300 Bartow Avenue Auburndale, Florida 1,080 540 ist United Methodist Church 410 Ariana-Avenue Auburndale, Florida 260 130 lst Presbyterian Church Pilaklakaha Auburndale,-Fl.orida 156 78 ist Missionary Baptist Bartow Auburndale, Florida 450 225 lst Assembly of God 607 Lemon Street Auburnd@ile, Florida 214 107 First Baptist Church Annex .300 Bridgers -Auburndale, Florida 784 392 VFW Post 4945 213 Lake Auburndale, Florida 130 65 Canaan Church 525 Bridgers 120 49 .,Auburndale, Florida lst Presbyterian Church Sunday School 410 Park Auburndale, Florida 176 88 Church of Christ 310 Orange Street Auburndale, Florida 622 311 Eastside Baptist Church 210 Pike Auburndale, Florida 140 70 lst Baptist Church 524 Arborvitae Lane 122 61 Polk City, Florida 70 POLK COUNTY ALTERNATE SHELTERS (continued) ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY @ 20 sq. ft. @ 40 sq. ft._ Victory Tabernacle 210 Dairy..Road Auburndale, Florida 160 80 United Methoaist Church Berkley Auburnd&le, Florida 120 59 Lena Vista,Baptist Church Annex Luna Road. Auburndale, Florida'-- 180 90 Havendale Baptist-Church Sunday School 2200 Avenue Y, N.W.: 160 80 Knights of.Columbus .3274 Avenue W, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida' 200 100 Kingdom Hall of Witness .2211'28th St ., N. W. [email protected], Florida 64 82 Ist, Baptist Church 1318 34th Street, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 150 75 Humpty Dumpty'Preschool 2219 31st Street, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida- 154 77 Church of God Bldg. 1 1721.34th Streett N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 208 104 Mrs. Pearsons Preschool 2995 Avenue G, N-.W. Winter Haven, Florida 100 50 County Court House Main Street Bartow, Florida 1,024 512 71 ALTERNATE SHELTERS -(continue'd) ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY @ 20 sq. ft. 40. Methodist-Church 455 Broadway Bartow, Florida 536 268 Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church 100 Stanford Avenue Bartow, Florida 520 260 lst-Baptist Church 430.Church Street Bartow, Florida. 936 468 lst..Presbyterian Church 395..Stanford-Street Ba rtow,-Florida 302 151 Oak School Wilson Street Bartow,. Florida 272 136 Main Street Baptist-Church Main.& Holland Bartow, Florida. 404 202 First Church of Christ Science 495 Park Lane Bartow, Florida 88 44 Lake Ruth Baptist Church Annex Clover Street Bartow, Florida- 64 32 Community Action 1150 Palmetto Bartow, Florida 400 200 Main Street Baptist Church Main Street Bartow, Florida 400 200 Polk County Social Service 3rd Avenue Bartow, Florida 850 425 Holy Trinity Education Bldg. Stuart & Floral Bartowt Florida 240 120 72 ALTERNATE SHELTERS nued) (conti EST114ATED CAPACITY FACILITY. @ 20 sq. ft.. 40 sq. ft. Holy Trinity-Education Bldg. Stuart & Floral Bartow, Florida 374 187 Church of the Nazerine 208-Hooker Street Bartow, Florida 120 60 Victory Tabernacle Hooker Hill -L Bartow, Florida 200 100 Church of God Stuart Bar**tow, Florida 180 90 American Legion Post 3 1575 HW' 17 Bartow, Florida 74 37 lst Assembly-of God- 1345 Pine Level Avenue Bartow, Florida 84 .42 Catholic Church School Kissingen Avenue Bartow, Florida 84 42 Asbury Methodist Church School Avendia Soledad Bartow, Florida 300 150 Catholic Church of.St. Thomas Kissingen Avenue Bartow, Florida 140 -70 St.. James Church Magnolia & Fourth Bartow, Florida 234 117 Mt Gilboa Church Palmetto & First Bartow, Florida 400 200 Church of Christ Main Street Bartow, Florida 74 37 Mt. Zion AME Church Scott & Palmetto Bartow, Florida 114 57 73 POLK COUNTY ALTERNATE SHELTERS ESTIMATED-CAPACI7Y'. FACILITY 20 sq. f 40 sq.-ft-I Bartow Christian Church Wethelene* Bartow, Florida 186- 93 7 Methodist Church 455 Broadway Aventie Bartow, Florida-. 112- 56 ls@ Presbyterian Church 355,Florida Avenue Bartow,.Florida-. 70- Redeemer Lutheran Church 390,Parker Street.. Bartow, Florida 166@ 83. Ei*Jon Motel 1460 Main Bartow, Florida 19 Bartow Civic Center -Floral-Street Bartow, Florida 1,440- 720- Lake Ruth Baptist Church Clover Street Bartow, Florida 96- 48 Trinity Church S.R. 5400 Bartow*, Florida 80' 40 Bryant Street Church Bryant Street Bartow, Florida -84" 42' Northwood Baptist Missionary Lucile Bartow, Florida 124- 62 Florida Sheriffs Girls.Villa HWY 60 Bartow, Florida. 374 187 Macedonia Missionary Baptist Garfield Bartow, Florida 140 70 74. POLX..COUNTY 'ALTERNATE SHELTERS .(continued) -ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY 20 sq. ft. @ 40 sq. ft. Ist-Baptist Church 80 Foot Road. Bartow, Florida 180 90' Alturas Methodist Church 3rd Street Alturas, Florida 190 95 Lake Buffum Baptist Church Buffum Road Alturas,-Florida 240 120 Alturas Asse.mbly of God Alturas-Road Alturas, Florida- 320 .160 Ist Baptist Church Alturas Road' Alturas, Florida 120 60 Moose Lodge Moose Club Road 7 Bartow, Florida 200 100 Ev''angel Temple Old Bartow Road Bartow,.Florida 240 120 Ist Baptist Church Maple St. & U.S. HWY 31 Davenport, ',Florida 306 153 City Hall U.S. HWY 17-92 Davenport, Florida 200 100 S.partan Inn.* Route 27 Davenport, Florida N/A N/A Ramada Inn Route 27 Davenport, Florida N/A N/A 75 POLK COUNTY ALTERNATE SHELTERS .(continued) ESTIMATED CAPACITY- FACILITY @ 20 sq. fti. @ 4 Dundee Baptist Church Annex Main Dundee, Florida 240 120 Church of Christ Main Street Dundee,.-Florida 300 150 Dundell Methodist Church Third Street--.:n- Dundee, Florida. 230 115 Baptist Temple Center - Street Dundee, Florida 174 87 Holiday Inn HWY 27 Dundee,- Florida 40 40 Sheraton Hotel- HWY 540 Winter Haven, Florida 0A N/A Lake Peirce Baptist Canal Road Winter Haven, Florida 96 48 Holy Cross Church HWY 540 Winter Haven, Florida 150 75 Hope Presbyterian Church cypress Garden. Winter Haven, Florida 594 297 St. Johns United Methodist Cypress Garden Winter Haven, Florida 360 180 Welcome Baptist Church HWY 542 Dundee Winter Haven, Florida 112 56 Pentecostal Church HWY 544 Winter Haven, Florida 100 52 76 POLK. COUNTY@ ALTERNATE.-SHELTERS.' .(continued) ESTIMATED CAPACITY- FACILITY 20 f t. @ 40: sq.; f t, Church of Christ 2nd Street Winter Haven, Florida -120 60 Baptist Church HWY 544 Winter-Haven, Florida 280 140 lst'Baptist Annex 60O.Eagle Avenue.. Eaglei.Lake, Florida 314 157 Church of Christ 261 3rd:Street Eagle Lake, Florida. 200 100 Assembly of God School 274 Gilbert Street Eagle take, Florida 240 120 Church of God 408 Snively Avenue Moise, Florida 160 80 Church of God Rifle Range.Road Wahneta, Florida 100 50 lst Baptist Church Rifle Range Road Wahneta, Florida 112 56 (@@dlity - Inn Cypress Gardens Winter ITaven, Florida 40 40 Ramada Inn Cypress Gardens Winter Haven, Florida 26, 26 Immanuel Baptist Spirit Lake Road Winter Haven, Florida 180 90 Calvary Assembly of God I 3800-Recker.Highway Winter Haven, Florida 252 126 77 ALTERNATE SHELTERS .(cont-inue ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY 20 sq. ft. 40 sq. ftl Ist Baptist Church Hatfield Road Winter Haven, Florida 404 202 Westwood-Baptist Church Avenue G. N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 400 200 Mrs. Pearsons Preschool 2995. Avenue G,-.:N.W-. Winter Haven, Florida 150 75 lst.-,Freewill'Baptist Church. 2-7th. St. N.W. 'Winter Haven, Florida 96 48 lst Baptist of Inn. 1302 34th Street, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 160 80 Central Christian.Sdhool 3900 Lake Blue Drive Winter Haven, Florida 180 90 lst Alliance Church 2401 34th Street, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 120 60 Knights of Columbus Hall .3308 Avenue W, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 200 100 Kingdom Hall of Jehova 2211 28th Street, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida i26 63 Free.Will Baptist Church 717 27th Street, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 120 60 lst Baptist Church BLDG. 2 33rd Street, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 132 66 lst.Alliance Church 34th Street, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 144 72 78 rVIA1. WUN-11 ALTERNATE SHELTERS (continued) ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY @ 20 sq. ft. @ 40 sq. ft. Calvary Apostolic Church 1301 36th.Street, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 72 36 Immanuel Lutheran Church 1449 34th Street, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 108 54 Church-of"God Bldg. 1 1724 34th Street, N.W.* Winter. Haven, Florida 264 132 Knights of Columbus Avenue.W, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida' 216 108 Ist Church of God 214.Perry Street* Ft.. Meade, Florida 372 186 Ft. Meade Masonic Temple 6th Street Ft. Meade, Florida 80 40 Chur dh of God Seminole Ft. Meade, Florida 94 47 Church of God French Ft, Meade, Florida 112 56 American Legion Hall U. S. 17 Ft -Meade, Florida 108 54. Charleston Avenue Church Charleston Avenue Ft. Meade,- Florida 150 75 First Methodist Church Broadway Ft. Meade, Florida 424 212 Ist As$embly of God 211 8th Street Ft. Meade, Florida 216 108 79 ALTERNATE SHELTERS ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY @ 20 p1t. f t. @ 40-sq. -fro Calvary Missionary Baptist Perry Ft. Meade, Florida @90 4*5 Kathleen Baptist 2nd Street Kathleen, Florida 400 200 'Masonic Hall Wall Street Frostproof Florida -88 Church of God S.R". 630 Frostproof, Florida -.84 42 West Frostproof Baptist-thurch Frostproof-Road Frostproof, Florida -92 46 .,lst Methodist Church Auditorium Deva.ne Street. Frostproof, Florida 100 51 lst Methodist Church School Devand Street Frostproof, Florida 176 88 Ist Baptist Church Oak.Street Frostproof, Florida. 272 136 Church of Christ Frostproof,' Florida 100 56 Southside Baptist Church Alternate 27 Frostproof, Florida 146 73 Faith Community@'Church HWY 580 Haines City, Florida 50 25 Calvary Baptist Church Smith Haines City, Florida 84 42 Masonic Temple 47 6th Street .Haines City, Florida 378 189 80 POLK COUNTY ALt.ERNATE SHELTERS' .(continued) ESTIkATEDwCAPACITY-- FACILITY. @ 20 sq. ft.._ @ 40 sq.-ft. Palm Crest Hotel Hinson Street Haines Ci.,ty, Florida 702 351- ist Baptist Church d lst.& Le with Haines City, Florida 564 282 .-Westside Baptist Church Polk City Road Haines City, Florida 100 49- Florida National Guard 6th*- Street Ha ines City, F lorilda- 200 100- Church of the Nazarene Robinson Drive Haines City, Florida' 70. 35 Catholic Church of the Transfiguration Robinson Drive Haines City, Florida 96 48 'Central* Church of Christ Robinson Drive Haines City, Florida 150 7@ St.'Marks Episcopal Church 9th-Street Haines City, Florida 128 St.@Marks Episcopal Church 9th'Street. Haines City, Florida -60 30.: lst.Assembly of God 14th Street Haines City,. Florida 60 30- Church of God -1718 Melbourne Avenue Haines City, Florida 148 74 Church of God Sunday School 1718 Melbourne Avenue Haines City, Florida 122 61 81 ALTERNATE SHELTERS (continued) ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY 20 sq. ft. 40 _f Eastside Baptist Church 116 22nd Street Haines City, Floair7d 420 2io New.Mt. Zion Baptist Church 713 8th Street Haines City, Florida- 90 -45 New M.t. Zio*n Baptist Church School 713 .8th Street Hai--Tfes: City'. Flo ida@ 100 St -..Mark. AME. Church 826-8th Street Haines City* Floridw -1-08 Oakland Civic Center Avenue C Haines City, Florida 110 -55 Ist Baptist Church 370 Pierce Street Lake Alfred, Florida 118 59 Methodist Sunday School 130 Penn. Avenue Lake Alfred, Florida 62 31 Church of God Bldg. 1 140 Mallard Road Lak.e Alfred, Florida 68 34 Trinity Church Sunday School, 2551 Havendale Boulevard Winter Haven, Florida 240 120 Calvary Baptist Church 3659 Derby Road Winter Haven, Florida 208 104 St. James Baptist Church 2212 Lucerne,Park,Rd. Winter Haven, Florida 134 67 Church of Christ 2101 Second Street, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 112 56 82 ALTERNATE.SHELTERS- ESTIMATM CAPACITY.'. FACILITY @ 20 s q f t;. @ 40 sq@ ft6 Salvation Army Bldg 1 2020 Second Street, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 180 89 Free Methodist Church 301*.9 Lake Alfred Rd. Winter Haven,florida 100 50Z Community Service Center 7301-'Lynchburg Winter Haven, Florida .80 40,-. Lynchburg Baptist*Church 4800'@Lynchb urg Winter,Haven, Florida 156 78 ist.Presbyterian Church 126'Massachus'etts Lakeland, F/orida 478 239-- Masonic Temple 212-Iowa Avenue - Lakelmd Florida 550 275 Southsid6 Baptist Church 304 McDonald Street Lakeland, Florida 2,880 1,440. College Heights Methodist Church 942'South Blvd. Lakelarid, Florida 544 .272_ West Minister Presbyterian-.Church Mosswood Rd Lakeland,.Florida 522 262, Elks*Lodge 108 Massachusetts Lakeland, Florida 700 350- lst Methodist Church 72 Lake Mort6n,Drive Lakeland, Florida 892 446 Temple Emanuel 730 Lake Hollingsworth Drive Lakeland, Florida 430 215 83 ALTE T @MA E SHELTERS. tinued) ESTIMATED CAP ACITY 40 ft FACILITY 20 sq. ft. United Methodist Building 1140 McDonald Street 586 2 Lakeland,'Florida 93 Church of Christ 1807 Florida Ave. Lakeland, Florida @08 164, lst Christian Church-'. Florida Ave. Lakeland,-Florida--- 544 272 -.l�t.:Baptist ChUrch 300'Florida Ave. Lakeland, Florida 1,600 863 Parkview Baptist Church .505,Parkview Plaza 277 Lakeland, Florida 554 Ramada Inn' .601 Memorial Blvd.. -Lakeland, Florida 29 29 Holiday'Inn 910 Memorial Blvd Lakeland, Florida 67 67 Church of Christ Oak Street Lakeland, Flotida 204 02 Harmony Baptist Church- 1002 Florida Ave 102 Lakeland, Florida .204 lst Baptist Church Education Annex Quincy & Dakota Lakelarid, Florida 3o6 150 Church of God Bldg. 1 746 Combee Road Lakeland,. Florida 130 65 Lakewood Park Methodist Church 1140 Combee Road Lakeland, Florida 138 69 Carters Baptist Church 5201 Route 92 Lakeland, Flo-ida 142 71 84 ALTUNATE SkIELTERS (.continued) ESTIMATED CAPACITr 7ACILITY @ 20 sq.. ft. 1 40 set. ft. Christ B aptist.Bldg. 1 Hardin Combee Rd. Lakeland,-Florida 218 109 Christ Baltist Bldg. 2 2929 Hardin Combee Rd. Lakeland, Florida 200 98 ..Easiside Baptist Church Eastside Drive Lakeland, Florida 202, 101 Eastside Baptist Church Ea9tside Drive-. Lakeland,.Florida... @330-@ 165 C@urch-of God of.Propbecv Dixie Hwy Auburndale, Florida- 108. 54 K-ville As.sembly of God Bldg. 110 Palmetto Rd. ..Auburndale, Florida 62 31 ist Baptist Church Social Hall Rowell Auburndale, Florida 56. 28 7 oddlers Kindergarten 103'Hibriten Way Lakeland, Florida 80- 40 American Legion Post 614 Orange. Lakeland, Florida 360- 180 Evangel Christian School 1360 Main Street Lakeland, Florida 900 450 Temple Baptist Church 1815 Edgewood Drive Lakeland,,Florida 300 150 ist Alliance Church Edgewood Drive Lakeland, Florida 200 100 Imperial 400 Motel 740 Main Street 15 15 Lakeland, Florida 85 -CAPACITY ESTIMATED .(continued) FACILITY @ 20 sq.'ft. 40 f Methodist Church Cleveland Heights Blvd Lakelan .d,- Florida 180 90 Calvary Bappist Church Nursery 1945 Florida Ave.- Lakeland, Florida 168 84 lChrist Lutheran-Church-, 2715 Lakeland.Hills Blvd Lakeland, Florida --80 -41 lst.Free Methodist Church 315'.Granada Street Lakeland, Florida'. -120 .65 Church of Christ Bldg. Lakeland Hills Blvd. Lakeland, Florida 94 47 Knights of Columbus 2014 Lakeland Hills Blvd. Lakeland, Florid a 160 80 Parkview Baptist Church 509.Parkview Plaza Lakeland, Florida 216 108 7th Day Adventist Church 1443 Gilmore Avenue Lakeland, Florida .66 .33 7th Day Adventist Church 1443 Gilmore Avenue Lakeland, Florida .104 -52 Holiday Inn 3405 So. Fla. Ave. Lakeland, Florida 43 43 Rama,. Inn 601 Memorial Blvd Lakeland, Florida N/A N/A Best Western Motel Memorial Blvd Lakeland, Florida 36 36 86 ALTERNATE SHELTERS -(@ontinued) ESTIMATED'CAPACITY* FACILITY @ 20 s q f t @ 40 sq-.. ft-. Lakeland Mall Part 1 Memorial Blvd La.keland,.'Florida 7,400 3,700 Church'of God Lake Wire Lakeland, Florida '266 133 Church of-Christ Quincy Lakeland, Florida- 3-1-2 15,6 Hilton Inn U.S., 98 --!-17 37 Lakeland, Florida-.. Bethel''Baptist Church S,X, 35A Lakeland. Florida 400 200 Lions Club lst Street .-Kathlden, Florida 100 50 Mason Lodge lst Street Kathleen, Florida 60 30 Meth odist Church Polk Avenue Kathleen, Florida 250 125 Days'Inn Motel 32-23 U.S. Hwy 98 Lakeland, Flotida 60 Dutch Inns of America 3311 U.S. Hwy 98 Lakeland, Florida N/A NIA American Veterans SA. 33 Lakeland, Florida 3,200 1,600 Assembly of God S.R. 33 Polk City, Florida 304 152 Ist Baptist Church Fourth Street Lake Wales, Florida 200 103 87 ALTERNATE SHELTERS (continued) ESTIMATED CAPACITY PACILITY 20 sq. ft.- 40 sq. f Central Avenue Baptist Church 69 Central Avenue Lake Wales, Florid'a 240 120 Central Avenue Baptist Church Annex 71 Central Ave. Lake Wales, Florida 320 - 160. Church of*Chris-t @126 Wetmore Street' Lake Wales,-Florida 24-0-- 12a Church of-Nazarene Annex Johnson Ave. 'Lake Wales, Florida 250 i25 Church of God Annex 45'Walker Lake Wales, Florida 400. 200 Lake Wales Family YMCA .203 Polk Lake Wales,''Florida 96 48 .1st Christian Church Scenic Hwy 160 Lake Wales, Florida 320 -The Adventist Church Annex Burns Lake Wales, Fl orida 90- Church of God Main Street Bradley, Florida 120 60 Calvary Baptist Church 500 1st Avenue Mulberry, Florida 152 76 lst Methodist Church Annex Church Avenue Mulberry, Florida 270 135 Fellowship Baptist Church Old Rt. 37 Mulberry, Florida 134 67 88 ALTERNATE SHELTERS (continued) ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY @ 20 sq. ft. @ 40 sq. ft. 1st Community Church S.R. 540 A Mulberry, Florida 80 40 Holiday Inn N. Socrum Loop Rd Lakeland, Florida 25 25 Lakeland, Christian Schood Bldg. 1111 Forest Park St. Lakeland, Florida 280 140 1st Baptist Church Education Bldg. 198 Central Avenue. Winter Haven, Florida 2,100 1,050 N.E. Winter Haven Recreational Center Avenue T Winter Haven, Florida 560 280 1st Church of Christian Science 652 Avenue L, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 228 114 Southside Baptist Church 7th Street, S.W. Winter Haven, Florida 288 144 St. Paul Episcopal School 656 Avenue L, N.W. Winter Haven, Florida 360 180 Church of God Annex Avenue E . S.W. Winter Haven, Florida 120 60 St. Josephs School 535 Avenue M Winter Haven, Florida 480 240 St. Joseph Center 532 Avenue M Winter Haven, Florida 108 54 Beymer Church Annex 725 Lake Howard Drive Winter Haven, Florida 288 144 - 89 - ALTERNATE SHELTERS. (continued) ESTIMATED CAPACITY FACILITY 20 sq. ft. 40 f Winter Haven Mall 3rd Street Winter Haven, Flozida 6,000 3,600 BPOE Post 1672 3rd Street Winter Haven, Florida @614 307 Civic Center of Winter Havenc. - 250 Lake Silver Drive Winter Haven,-Florida -480 -240 Da-@enport Church of God Route 17 .Davenport, Florida' 194 97 Billiard's'Parlor 7 1. 126 Bay Street. Davenport,.Florida 160 80 .1st Methodist Church- 11 Market Stre@t Davenport, Florida '214 107 Asseifibly of God Church 206 Pine Street Davenport, Florida 180 89 Evangelistic Temple Route 17 Loughman, Florida 100 51 Dundee Assembly of God Myrtle Street Dundee, Florida 52 Dundee Community House S.R. 542 Dundee, Florida- 100 52 TOTAL 79,014+ 39,846+ 90 V. INTER-REGIONAL EVACUATION This section and those following it form the essence of the Central Florida Regional Hurricane Shelter Plan. They incorporate and tie together the research explained previously. This section identifies who will be evac- uating prior to hurricane landfall, where the evacuees will come from and where they will go. The regional impact of a hurricane will be clearly illustrated in this section. As mentioned earlier :three regional hurricane scenarios, as developed by the Bureau, were selected for analysis: 1) A worst-case storm making land- fall in Hillsborough County (Regional Scenario 3, illustrated in Figures 2 and 3); 2) A worst-case storm making landfall in Sarasota County (Regional Scenario 5, illustrated in Figures 2 and 4); and 3) The worst-case parallel storm (Regional Scenario 12, illustrated in Figures 2 and 5). Obviously, evacuees will be crossing county lines in large numbers, and the actions taken in one county (coastal or inland) will affect the actions taken in several other counties. The Tampa Bayand Southwest Florida regional evacuation plans have identified fievacuation time" as the most important element to be considered for regional evacuation. "Evacuation time" is defined as the sum of the time needed for mobilization of evacuees, the travel time involved in evacuation, the delay time caused by traffic volume exceeding roadway carrying capacity, and the time preceeding the onset of gale-force winds and/or roadway inun dation. This concept is illustrated as Figure 6. The evacuation time of a region increases when several counties evacuate concurrently. In the Central Florida Region, because of the limited numbers of regional roads, and their configurations and conditions, carrying capacity will greatly influence evacuation time. Most roads in this region are two lane facili- ties with limited carrying capacities due to a combination of limited passing sight distances, deteriorated surfaces and/or poor surface drainage, and inadequate (narrow) shoulders. In several cases, the loading of vehicles onto the regional network will be slowed by limited carrying capacities. (To analyze traffic flow, the Florida Department of Transportation, 5th District, recommended that the following standards, based on Level of Service "E" be used8: Undivided Higheays: 850 cars/hour/lane Divided Highways: 1000 cars/hour/lane Interstate Highways: 2000 cars/hour/lane) The situation in Arcadia is illustrative of this point. Five two- lane roads (S.R. 72, Kings Highway, U.S. 17, S.R. 7Q, and S.R. 31) enter DeSotoCounty from the west and south, and converge at Arcadia. Only two two-lane roads a"Levels of Service" (L.O.S.) are: A,B,C,D,E, and F; L.O.S. "A" being the best. L.O.S. "F" applies to a road with heavy, stop and go traffic. Thus, L.O.S. "E" is used as a conservative standard. 91 FIGURE 6' EVACUATION TIME CONCEPT COMPONENTS OF EVACUATION TIME Clearance Time in Hours Mobilization Time Travel Time Queuing Delay Time Arrival of Cale Force Winds Time* Pre-Landfall Hazards Time Issuance of EVACUATION TIME IN HOURS Hurricane Local Evacuation Order Eye Landfall *Also includes roadway inundation time. are the means of egress from the city. (U.S. 17 to the north and S.R. 70 to the east). Using the evacuation schema for Scenario 12 as an example, one can see that once vehicles from Kings Highway, U.S. 17 and. S.R. 31 are loaded onto S.R. 70 East, it would take some 29 hours for all 25,123 vehicles to reach U.S. 27. As one looks farther north at Hardee and Polk Counties, one sees a similar situation; more roads enter the counties to the west of U.S. 17 (a mostly two-lane, north-south route) than exit the counties to the east. This funnelling effect will increase the queuing.and overall evacuation time of @vacuees. The inter-regional evacuation s-ah-ema-s for Scenarios 3,5, and 12 route traffic in such a manner that vehicles will not cross through intersections, thus keeping the traffic moving as smoothly as possible throughout the region. Further, the overall inter-regional evacuation plan centers on U.S. 27, a four-lane, north-south divided highway. U.S. 27 will be used as the major evacuation route in the region because of its capacity. As was alluded to above, however, getting vehicles to U.S. 27 may take some time, due to loading and queuing on the adjacent two-lane roads. To utilize U.S. 27, vehicle's must first be loaded onto U.S. 17. As one moves north from DeSoto County on U.S. 17, vehicles are loaded onto U.S. 17 and turned north, while other vehicles already on U.S. 17 are diverted on east-west routes to U.S. 27. The volume on U.S. 17 is thus kept constant or lessened where possible, while the volume is increased on U.S. 27. To appreciate the increased carrying capacity of U.S. 27, one can again examine the evacuation schema for Scenario 12. Once the 12,123 vehicles are turned onto U.S. 27 in Highlands County, the divided highway's increased capacity will reduce the evacuation time to move all of the vehicles to some 12 hours. Because of very limited shelter space in this Region, low roadway carrying capacities, and expected high loading and queuing time, the use of optimum evacuation routes to carry evacuees to the nearest shelters is not possible in most cases. Using the schema for Scenario 12 again, if one follows the traffic flow from one end of the Region to the other, one can see that some evacuees will be traveling for a long period of time. With the heavy volume of traffic expected in this Region in various scenarios, this situa- tion is unfortunately unavoidable. (Because of this concern, and because the southern portion of the Region will be relatively unaffected in Scenario 3, a minimum number of evacuees are diverted through Okeechobee County in that particular scenario.) With high evacuation times in this Region for several landfalling storms, comes the threat of the arrival of sustained gale-force (40 mph) winds and freshwater flooding. As was noted earlier, the onset of freshwater flooding generally approximates the onset of sustained gale-force winds. Both of these hazards will occur prior to eye landfall of a hurricane as wind and rain fields move across the state. In discussions with officials in each Central Florida county, CFRPC was able to identify sections of the regional road network which may be or will be susceptible to inundation. (See Figures 3,4, and 5) 93 Because of its low elevation and proximity to Charlotte Harbor, DeSoto County may have several roads breached by flooding. These include S.R. 72, Kings Highway, U.S. 17, and S.R. 31 - all reg'.onal roads and primary evacuation routes. Sections of roads which may 't-,e inundated are circled on the accompanying maps. Obviously, the objective of this planning process is to complete the inter-regional evacuation before the hazards preceding actual hurricane eye landfall make safe evacuation impossible. Local officials must consider that sustained gale-force winds may occur several hours before eye landfall. Due to limited available shelter space, coastal evacuees will be assigned to shelters on a first-come,,first-served basis. As shelters reach capacity, evacuees will be passed to other areas of the Region where shelter space exists. When all shelters in the Region reach capacity, evacuees will be passed to shelters in the East Central Florida Region. Movement of traffic will he facilitated by traffic control points at critical intersections which will be manned by at least one law enforcement officer. Officers will set up road blocks using patrol cars, and other barricades, plus signs (if available) which will allow vehicles to pass through to local public or private shelters while maintaining orderly movement of inter- regional traffic. Obviously, adequate' communication must exist between public 'shelters and traffic control points so that officers at the traffic control points will know when shelters are nearing capacity. Without proper organization and deployment of officers-at critical intersections, the already high evacuation times Alluded to above can only increase.__ Details of deployment of officers should be worked out by regional meetings of local law enforcement agencies, the Florida Highway Patrol, and Civil Defense authorities. The Inland Shelter Advisory Committee is the obvious coordinative mechanism through which such meetings can take place. Lane use modification was discussed in several advisory subcommittee meet- ings and was rejected as a means to reduce clearance time. Reasons for rejection were that there are few regional evacuation routes which could be modified in the first place; emergency response to accidents or break- downs may be hindered; and, according to FDOT and the Lakeland Traffic Engineer's office, modifying a four (4) lane road to allow three (3) lanes of traffic to flow in one direction would not decrease evacuation times because of motorists' unfamiliarity with such a configuration,and because on-loading and off-loading of traffic on the facility would be relatively difficult (requiring additional manpower, etc.). The volume of traffic entering into the Central Florida Region during a major evacuation makes accidents and breakdowns likely. As was mentioned above, most regional roads are two lane facilities with limited passing sight distances, deteriorated surfaces and/or poor surface drainage, and inadequate (narrow) shoulders. Narrow shoulders is the most significant of the road- way limitations. The removal of disabled vehicles to the side of the road must be immediate, especially on a two-lane road. As with inefficient traffic control p,-lints, any delay in the removal of accidents or disabled vehicles can only increase already high evacuation times. Two recommend- ations made by the Tampa Bay Hurricane Evacuation Plan regarding accidents and disabled vehicles may be applied to this Region: 94 First,- where manpower resources make it possible, the critical traffic control points identified should be manned by two traffic control persons, This would allow one person to continue directing constant traffic movement while the other person supervised and facilitated the removal of any.potential disabled vehicles away from the critical evacuation path of the intersection. Second, special monitoring of historically inundated evacuation routes from freshwater should take place. The propensity for stalled and aband- onded vehicles on these routes will naturally be higher. It is recommended that the identification and mapping of such routes throughout the Region be utilized as a guide for the emergency pre-positioning and dispatch of towing and rescue equipment. VI. INTRA-REGIONAL EVACUATION The Central Florida Region cannot shelter both the vulnerable inland. (Central Florida) population and coastal evacuees. The Region, in fact, will be hard pressed to shelter inland evacuees alone. Based upon estimates of the vulnerable inland population expected to seek shelter (mobile home and flood plain residents)9, Okeechobee, Highlands, Hardee, and DeSoto Counties will not have sufficient shelter space available for its evacuees. Polk County will have approximately the same number of shelter spaces available as Polk County evacuees. This shelter deficit will obviously be compounded if a significant number of non-mobile home residents seek public shelter. The Inland Shelter behavioral survey asked both mobile home residents and non-mobile home residents where they would evacuate. The percentage of non-mobile home residents in Polk, Hardee, Okeechobee, Highlands and DeSoto who said they would go to a public shelter was 52.6%, 33%, 32.9%, 51% and 44.2% respectively. If the percentages of non-mobile home residents who said they didn't know where they would go (over 24% in each county) were added to the figures above, as was done to estimate public shelter demand for mobile home residents, one can see that an over- whelming number of regional residents could evacuate to public shelters, whether they need to do so or not. Intra-regional evacuation in Central Florida will be structured around evacuation zones, as illustrated in Figure 7. Because public shelters are concentrated in the major cities of DeSoto, Hardee and Okeechobee Counties, each of these counties was designated as an evacuation zone unto itself (Figures 8,9, and 10). Because shelters are dispersed in Highlands and Polk Counties, multiple zones were delineated in those two counties. Evacuation zones in Highlands County are illustrated in Figures 11(a) and 11 W. Zones in Polk County are illustrated in Figures 12 (a) and 12 (b). Table 7 defines the boundaries of the Highlands County and Polk County evacuation zones, the intra-regional evacuation routes within each zone, and the specific primary shelters assigned to each zone. Intra-regional sheltering will be on a first-come, first-served basis. Evacuation routes will be the shortest routes from an evacuee's residence to a public shelter. Evacuees who do not find space at the closest shelter 9Central Florida mobile home and flood plain residents expected to seek shelter are estimated to be 83,127 (region-wide). - 95 - TABLE EVACUATION ZONES ZONE Fill[BER ZONE '10UNDARIES EVACUATION ROUTES SHELTERS P-1 NORTH: Pasco County line and U.S. 98 W. Socrum Loop Rd. (S.R. 35A and S.R. 582), Kathleen Elementary EAST: U.S. 98, S.R. 582 (W. Socrum Banana/Wilder Rd, W. Campbell Rd, Duff Rd, Kathleen Jr. High Loop Rd.), Polk City Rd., Mc- Daughtery Rd, Deeson Rd, Knight Station/ Griffin Elementary Donald Rd. Griffin Rd (S.R. 582), Bella Vista St., Winston Elementary Kathleen Rd. (S.R. 35A), Providence Rd SOUTH: 1-4 (U.S. 98) WEST: Hillsborough and Pasco County lines. P-2 NORTH: Sumter and Lake County lines Old Polk City Rd, S.R. 33, S.R. 559A, S.R.559 Polk City Elementary EAST: Hickman Rd (graded Rd. extension of S.R. 557 A) SOUTH: 1-4, Socrum Loop/Polk City Rd. WEST: Socrum Loop Rd, U.S. 98 P-3 NORTH: Lake County Line U.S. 27', Deen Still Rd. (graded) S.R. 54, Polk City Elementary EAST: Osceola County Line Vaughn Beauchamp-Rd.- SOUTH: 1-4 WEST: Hickman Rd. (graded Rd. extensior of 557A) P-4 NORTH and EAST: Osceola County line U.S. 17/92, County Rd. 17, U.S. 27, S.R. 574, Davenport Elementary SOUTH: U.S. 17/92, U.S. 27, North City S.R. 580, S.R. 544, Hinson Ave. (Haines City) Bethune Elementary limit of Lake Hamilton, S.R. 546, Peninsular Dr. (Haines City) Polk City Rd/ Eastside Elementary and a line extending east from Minnie Ave. (Haines City), 10th St/Kingham Rd. Haines City Sr. High School S.R. 546 to the Polk/Osceola Co. (Haines City), Jackson Hwy. (Davenport) Haines City Jr. High School line. Alta Vista Elementary School WEST: S.R. 557A, S.R. 557, Creek Rd., Evenhouse Rd, Jackson Rd, Old Haines City-Lake Alfred Rd, Fletchers Cut-off, North and East Shorelines of Lake Haines, East and South Shorelines of-Lake Rochelle TABLE 7 (C Oil tinued) EVACU1=0N ZONES -ZONE NUMBER ZONE BOUNDARIES EVACUATION ROUTES SHELTERS P-5 NORTH: 1-4 S.R, 35A, U.S. 92, U.S. 92 Business, S.R. 600A Kathleen Sr. High School 'EAST: S.R. 35A (Kathleen Rd.), S.R. 37 (Memorial Blvd.), Galloway Rd. Seth McKeel Jr. High School @SOUTH: Cresap St./Lake Hunter Dr, Jesse Keen Elementary Bennett/Highland St., S.R. 542 WEST: Polk/Hillsborough County line. NORTH: 1-4 U.S. 98, S.R. 582, S..R. 700 (N. Florida Ave.), North Lakeland Elementary P-6 @EAST: S.R. 33 to Lakeland City Limit, S.R. 33 (Lakeland Hills Blvd.) Lake Parker Dr. SOUTH: 10th St/Parkview Place VEST: S.R. 35A NORTH: 10th St./Parkview Place, south S.R. 37 (Florida Ave.), S.R. 600A (Memorial Lime Street Elementary 00 P-7 shoreline of Lake Parker, U.S. 92 Blvd.), U.S. 92 (Lake Parker Dr.), U.S. 92 Lakeland High School ,@AST: S.R. 33A (Combee Rd) Business (Gary Rd.), U.S. 98, U.S. 98 Business Crystal Lake Elementary $OUTH: S.R. 33A (Edgewood DR.) S.R. 33 (Massachusetts Ave/Lakeland Hills Blvd. Crystal Lake Jr. High School ,@EST: S.R. 37 (So. Florida Ave.), S.R. 33A (Edgewo6d Dr".), Crystal Lake Dr. Cleveland CourtElementary S.R. 35A (Kathleen Rd.) NORTH: 1-4 Old Combee Rd., Tenoroc Mine Rd., S.R. 33A Combee Elementary ,'-V,AST: S.R. 33, Seab@ord Coastline R.R. (Combee Rd.), S.R. 546 (Saddle Creek Rd.), P-8 Right-of-Way, S.R. 546, Saddle Lake Parker Dr., East Lake Parker Dr. Creek ISOUTH: U.S. 92, South shoreline of Lake Parker ,WEST: S.R. 33 from Lakeland City limit to 1-4, 1-4 NORTH: 1-4 Same as boundaries Combee Elementary P-9 EAST: S.R. 655/Seaboard C.L.R.R. Lena Vista Elementary SOUTH: S.R. 546 'WEST: Seaboard Coastline R.R., S.R. 33 TABLE 7' (continued) EVACUATION ZOINDS ZONE NUMBER ZONE BOUNDARIES EVACUATION RO UTE.S SHELTERS NORTH: 1-4 S.R. 559, S.R. 559A, S.R. 655, U.S. 92, Auburndale Sr. High School P-10 jEAST: East shore of Lake Mattie, Lake Ariana Blvd, Plaklakaha Ave., Bridgers Ave., Auburndale Jr. High School Mattie Rd., Adams Grove Rd, U.S. 92 (Magnolia Ave.), S.R. 544A Auburndale Middle School Lynchburg Rd. Bridgers Ave. Elementary School SOUTH: U.S. 92, west shoreline of Lake Auburndale Central Elementary Jessie, S.R. 544A/Derby Rd. Lena Vista Elementary School !WEST: S.R. 655/Seaboard C.L.R.R. NORTH: 1-4 S.R. 557A, S.R. 557, S.R. 555, U.S. 17/92 Lake Alfred Primary School P-11 EAST: S.R. 557A, S.R. 557, Creek Rd. Lake Alfred Elementary Evenhouse Rd., Jackson Rd., Old Haines City-Lake Alfred Rd. Fletchers cut-off, north & east shorelines of Lake Haines, east and south shorelines of Lake \.O Rochelle SOUTH: U.S. 92 WEST: Lynchburg Rd., Adams Grove Rd, Lake Mattie Rd., east shoreline of Lake Mattie. P-12 NORTH: U.S. 17/92 S.R. 544, Old Lucerne Park Rd. Ridge Vocational Technical Center EAST: U.S. 27, West city limits of Lake Hamilton and Dundee SOUTH: Country Club Dr., Buckeye Loop Rd. WEST: West city limits of Winter Haven, west shoreline of Lake Smart, east shoreline of Lake Rochelle., south city limits of Lake Alfred, east shoreline of Lake Haines. TABLT@ 7 EVACUATION ZONES ZON",,@' 'C\JJ'MBER ZONTE BOTLINDARIES EVACUATION ROUTES SHELTERS NORTH: S.R. 542, Bennett/Highland St., S.R. 542, Airport Rd., Drane Field Rd., Medullaf Southwest Jr. High:School 1@ P-13 Lake Hunter Dr., Cresap St. Pipkin Rd./Lake Miriam Dr., S.R. 540A,,S.R. 37A Carlton Pal ore Elementary School m EAST: S.R. 37 (Florida Ave.), S.R. 33A (Scott Lake Rd.), S.R. 37B (Lakeland Highlands Lakeland-Highlands:Jr. High School (Edgewood Dr.), S.R. 37B (Lake- Rd.) Medulla.Element .aryjSchool land Highlands Rd.) Scott Lake Elementary School SOUTH: S.R. 540A (Central Barn Rd.), Carter Rd., Shepherd Rd. WEST: Hillsborough County line I T__ NORTH: U.S. 92 Maine Ave., Reynolds Rd., U.S. 98, S.R. 540 Oscar J. Pope Elementary School P-14 EAST: Saddle Creek' Polk Vocational Technical Center SOUTH: S.R. 540, U.S. 98 WEST: S.R. 33A (Combee Rd.) 0 0 P-15 NORTH: S.R. 546 (Saddle Creek Rd/ Old S.R. 542, U.S. 92 Westwood Jr. High School Dixie Hwy.) EAST: Phillips Rd., Howard Dr., U.S. 92, Thornhill Rd. SOUTH: S.R. 540 WEST: Saddle Creek P-16 NORTH: S.R. 544A Recker Hwy, S.R. 542, Spirit.Lake Rd/42nd St. Garner Elementary Schgol EAST: West shoreline of Lake Jessie, N.W., Jersey Rd, 26th St. N.W., 34'fih St. N.W., Inwood Elementary School Lake Jessie/Lake Idylwild Canal, Coleman Rd, 20th St. N.W., 21st St. N.W., Westwood Jr. High School Lake Idylwild/Lake Cannon Canal, Lake Howard Dr. N.W., 24th St. N.W. Lake Cannon/Lake Howard Canal, Lake Howard/Lake May Canal, Lake May/Lake Shipp Canal SOUTH: Lake Shipp Dr, Ave Q. P.W., S.R. 540 WEST: Thornhill Rd, U.S. 92, Howard Dr.,, Phillips Rd. M M-M M M M = M = M == TABLE 7 (con*t:iL1uc-J) EVACUATION ZONES ZONE VIUMBER ZONE BOUNDARIES EVACUATION RO UTES SHELTERS NORTH: S.R. 60 (Main St.) Main St, Broadway Ave, Stuart St, Clower St, Bartow Civic Center P-24 EAST: Broadway Ave, Stuart Ave. S.R. 555, Kissingen Ave. Bartow High' School, . SOUTH: Six Mile Creek/Cedar Branch Bartow Jr. High School WEST: S.R. 555 P-25 NORTH: North city limit of Bartow, U.S. S.R. 60 By-Pass, Main St., U.S. 17, Kissingen Bartow Elementary School 17, 91 Mine Rd, S.R. 60 Ave. Bartow Jr. High School EAST: S.R. 655A Bartow Sr. High School SOUTH: Mann Rd and a line extending from Mann Rd. to S.R. 559 WEST: Kissingen Ave, Stuart St., Broad- C3 way Ave. P-26 NORTH: S.R. 555, S.R. 559, Rifle Range S.R. 559, S.R. 655, S.R. 60, Old Bartow- Eagle Lake,Elementary School Rd, Eagle Lake Loop Rd/S.R. 540A Lake Wales Rd. EAST: Seaboard Coastline R.R. right-of- way SOUTH: S.R. 60 IWEST: 91 Mine Rd INORTH: Cedar Branch/Sixmile Creek, Same as Boundaries Bartow Civic Center U.S. 17, Mann Rd. and a line Bartow Jr. High School P-27 extending from Mann Rd. to S.R. Bartow Sr. High School 559 EAST: S.R. 559 SOUTH: S.R. 640 WEST: S.R. 555 TABLE 7' EVACUATION ZONES -ZONE NUMBER ZONE BOUNDARIES EVACUATION ROUTES SHELTERS NORTH: S.R. 60 S.R. 60, S.R. 655A, Alturas-Babson Park cut-of] Alturas Elementary School P-28 EAST: Seaboard Coastline right-of-way, Rd. Lake Buffum Rd. iSOUTH: Lake,Buffum Rd, Sinkhole Rd, S.R. 640 WEST: S.R. 559 ,NORTH: Peace Creek Drainage Canal, S.R.-60, U.S. 27, S.R. 17A, S.R. 17B, Lake Wales Sr. High School U.S. 27, Old Mammouth Grove Rd., U.S. 27A Lake Wales Fr. High School P-29 Camp Mack Rd. Hillcrest Elementary School tAST: Osceola County Line Janie Howard-Wilson Elementary SOUTH: River Ranch Blvd, S.R. 60/S.R. Polk Ave.. Elementary 630, Lake Walk-in-the-water Rd., Roosevelt Elementary C) 41 Lake Buffum Rd. and a line Spook Hill Elementary connecting Lake Buffum Rd, the Lake Wales Adult.School south town limit of Hillcrest Heights, Alico Rd, and Lake Walk in-the-water Rd. T111 '@'NORTH: S.R. 640, Sinkhole Rd. U.S. 17, S.R. 630, District Line Rd, S.R. 555, Ft. Meade Jr.-Sr. High School 'EAST: A line from Grassy Lake south to Lake Hendry Rd, Lake Buffum Rd. Riverside Elementary School Hardee County line. Ft. Meade Middle School P-30 SOUTH: Hardee County line @j@: District Line Rd./S.R. 555 mmmmmmmmm M TABLF 7 (c on L i n*U e'j EVACUATION ZONES ZOINIE MUMBER ZONE BOUNDARIES EVACUATION ROUTES SHELTERS NORTH: S.R. 60 (Main St.) Main St, Broadway Ave, Stuart St, Clower St, Bartow Civic Center P-24 EAST: Broadway Ave, Stuart Ave. S.R. 555, Kissingen Ave. Bartow High School@ SOUTH: Six Mile Creek/Cedar Branch Bartow Jr. High School WEST: S.R. 555 P-25 NORTH: North city limit of Bartow, U.S. S.R. 60 By-Pass, Main St., U.S. 17, Kissingen Bartow Elementary School 17, 91 Mine Rd, S.R. 60 Ave. Bartow Jr. High School EAST: S.R. 655A Bartow Sr. High School SOUTH: Mann Rd and a line extending from Mann Rd. to S.R. 559 WEST: Kissingen Ave, Stuart St., Broad- 0 way Ave. P-2.6 NORTH: S.R. 555, S.R. 559, Rifle Range S.R. 559, S.R. 655, S.R. 60, Old Bartow- Eagle Lake Elementary'School Rd, Eagle Lake Loop Rd/S.R. 540A Lake Wales Rd. EAST: Seaboard Coastline R.R. right-of- way SOUTH: S.R. 60 IWEST: 91 Mine Rd INORTH: Cedar Branch/Sixmile Creek, Same as Boundaries Bartow Civic Center U.S. 17, Mann Rd. and a line Bartow Jr. High School P-27 extending from Mann Rd. to S.R. Bartow Sr. High School 559 EAST: S.R. 559 SOUTH: S.R. 640 WEST: S.R. 555 TABLE 7 (Cont-I'lluccl.) EVACUATION ZONES ZONE NUMBER ZONE BOUNDARIES EVACUATION ROUTES SHELTERS P-28 NORTH: S.R. 60 S.R. 60, S.R. 655A, Alturas-Babson Park cut-ofj Alturas Elementary School j,,EAST: Seaboard Coastline right-of-way, Rd. Lake Buffum Rd. SOUTH: Lake.Buffum Rd, Sinkhole Rd, S.R. 640 iWEST: S.R. 559 NORTH: Peace Creek Drainage Canal, S.R. 60, U.S. 27, S.R. 17A, S.R. 17B, Lake Wales Sr. High School U.S..27, Old Mammouth Grove Rd., U.S. 27A Lake Wales Sr. High School P-29 Camp Mack Rd. Hillcrest Elementary School EAST: Osceola County Line Janie Howard Wilson.-Elementary 'SOUTH: River Ranch Blvd, S.R. 60/S.R. Polk Ave.. Elementary 630, Lake Walk-in-the-water Rd., Roosevelt Elementary C) Lake Buffum Rd. and a line Spook Hill Elementary connecting LakeiBuffum. Rd, the Lake Wales Adult,School A south town limit of Hillcrest Heights, Alico Rd, and Lake Walkj in-the-water Rd. WEST: Lake Buffum-West Lake Wales Rd/ Seaboard C.L.R.R.- NORTH: S.R. 640, Sinkhole Rd. U.S. 17, S.R. 630, District Line Rd, S.R. 555, Ft. Meade Jr.-Sr. High School EAST: A line from Grassy Lake south to Lake Hendry Rd, Lake Buffum Rd. Riverside Elementary School Hardee County line. Ft. Meade Middle School P-30 SOUTH: Hardee County line WEST: District Line Rd./S.R. 555 will be s ent to the next closest shelter. Counties which have inadequate space for their own residents will send local evacuees who have not been sheltered to the closest county with adequate shelter space. Intra-regional evacuation should be facilitated,by the following factors, based on the findings of the behavioral survey: 1) Nearly all inland residents will seek evacuation advice from National Weather Service reports broadcast on radio or T.V. Other than the National Weather Service, a majority of residents (ranging from 56% in DeSoto County to 72% in Hardee County) will seek advice from local government or law enforcement officials; 2) Most households will be ready to evacuate quickly and when ordered to do so, even if the weather is not threatening; 3) Most households would evacuate in one vehicle. On the other hand, intra-regional evacuation could be hindered by the following factors: 1) Over 40% of all mobile home households are age 65 or older (in Highlands County nearly 79% of mobile home households have someone 65 years old or older); 2) The median number of years in the Region for mobile home residents is 15 years or less. (Hurricane Donna was the last major hurricane to strike the Region, in 1960. Thus, the great*majority of mobile home residents moved to the area following that storm.) 3) Although most residents are familiar with the road network in their area, most do not know where the nearest public shelter is located. Intra-regional evacuation will be facilitated by at least one law enforce- ment officer at critical intersections on the local road network as well* as at the junctures of regional and local road networks. These traffic control points will also consist of roadblocks which allow for passage of local traffic. Details as to how officers and roadblocks will be deployed should be worked out through meetings of law enforcement and Civil Defense officials through the Inland Shelter Advisory Committee. Local officials should identify sites of potential localized flooding and prepare alternate evacuation routes so that flooded areas can be avoided. Local officials should also prepare for the prompt removal of accidents and disabled vehicles. Concern was raised in the discussion of inter-regional evacuation (above) that the onset of sustained gale-force winds and flooding may occur prior to completion of inter-regional evacuation. Conversely, at the local level, people may be told to evacuate even though a hurricane may not present an immediate inland threat. In such an event, school boards may not make their schools available promptly, and other local officials may be slow in recog- nizing the urgency of developments on the coast or elsewhere inland. While all evidence indicates that local officials will act expeditiously, appro- priate state officials should be prepared to facilitate emergency inter and intra-regional operations. VII. SHELTER CHECKPOINTS The shelter checkpoint issue was the most difficult to resolve in this study. Instructions from the Bureau of Disaster Preparedness were to 11specify the location of checkpoint sites at strategic points that would serve coastal evacuees. The purpose of these centers will be to provide 107 supporting services and guidance to evacuees seeking arrangements for shelter; to provide a control mechanism for officials keeping track of (evacuees);" and to distribute maps and directions to shelters. The Bureau asserts that communication with evacuees who need directions is essential, as is the need to determine who is headed for a friend or relative's house or hotel as opposed to those seeking public shelter. After severaI discussions and meetin gs with Bureau staff and Civil Defense officials, the locations of shelter checkpoint sites or reception areas were established in Polk, Hardee, Highlands and Okeechobee Counties. Sites in Polk, Okeechobee and Highlands Counties are based on sites identified in those counties' Nuclear Civil Protection Plans. DeSoto County, because of its location (the primary point of ingress of Southwest Florida evacuees) and because of its severely limited shelter capacity, will not establish checkpoint sites. Shelters in DeSoto County will reach capacity within a short period of time after the initiation of a coastal evacuation. Thus, shelter checkpoints in DeSoto will be superfluous. After absorbing as many evacuees as poss.ible, directing evacuees through DeSoto to other counties will be the major concern of DeSoto County officials. Related to this point is the assertion by Bureau staff that the primary purpose of checkpoints is for local officials to communicate with those evacuees who do not know where to go and direct them to public shelters. Moreover, once shelters reach capacity,.checkpoints may be dismantled and evacuees still on the regional road network will be directed to areas where shelter space is available. Thus, as shelters to which certain checkpoints have been directing evacuees reach capacity, those checkpoints may be closed. It is assumed, then, that checkpoints in counties with limited shelter capacity (relative to other counties in the Region), such as Hardee and Okeechobee, will be open for a relatively short period of time. The following are the locations of shelter checkpoints and reception areas in the Central Florida Region. DeSoto None Hardee Wauchula State Bank - Southeast corner of U.S..17 and Main Street, Wauchula Ernest Plaza - Northeast corner of U.S. 17 and Main Street, Wauchula Wauchula State Bank - U.S. 17, Bowling Green Highlands Venus Post Office - Junction of S.R. 731 and U.S. 27 St. Regis Co. Warehouse S.R. 70 west of u.s. 27 o Avon Park Airport 108 Okeechobee . Rodeo Arena (Reception Center) - North of Okeechobee City limit on U.S. 441 Polk . Lake Wales Plaza - Junction of S.R. 60 and U.S. 27 . Lake Wales Shopping Center - S.E. corner of Junction of S.R. 60 and U.S. 27 Golden Gate,Shopping,Center - S.E. corner of Junction of U.S. 60 By-pass and U.S. 98, Bartow . Bartow Mall (Reception Center, if necessary) N.E. corner of Junction of S.R. 60 By-pass and U.S. 98, Bartow . Mulberry Restaurant (Scenario 12 only) S.R. 60, east of S.R. 37, Mulberry . Lake Miriam Square Shopping Center (Scenarios 3 and 5) - Junction of S.R. 37 and Lake Miriam Drive, Lakeland 40 Acre Truck Stop (if necessary) - Junction Memorial Boulevard and Wabash Avenue, Lakeland Shelter checkpoint sites for Hardee and Okeechobee Counties are mapped in Figures 8,9, and 10 respectively. Checkpoint sites in Highlands County are mapped in Figures 11 (a) and 11 (b). Checkpoint sites in Polk County are mapped in Figures 12 (a) and 12 (b). To augment the function of checkpoint sites or reception areas, local officials may want to select specific gas stations along major evacuation routes to be supplied with county or regional evacuation and/or shelter maps (cost of reproduction to be incurred by the county or combination of counties). The availability of these maps should be noted by the gas station on a prominent sign. VIII. COORDINATION The first and perhaps the most important accomplishment of this study was the formation of the Central Florida Inland Shelter Advisory Committee. This committee's membership includes not only representatives of emergency response agencies, but representatives of hospitals, planning agencies, and the news media. (The Advisory Committee membership as of October, 1982 is listed in Appendix G.) This rather diverse membership illustrates multi-agency and mulit-county concern with the impact a major hurricane will have on the five county Central Florida Region. This advisory committee is the first of its kind in the Central Florida Region. For the first time, emergency response officials and other interested parties have had the opportunity to meet with their @ounterparts in neighboring cities and counties to discuss the implications of a major hurricane striking Central Florida. At the outset, the Inland Shelter Advisory Committee elected to divide itself into five county-based subcommittees for the purpose of 109 guiding and assisting CFRPC staff in completing this plan. The few full- committee meetings that were held were mainly informational meetings at which CFRPC staff presented individual "work products" or progress reports to the members. Working sessions were held on an informal basis at the subcommittee level in each county. Other informal meetings between CFRPc staff and key subcommittee members were also held during the study period. The main reason for holding infrequent and informal meetings was the belief of members that staff would risk losing members' interest if fre- quent, formal, and "uneventful" meetings we@e scheduled. A high level of interest was maintained throughout the study period, yet CFRPC-staff feels that more frequent meetings should be scheduled during the upcoming study period which will focus on hurricanes in the Atlantic Ocean. Staff feels that at the risk of losing some members's interst, the full membership's understanding of the study process and the information gathered during the study can be improved. Staff also believes the committee should be perpetuated beyond these two study periods. As was discussed earlier in this plan, the Inland Shelter Advisory Committee is the logical vehicle to maintain the multi-county continuity, coordination and communication necessary in hurricane planning. By holding regular meetings, the committee members will become more familiar with each other, and thus facilitate future coordination of emergency response planning. IX. RECOMMENDATIONS One purpose of intra and inter-regional advisory committees on this project was to assist regional planning council staff by offering expert opinions and suggestions on evacuation and sheltering. The following are a few of the suggestions which the CFRPC staff believes should be pursued and imple- mented. Regarding inter-regional evacuation, two significant proposals have be en advanced by members of the East Central Florida Technical Advisory Sub- committee. The first proposal is for "predesignation" of shelters for coastal evacuees. This would entail pre-assignment of coastal evacuation zones to certain inland reception centers. CFRPC staff believes that wit detailed and extensive discussions between coastal and inland regions* pre- designation may be a workable concept. on a related issue, ahl East Central Florida subcommittee proposed that the State provide a network of hurricane shelter signs based on "Emergency Snow Street" signs inmanynorthern states. (The "Snow Street" signs are typically posted on major city streets indi- cating that parking bans ate in effect following a declaration"of a snow emergency.) CFRPC staff endorses this idea as a way to lessen the burden. on traffic control points and -checkpoint sites. It is recommended that the State erect a network of signs on inter and intra-regional roads which indicate directions to shelters, and on major local roads to ban parking during a hurricane emergency. A less expensive system of signs may also be developed whereby coastal evacuees could communicate their needs to traffic control officers. As radio or television announcements inform coastal and inland residents to ay evacuate and which amenities they should take with them, the announcer m 110 instruct evacuees to state their needs or destinations on simply worded signs to be displayed on their vehicle's dashboard (e.g., "Need Shelter", or "To Friend's House", or "Need Directions"). Traffic control officers may also be provided with simple signs such as "To Shelter", "Local Traffic Only", or "Shelters Full". CFRPC staff believes such a system is at least as workable as other routing or signage systems, and would also lessen the burden on traffic control officers and information centers. On the local level, it has been noted that the Lakeland Police Depart- ment intends to designate one city shelter as the place where dependents of the L.P.D. who need to evacuate are to be taken. This idea was sub- sequently endorsed by each Central Florida Advisory Subcommittee as a way to allay officer's concerns for the safety of their families. County law enforcement,, Civil Defense and Red Cross officials are urged to incorporate this suggestion into their local plans. It should be noted that because of the potential shortage of shelter space, the only families which should be evacuated are those whose homes will be vulnerable to damage in a hurri- cane. Finally, it has been suggested that detailed hurricane information (i.e., shelter locations, etc.) be incorporated into local telephone books. This suggestion, advanced by members of both East Central and Central Florida Advisory Committees is worth pursuing and refining. Public information efforts are greatly needed in hurricane evacuation and shelter planning. The various news media should be involved to a greater extent in the planning processes. Recognizing the different needs of the media and local officials, input should be obtained from both parties as to the best form and content for press releases or public information presentations. I I I //, lz@ / / 'I I I .'POCKET* A Figures 1 3, 4, 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I 8,859/19,486 ORANGE I LAKE COUNTY COUNTY -SUMTER COUNTY 33 z 23,306/49,073 0 54 5.000/11,000 4 % 98 o L) 2 U) 4 i PO, K C,@, 8,859 19.48 5 17 DAVENPORT HAINES CITY -62*74 8 474119.7 OSCEOLA AUBURNDA - - - - - - ON LAKE HAMM z A 0 08/7,277 92' 2 INTE AV EN 23,306/51,273: ;DU14DEE 4 LAKELAND A i 17 7 11 F LE 4 'LAKE A 5 4,698/3,616 3,30 277 -,,"3,29 @2 55 LAKE WALES 1,455/3,201 BARTOW I i 17 255/561 HiGH: AND 60 55 PARK 3,291/ 240 736/1,6191 5 37 11) 17 27A 8,974/19,74 HE GHTS 60 2,555/5,621 FORT STPROOF 3 MEADE 0 3 0 98 m (n 2 17 74 1,186/2,609 305 17 7 25 1,369/3,01 9,819/21,6010, ',RE E 2 64 976/2,147 Avo 64 WAUCHULA 17 z 0 7 SEBRING -FO 2,1153915,585 IR IGS 63 6 6 35 (6-3'@ 17 98 3 T 17 6,960/15,313 Lu 7 z 61 LAKE -1 1,8316/26,039i L PLACiD 70 7,215/1518 29 r-,-"r. @ARCADIA 2,304/5,068 14,140/31,108 6,924/15, 72 61 z n 76 0 u 760 35 31 27 0 U) 4 31 CHARLOTTE COUNTY G ADE 34,476/75,847 1ORANGE LAKE COUNTY COUNTY jSUMTER 7 COUNTY1 q@ 33 z 164,S611/142,034 0 54 10,000/22,000 98 0 ! 92 4 (L POLK 34,476 76,847 CITY 5 17 DAVENPORT 5 4 3,8811/3@j 3 HAINES CITY LAKE 8 _Aj fRED AUBURNDAI E - - - - - - - - - z p @AkF HAN, -'-)N 2 0 4 9 92 INTEI@- w @4 2 67,0921147 AVEN "' E 602 D,ND 4 LAKELAND 4 98 7 17 E LE 4 A LAKE 5 15,593/34 304 5 55 LAKE WALES 0 @-M-BERPI Ow BART 17B 76 60 5 55 17 p4- 37 A 98 )7 30 ,696/67,309 15,593 34,ip4 6b P,:,R T CSTPROC) "EADE @F@ 0 S/20,141 ir,i 3 C70 5/20_141 cul) 74 (1 7@\ 16,483/36,262 305 17 (,P F E 2 35 AVON 64 1,012/2,226 62 PARK 64 6- WAUCHULA 17 20,000/44,000 00 SEB ING 4 OLFO 2,539/5,585 4/ @PRJNGI, 63 6 3 17 14,000/ 6 35 3 9,335/42,53 98 3 66 17 2 6 3 6/78.28 20@ UA 61 33,11 035+ 2E LAKE 33,892/74,582 2. /5,0 (local)=,35.58 /78.28 t PLAC 1) 33,335/73,337( 70 98/73,035 29 ARCADIA 13,969 8,000/17,600 33,335/73,337 70 7- 7,308/16,073 72 61 z 0 L) f 760 35 31 25 7 0 31 CHARLOTTE COUNTY GLAD S 8,243/18,134 7,961/17,514 9,131/20,088 13,969/30,731 13,323/29,310 ORANGE I LAKE COUNTY COUNTY - - - - - - - - - - iSUMTER COUNTYj 33 z 0 50,279/123,813 5A 8 5,000/11,000 2 UO 4 P01 K C'T' 0 17 DAVENP Rr -0,000/ 1 1,0JO 5 - - - - -- 4 INES CITY AKE --&L[RED 3 0 8,50 OSCEOLA AUBURNDAI E. - - - - - - - - - z 609 0 1 2 DUNDEE "'4/ LAKELAND 4 98 17 7 E AGL E 4 I'll 4 LAKE 923/2,030 4 -A.67 67 5 24,928 54,8 1 17 5 LAKE 988/2,169 WALES 4,901 10,782 1-_!@R3EPRN BART-' 0 i 7 18/39 676 3,296/7,25 HIGHLAND 0 e 5 PARK 5 17-----' 37 17 27A H! L Ll' REST 26,08 57, HF.GHTS 0 1 7.15 741 FORT FROSTPROOF 3 MEADE 0 000/ '600 3 Q0 98 con 17 74 1,085/2,387 1,719/341 917 34,08 27 4/74, a BOW, GREE 2 1 35 89 9/19,6 AVO 64 AUCHULA 25,11 5/56,341 17 z 0 SEBRING 1,725 3,795 ZOLFO SPRINGS 3 /27,196 2 17 6 35 3 12, 3 17 6 7(9 W - - - - - -- - - - - - - - 6 2 5, 55/55 41 I. AKE .21,483/47,163 lltAC 24,S6 5,038 29 7 ARCADIA 25,123/55,270 14, 7 4,82i/110,610 72 61 z 76 35 31 '257 0 (n CHARLOTTE COUNTY GLADE 7,742 17,032 7,476/16,447 9,905/21,791 14,109/31,039 IORANGE COUNTY L AKE COUNTY jSUMTER COUNTY -7 33 z 0 P-3 54 4 98 P-2 2 P-1 DA@ENPOR' 5 17 P-4 5 P-11 4 HAINES CITY P-9 AKE 8 -10 E 3 --- OSCEOLA AUBURNDA -- - - - - - - E @Am C N A 0 92 2 P-# 4 T P-1 p.:: INT i -14 P-1 Djl4DFE L P 4 AKELAND 4 P-13 17 P-18 98 P-19 A E -P 4 4 7 4 P-20 5 17 5 P- MU,BERR, ---- BART6"A/ 60 5 P-28 17 pApk P-29 37 A 98 t@@,P-27 17 R T P-22 FROSTPROOF 3 "EACE 0 cr 0 7 m P-30 (1'7' 74 p- I BOWL NG G GRiCG REEN 17.35 AVC) 2 61A N PARK H-1 64 WAUCHULA 17 z 0 Hr-l 3 SE RING 0 4 ...... ZOLFO H- SPRINGS 63 6 17 23 6 35 3 9 3 66 17 2 6 27(@@ Lu 6 PLAC D 70 29 ------r D-1 H-3 ARCADIA 72 61 z 76. 35 31 250 U) 4c1 31 0 or 0) CHARLOTTE COUNTY GLADES I I I I - I I I -TOCKET-B Figures 1 7, 8, 9, 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I @111 E F 61 17 Uj 630 'ro D-1 - 06"A F:4.. SHELTERS I old Brownville School 2 First Baptist Church 3 Desoto Middle School 4 Desoto County High 5 west Elementary School 6 Memorial Grammer School 7 Nocatee Elementary ,K Desoto County has no check points. 141 L LSBOROUG,4 COUNTY P 0 L K C 0 U N T .Y..n OWL 1 6 GRJE 17 62 WAUCHULA 0 lul jc 03 Hr- I 4 ZOL Fo SPRINOS 66 w 17 w 5 - - - - - - - -C U N T-Y D 9-S 0 T -0- SHELTERS CHECK POINTS I Bowling Green Elementary A Wouchula State Bank 2 Hardee Junior High B Ernest Plaza 3 Hardee Senior High C Wduchula State Bank 4 Zolfo Springs Civic Center 5 Zolfo Springs Elementary 0-1 9 441 0 FIGURE 10 2 9 KEECHOSEE OKEECHOBEE COUNTY >< rA-- EVACUATION ZONES/SHELTERS/CHEM POINTS 7 441 LEGEND 15 15A 7 10 0-1 EVACUATION ZONES 0 SHELTERS LAKE CHECK POINTS OKEECHOBEE SHEL@ERS I Okeechobee Moose Lodge 2 Okeechobee Junior High 3 Okeechobee High 4 City Hall 5 Sixth Grade Center 6 North Elementary 7 South Elementary CHECK POINTS A Rodeo Arena pr*pwed by the 4ALM BEACH 1 COUNTY CENTRAL FLORWA REGONAL PLANNM COUNM Octobw 190: 0 S C E 0 L A C 0 U N T Y N_D@, I IN 441 C 0 U N T Y 15C Ay 68 LEGEND Figures 12 (a) - 12 (d) POLK COUNTY SHELTERS 1. Kathleen Elementary School 26. Highland City Elementary 2. Lake Gibson Jr. High School 27. James E. Stephens Elementary 3. Padgett Elementary 28. Bartow Middle School 4.1, Griffin Elementary 29. Bartow Sr. High 5.L North Lakeland Elementary 30. Bartow Jr. High 6.L Winston Elementary 31. Union Academy 7.1, Kathleen Sr. High School 32.1 Polk City Elementary 8.L John Cox Elementary 33. Lena Vista.Elementary 9.L Combee Elementary 34. Auburndale Sr. High 1O.L Seth McKeel Jr. High 35. Auburndale Jr. High ll.L. Jessee Keen Elementary 36. Walter Caldwell Elementary 12.L. Lakeland Sr. High 37. Auburndale Central Elementary 13.L Crystal Lake Jr. High 38.W Lake Alfred Elementary 14,L Southwest Jr. High 39.W Ridge Vocational Technical Cent 15.L Cleveland Court Elementary 40.W Garner Elementary 16.1, Oscar Pope Elementary 41.W Jewett Elementary 17.L Carlton Palmore Elementary 42.W Northeast Jr. High 18.L Polk Opportunity School 43.W Westwood Jr. High 19.L Crystal Lake Elementary 44.W Inwood Elementary 20. Polk Vocational Technical 4 5.W Elbert Elementary 21. Lakeland Highlands Jr. High 46.W Denison Jr. High 22., Medulla Elementary 47.W Winter Haven Sr. High 23- Scott Lake Elementary 48.W Lake Shipp Elementary 24- Mulberry Elementary 49.W Snively Elementary 25., Mulberry Sr. High 50. Garden Grove Elementary L = Lakeland W = Winter Haven 117 LEGi_"'D Figures 12 (a) - 12 (d) POLK COUNTY SHELTERS (continued) 51. Eagle Lake Elementary 62. Janie Howard Wilson Elementary 52. Alturas Elementary 63. Lake Wales High School 53. Fort Meade-Jr./Sr..High 64. Roosevelt Elementary 54. Lewis Elementary 65. Spook Hill Elementary 55. Fort Meade Middle School 66. Polk Avenue Elementary 56. Davenport Elementary 67. Hillcrest School 57. Bethune Elementary 68. Lake Wales Jr. High 58. Eastside Elementary 69. Babson Park Elementary 59. Haines City Sr. High 70. Frostproof Jr./Sr. High 60. Haines City Jr. High 71. Frostproof Elementary .61. Alta Vista Elementary POLK COUNTY CHECKPOINTS A. 40 Acre Truck Stop (if necessary) E. Bartow Mall (Reception Center, if necessary) B. -Lake Miriam Square Shopping Center (Scenarios 3 and 5) F. Lake Wales Plaza C. Mulberry Restaurant (Scenario 12 only) G. Lake Wales Shopping Center D. Golden Gate Shopping Center 118 I / / - - - -- - --- I / V/ I I I . IPOCKET',C, Figures I lla, llb, 12a, 12b, 12c, 12d I I I I I I I I I I I I H A R 0 E E T Y-- ON IN CA) LX/- (Am r x Ic m m 30 m c C) r-0 G) M -4c m m m 310 -% M -1 z m Zm 0 o 0 m z CO 0 z c 30 N 0 0 Z z z 0 A 7 I Missionary Church 6 Sebring Middle School 2 Wolker Memorial Jr. Academy 7 City Pier Youth Center 3 First Baptist Church a Courthouse 4 Avon Park High 9 First Presbyterian Church 5 South Fforida College 10 Fred Wild Elementary I/ Agriculture Center CHECK POINTS A Avon Pbrk Airport LAXE IVE LANE PLACID J L I N 12 WINTE U 29 H-3 LAKE L-7@ PLACID at 14 15 Hl EVACUATIC ol 0 L A D 'E' S SHELTERS CHECK POINTS 0`2 Lake Placid High a St. Regis Warehouse prepared by the 13 Miller Warehouse C Venus Post Office 14 St. Regis Warehouse CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL 15 Lake Placid Grove Warehouse PLANNING COUNCIL October 1982 iORANGE L A K E 0 U N T Y COUN TY SUMTER COUNTY POLK COUNTY FLORIDA 7 33 WESTERN P FIGURE 1: P-3 4 0 P-2 Q 4 p- 1 32 P-4 35 +. .557 7 DAVE 547 C5 p- I 02 1; 4 57 0 -1 HAIM S Cl p, -9 5 10 L La e Lake o :etta Lo Lo A, 559) Afred 3 rgo 6,@ - AUBURND 061 4 I Lam 3 La e P7 P rker Lake f 2, LAKF HAIWILT Fam take J @54@ k7 4L 9L P- 15,- IV T E Al I I !P-17 -HAVEN A@, AND / Lake p- I fkwa E 4Z) 37 -P- 14' 38 W:049 W P-13 4u 50 98 ake 0 @17 a 2 f P-1 LF Lake AKE t5 4DO 22 0 5 Hancock P-20 5 (27 C 23 26 9 C25 X P-21 75@@ 653'l P-26 I k@ , AKL 60 L 27 RE 60 _Y MULBERRY 25 BARTOW: 2 2 4@@ F- P-23 P-26 3-0 52 68 76 P.6 55 P-29 P-28 mo P-27 37, 4 P-22 FORT 0 MEADE 630 t P-30 98 CD P-3 I 74 5 17 MANATEE H A R 0 E c C U N T COUN T Y < FIGURE 12b P-4 POLK COUNTY EASTERN PORTION. T%0-0 EVACUAIION ZONES/SHELTERS/CHECK POINTc LEGEND P-1 EVACUATION ZONES 0 SHELTERS P-18 CHECK POINTS L-ake Pierce Lake propwod by the Rosalie CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL iL 17B T[ger 'PIP. Octobw 1982 11 LAKE Lake LES I% PARK 17 27A SHELTERS Crooked 69 Lake 69 Babson Park Elementor W, I&fT Weohyakapka 70 Frostproof Junior-Sonic 71 Frostproof Elomentvr.@- FROSTPROOF Reedy P-3 1' (Clinch! Lake AVON PARK SOUSING RANGE It 17 Lake (AVON PARK WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA) L vingston I ? - ly, 27 25 1 4 64 HARDEE 4 H I G H L A N D S C 0 U N T Y OKEECHOBEE COUNTY COUNTY L4k 4L 3 98 GRIFFIN ,fix 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7@ w 7 ......... torm 91. 9L to 6L 7L 10L@ 92 - WW: :.::Y:: %2 A@ .; 19L 11L a lLako) LAKE I L 4AXA-d CRV LAKE Olt morm 7- 0.71 16L $AND OULLY *a FIGURE 12c CITY OF LAKELAND SHELTERS FIELD RA L j) d 0 ALM@_ On. HALLAM Do. 17 37 r A j L -J Lj i 4 92 )fAVKM "oooo, .... ...... J A-Oks con 60 to bd L No tho r L z jw AVE V NW .... ... .. . BUCKEYE LOOP .. ............ ... ........... Al: AVE N Nw :MWO AWAV N 'AN&L, L X: .......... X 43W ........ .. LOA a*art" ... ....... Lake De or ..N.E. 110 Q ;,low a I FIGU ek@ w -, LE-@* 65 CITY 0 F W I SHE :x sw Avs: w V.9. *W, .... ... ... . .... ... ..... . .. ......... .. ... .. . . ... .... ........- Lake Roy w 48 Loki Lulm 49W 38W ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............... r I JL k. Rochelle Appendix A Tracks of Hurricanes Passing Within 100 Nautical Miles of Tampa Bay 18867 1979 20 17 1 11 1 219 22. 3 19 1025 15 13 6 33 4 Is 3 31- 6-" > 0 0 0 zc @j -0 )w In co (n 0 Z'4 2 1 33 3 1023 HURRICANES PASSING WITHIN 100 NAUTICAL MILES OF TAMPA BAYz 1806-1979 Distance to Closest Point Date at Closest Point Wind Starting Storm's of Approach Closest Point of Approach Speed Index Date Name (Lat.) (Long.) of Approach (NM) 1 7/14/1886 Not Named 28.5N 63.4W 7/18/1886 63 98 2 8/14/1888 Not Named 26.4N 83.OW 8/17/1888 72 @104 3 10/08/1888 Not Named 28.6N 84.OW 10/10/1888 86 97 4 9/18/1894 Not Named 27.4N 81.7W 9/25/1894 .56' .122 5 9/22/1896 Not Named 28.2N 83.9W 9/24 '/1896 71 112 6 10/07/1896 Not Named 26.5N 82.OW 10/09/1896, 79 98 7 8/02/1898 Not Named 28.ON 82.6W 8/02/1898 26 80 8 8/04/1901 Not Named 27.2N 82.8W 8/12/1901 24 76 9 9/09/1903 Not Named 27.7N 82.8W 9/12/1901 7 75 10 10/09/1910 Not Named 27.6N 81.8w 10/18/1910 51 @81 11 8/09/1911 Not Named 27.ON 83.7W 8/10/1911 61 81 12 10/20/1921 Not Named 27.8N 83.1W 10/25/1921 21 124 13 11/29/1925 Not Named 27.2N 82.5W 12/01/1925 31 75 14 9/11/1926 Not Named 27.ON 83.1W 9/19/1926 40 125 is 9/06/1928 Not Namecy 28.IN 81.8w 9/17/1928 61. 129. 16 9/22/1929 Not Named 27.3N B3.5W 9/29/1929 44 104 17 8/26/1932 Not Named 26.8N 83.2W 8/30/1932 51 81 18 8/31/1933 Not Named 28.2N 82.2W 9/04/1933 48 94 19 8/29/1935 Not Named 27.4N 83.2W 9/04/1935 25 114 20 7/27/1936 Not Named 27.ON 83.3W 7/30/1936 48 77 21 8/07/1939 Not Named 28.4N 82AW 8/12/1939 51 75 22 10/03/1941 Not Named 27.4N 83.2W 10/06/1941 26 114 23 .10/12/1944 Not Named 27.6N 82.3W 10/19/1944 28 98 24 6/20/1945 Not Named 28.6N 83.3W 6/24/1945 66 106 25 9/12/1945 Not Named 27.8N 81.8w 9/16/1945 54 127 26 10/05/1946 Not Named 27.5N 82.7W 10/08/1946 5 106 27 9/04/1947 Not, Named 26.7N- 83.4W. 9/18/1947 63 98 28 8/23/1949 Not Named 28.3N 82.2W 8/27/1949 52 121 29 9/01/1950 Easy 27.9N* 83.1W 9/05/1950 25 127 30 10/13/1950 King 28.1N 81.3W 10/18/1950 85 82. 31 10/18/1950 Love 28.4N 83.7W 10/21/1950 70 .78 32 8/29/1960 Donna 27@5N 61.9w 9/11/1960 46 130 33 6/04/1966 Alma 27.3N 83.3W 6/09/1966 33 113 34 10/13/1968 Gladys 28.1N 83.3W 10/18/1968 43 81 SIM: 10ionggurrWe C"rj ME M. M M M M M I I I I I I I I Appendix B Saffir/Simpson I Hurricane Scale I I .I I I I I I I I THE SAFFIR/SIMPSON HURRICANE SCALE The Saffir/Simpson Hurricane Scale is used by the National Weather Service to give public safety officials a continuing assessment of the potential for wind and storm surge damage from a hurricane in progress. Scale numbers.are made available to public safety officials when a hurricane is within 72 hours of landfall. Scale assessments are revised regularly as new observations are made, and public safety organizations are kept informed of new estimates of the hurricane's disaster potential. Scale numbers range from 1 to 5. Scale No. 1 begins with hurrica nes in which the maximum sustained winds are at least 74 mph, or which will produce a storm surge 4 to 5 feet above normal water level, while Scale No. 5 applies to those in which the maximum sustained winds are 155 mph or more, which have the potential of producing a storm surge more than 18 feet above normal. The Scale was developed by Herbert Saffir, Dade County, Florida, consulting engineer, and Dr. Robert H. Simpson, former National Hurricane Center director, and projects scale assessment categories as follows: Category No. 1 - Winds of 74 to 95 mph. Damage primarily to shrubbery, trees, foliage, and unanchored mobile homes. No real damage to other structures. Some damage to poorly constructed signs. Storm surge 4 to 5 feet above normal. Low-lying coastal roads inundated, minor pier damage, some small craft in exposed anchorage torn from moorings. Category No. 2 - Winds of 96 to 110 mph. Considerable damage to shrubbery and tree foliage; some trees blown down. Major damage to exposed mobile homes. Extensive damage to poorly constructed signs. Some damage to roofing materials of buildings.; some window and door damage. Coastal roads and low-lying escape routes inland cut by rising water two to four hours before arrival of hurricane center. Considerable damage to piers. Marinas flooded. Small craft in un- protected anchorages torn from moorings. Evacuation of some shoreline residences and low-lying island areas required. Category No. 3 - Winds of 111 to 130 mph. Foliage torn from trees; large trees blown down. Practically all poorly constructed signs blown down. Some damage to roofing materials of buildings; some window and door damage. Some structural damage to small buildings. Mobile homes destroyed. Storm surge 9 to 12 feet above normal. B-1 Serious flooding at coast and many smaller structures near coast destroyed; large structures near coast damaged by battering waves and floating debris. Low-lying escape routes inland cut by rising water three to five hours before hurricane center arrives. Flat terrain 5 feet or less above sea level flooded inland 8 miles or more, Evacuation of low-lying residences within several blocks of shoreline possibly required. Category No. 4 - Winds of 131 to 155 mph. Shrubs and trees blown down; all signs down. Extensive damage to roofing materials, windows, and doors. Complete failure of roofs on many small residences. Complete destruction of mobile homes. Storm surge 13 to 18 feet above normal. Flat terrain 10 feet or less above sea level flooded inland as far as six miles. Major damage to lower floors to structures near shore due to flooding and battering by waves and floating debris. Low-lying escape routes inland cut by rising water three to five hours before hurricane center arrives. Major erosion of beaches. Massive evacuation of all residences within 500 yards of shore possibly required, and of single-story residences on low ground within two miles of shore. Category No 5 - Winds greater than 155 mph. Shrubs and trees blown down; considerable damage to roofs on many residences and industrial buildings. Extensive shattering of glass in windows and doors. Some complete building failures. Small buildings over-turned or blown away. Complete destruction of mobile homes. Storm surge greater than 18 feet above normal. Major damage to lower floors of all structures less*than 15 feet above sea level within 500 yards of shore. Low-lying escape routes inland cut by rising water three to five hours before hurricane center arrives. Massive evacuation of residential areas on low'ground within five to ten miles of shore possibly required. Dr. Neil Frank, present National Hurricane Center director, has adapted atmospheric pressure ranges to the Saffir/Simpson Scale. These pressure ranges, along with a numerical breakdown of wind and storm surge ranges are: SCALE CENTRAL PRESSURES WINDS SURGE NUMBER MILLIBARS INCHES (MPH) (FT.) DAMAGE 1 980 28.94 74- 95 4- 5 Minimal 2 965-979 23.5 -28.91 96-110 6- 8 Moderate 3 945-964 27.91-28.47 111-130 9-12 Extensive 4 920-944 27.17-27.88 131-155 13-18 Extreme 5 920 27.17 155+ 18+ Catastrophic B-2 Appendix C Report on Expected Coastal Demand for Inland Shelter Facilities REPORT ON THE EXPECTED COASTAL DEMAND FOR INLAND COUNTY SHELTER FACILITIES FROM THE TAMPA BAY AND SOUTHWEST FLORIDA PLANNING REGIONS Prepared By: Department of Veteran and Community Affairs Division of Public Safety Planning and Assistance Bureau of Disaster Preparedness C-1 INTRODUCTION As a result of the implementation of Florida's Coastal Management Program, The Department of Veteran and Community Affairs was awarded funding to conduct an inland hurricane shelter study. The majority of work to be accomplished with this grant will be carried out by the Central, East Central, and Withlacoochee Regional Planning Councils. As part of its support to the study effort, the Bureau.of Disaster Preparedness was assigned the task of providing the following information to these agencies: A. Expected coastal demand for shelter facilities resulting from hur ricanes striking the Tampa Bay area, the south- west Florida area, and for a hurricane parallelling Florida's west coast. B. Identification of evacuation routes to be used by coastal evacuees seeking refuge. C. Identification of the number of vehicles and people expecting to enter.inland counties for shelter, by evacu- ation route. The following report presents the results of this research effoF't,' explains the methodology used in the analysis, and pro- vides a summary of the work effort's findings. METHODOLOGY The procedure used for determining the expected coastal demand for i.nland shelter facilities consisted of three steps: A. Identifying regional evacuation scenarios to use as a basis for determining coastal demand for shelter. B. Identifying routes evacuees will use in entering inland counties. C-2 C. - Estimating the number of coastal e'vacuees entering inland counties by* these evacuation' routes. The sources used to derive this information were the Tampa Bay Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan, Technical Data Report; public information tabloids published for dissemination throughout the Tampa Bay Planning 'Region; the Southwest Florida Regional.Hurricane Evacuation Plan; and discussions with coastal county civil defense directors and staff from the Tampa Bay and Southwest Florida Regional Planning Councils. Each step of this methodology is discussed in more detail in the following section. Step A. Identify Regional Scenarios Hurricanes with parallelling and landfalling tracks were chosen for regional evacuation scenarios if they met the following criteria: A. That the exposure from this track represented the worst probable case for evacuation for each county in each planning region, or B. That the track produced one of the five disaster potential intensities on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale for each county in the two regions. using this criteria, hypothetical hurricane tracks simulated by either the Tampa Bay or the Charlotte Harbor SLOSH (Sea Lake Overland Surge Height) Model were selected, from which the number of people to be evacuated were identified from the two hurricane ev acuation studies. The resulting evacuation scenarios and their regional impact are depicted in Table I. For the purpose of this analysis, letter rather than number designations represent the differing levels of vulnerability posed by the regional sce- nario: "A" corresponds to a category one hurricane and "E" c-3 represents a category 5 hurricane. Step B. Identify Evacuation Routes Highways or roads to be used for inte'rregional evacuation' were identified from the two coastal regional hurricane eva- cuation studi(@s and from discussions with coastal county civil defense directors. These routes are identified in Figure 1. Step C. Estimate The Number Of Coastal Evacuees Entering Inland Counties By Evacuation Scenario This portion of the methodology consisted of three steps: 1. Applying knowledge derived from the behavorial studies conducted for each hurricane evacuation study to esti- mate the percentage of coastal evacuees, who would leave the county or region. 2. Converting evacuation population into vehicle counts using regional specific vehicle occupancy rates. 3. Calculating traffic/population route assignments. Each of these s teps required a number of assumptions before calculations could be undertaken. These assumptions are iden- tified in Figure 2. The results of this analysis are shown in two series of tables. The Table II series identifies, by regional evacuat ion scenario, the total number of. vehicles and people evacuating into inland planning regions by evacuation route regardless of trip destination (e.g., public shelter, hotel-motel, or friend or relative). The Tab le III series provides a breakdown by eva- cuation scenario of the number of evacuees from coastal counties entering either the Central Florida or Withlacoochee Planning Regions that are expected to seek public shelter. Note the tables identifying the number of evacuees seeking C-4 FIGURE 1 SUMMARY OF HIGHWAYS TO BE USED IN INTERREGIONAL EVACUATION Withlacoochee Planning Region Highway Number/Name From To U.S. 41 Pasco County Hernando County U.S. 301 Pasco County Hernando County 1-75 Pasco County Hernando County Central Florida Planning Region Highway Number/Name From To 1-4 Hillsborough County Polk County U.S. 92 Hillsborough County Polk County S.R. 60 Hillsborough County Polk County S.R. 574 Hillsborough County Polk County S.*R. 640 Hillsborough County Polk County S.R. 674 Hillsborough County Polk County S.R. 676 Hillsborough County Polk County S.R. 62 Manatee County Hardee County -S.R. 64 Manatee County Hardee County S.R. 70 Manatee County Desoto County 1-75 Sarasota County County Via S.R. 64 U.S. 41 Sarasota County Desoto County Via S.R. 70 U.S. 301 Sarasota County Desoto County Via S.R. 70 S.R. 72 Sarasota County Desoto County U.S. 17 Charlotte County Desoto County Kings Highway Charlotte County Desoto County S.R. 31 Charlotte County Desoto County U.S. 27 (1q) Glades County Highlands County U.S. 27 (E) Hendry County Palm Beach County S.R'. 84 Collier County Broward County U.S. 41 (E) Collier County Dade County C-5 FIGURE 2 ASSUMPTIONS USED IN DETERMINING COASTAL COUNTY DEMAND FOR SHELTER FACILITIES IN INLAND COUNTIES I. Behavorial Assumptions A. Of the population evacuating out of the Tampa Bay Region, the following may be seeking shelter in interior counties: Pasco County, 49.5%; Pinellas County, 33.8%; Hillsborough County, 38.6%; Manatee County, 34.0% (Source: Tampa Bay Hurricane Evacuation Plan Technical Data Report). B. 34% of the Southwest Florida Planning Region's population effected by hurricanes will evacuation out of the region (Source: Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan). I I C. 45% of the Southwest Florida Planning Region's population effected by hurricane will seek shelter (Source: Southwes t Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan). D. That portion of the population seeking shelter who cannot find it due to an inadequate supply within their county will evacuate out of both Tampa Bay and Southwest Florida Planning Regions. Il. Conversion of Population to Number of Vehicles A. Vehicle occupancy rates for the Tampa Bay Region were derived from 1970 Census Data updated to 1979 data (Source: Tables G-11 through G-15, Tampa Bay Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan Technical Data Report). -B . Vehicle occupancy rates for the Southwest Florida Region were derived by dividing the number of people evacuating out of each county by the number of vehicles to be used in such an evacuation (Source: Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan). III. Reqional Traffic/Population Assignments A. Traffic assignments on routes out of the Tampa Bay Region were derived from Appendix G, Tampa Bay Regional Hurricane Evacuation Plan Technical Data Report. B. Traffic Assignments on routes out of the Southwest Florida Region were based on the routes' abilities to handle traffic bas&d on their roadway capacities. In this manner, maximum use of the regional transportation networks is achieved while providing the shortest eva- cuation time possible. C-6 FIGURE 2 (CONTINUED). 1. That portion of a county's population evacuating on 1-75 would remain on that route until they leave the region. 2. Evacuees using U.S..41 would gravitate towards 1-75 as they leave their respective counties. 3. Evacuees from Collier, Lee, Charlotte, and Sarasota remaining on 1-75 will be routed northeast on 1-4. 4. Traffic entering Manatee County on U.S. 41 and U.S. 301 from the Southwest Florida Planning Region will be routed east on S.R. 70. 5. Traffic entering Sarasota County on U.S. 41 from Collier, Lee and Charlotte counties will be routed east on S.R. 72. 6. S.R. 765 in Lee County will not be used as an eva- cuation route by those evacuees from Collier County. 7. S.R. 775 in Charlotte County will not be used as an evacuation route by those evacuees from Lee and Collier Counties. 8. S.R. 31 in Charlotte County will be used primarily by evacuees from Lee County. C-7 public shelter from counties in the Southwest Florida Planning Region are structured differently than the information for coun_ ties in the Tampa Bay Region. This is due to a slightly dif- ferentmethod for calculating vehicle/population route assign- mentS based on the data provided *(see row four for the number of people expected to seek public shelter). FINDINGS The demand for inland shelter services, whether it be a public shelter, a hotel or motel, or a friend or relative, ranges from a low of 77,-,693 to a high of 460,568 people. Those evacuees desiring a public shelter range from a low of 36,152 to a high of 226,212. In all cases, however, the number of people expecting to find refuge within the inland counties of the three planning regions may exceed present capabilities. The parallelling hurricane produces the greatest impact on inland counties for shelter services. The greatest ,impact to the Withlacoochee Planning Region is likely to result from a hurri- cane..,;triKing either Pinellas or Hillsborough County (Regional Scenarios 2 or 3). The greatest impact to the Central Florida Planning Region from a landfalling hurricane is one that strikes Sarasota County (Regional Evacuation Scenario 5). Although the landfalling hurricane producing the greatest impact to the East' Central Flor.ida Planning Region cannot directly be inferred from this analysis, it is expected that a hurricane striking Pinellas, Hillsborough, or Sarasota County would produce substantial demand for shelter services in this region. C-8 COASTAL COUNTY DEMAND FOR INLAND SHELTERS FROM TAMPA BAY AND SOUTHWEST FLORIDA PLANNING REGIONS Prepared By: Department of Veteran And Community Affairs Division of Public Safety Planning And Assistance Bureau of Disaster Preparedness C-9 TABLE I BINATION OF COUNTY SCENARIOS FORMING REGIONAL SCENARIOS COUNTY SCENARIO Glades s Hillsborough Manatee Sarasota -Charlotte Lee* Collier Hendry B B D@ C D B E D C D D C B All B D C C All D D D All A B B A All C B B All A C C All A D All A B C D D All 7BIN, al Hurricane Evacuation Plan Technical Report. -ricane Evacuation Plan. TABLE I (Continued) KEY SHEET Scenario A = Surge heights from a Category 1 or 2 Storm on the Saffir/Simpson Hurricane Scale-, as modeled by the Tampa Bay and Charlotte Harbor Sea Lake Overland Surge Height (SLOSH)-computer models. Scenario B = Surge heights from a Category 2 or 3 Storm on the Saffir/Simpson Hurricane Scale, as modeled by the Tampa Bay and Charlotte Harbor Sea Lake Overland Surge Height (SLOSH) computer models. Scenario C = Surge heights from a Category 3 or 4 Storm on the Saffir/Simpson Hurricane Scale, as modeled by the Tampa Bay and Charlotte Harbor Sea Lake Overland Surge Height (SLOSH) computer models. Scenario D = Surge heights from a Category 4 Storm on the Saffir/Simpson Hurricane Scale, as modeled by the Tampa Bay and Charlotte Harbor Sea Lake Overland Surge Height (SLOSH) computer models. Scenario E = Surge heights from a Category 5 Storm on the Saffir/Simpson Hurricane Scale, as modeled by the Tampa Bay Sea Lake Overland Surge Height (SLOSH) computer model. .All = Evacuation of the population exposed to hurricane wind forces, regardless of category storm. C-13 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 1 TABLE 2.1 Worst Case: Pasco (revised 8/13/82) Evacuation Route Pasco Co. Pinellas Co. Hillsborough Co. Manatee Co. To tal - Out of Region Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh.'/People U.S. 41 5313/15748 1808/3919 734/1287 - 7855/20�54 U.S. 301 1561/5074 3503/7305 12883/26222 - 17947/38601 1-75 319/884 28052/59195 - - 28371/60079 Subtotal 7193/21706 33363/70419 13617/27509 - 54173/119634 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1-4 - 20058/44004 4915/10321 - 24973/54325 U.S. 92 - 389/969 47/b4 - 456/1053 S.R. 60 - - 2514/5164 - 2514/5164 S.R. 574 - 2392/5063 - 2392/5063 S.R. 640 1602/3292 1602/3292 S.R. 674 2811/5950 2811/5950 S.R. 676 60/131 60/131 S.R. 62 - 1980/5321 1980/5321 S R. 64 5633/15078 5653/15078 S.R. 70 - 1001/2716 1001/2716 Subtotal 20447/44973 14341/30005 8614/23115 43.402/98093 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ TOTAL 7193/21706 53810/115392 27958/57514 8614/23115 97575/217727 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 2 TABL,E 2.2 Worst Cal@ se: Pinellas (revised 8/13/82) Evacuatln Route Pasco Co. Pinellas Co. Hillsborough Co. Manatee Co. Total Out of i!elgion Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People U.S. 41 4574/13832 3739/8283 2461/6940 10774/29055 U.S. 301, 1561/5074 4502/8235 16095/34304 22158/47613 319/884 34865/65958 1-75 35184/66842 Subtotalli 6454/19790 43106/82476 18556/41244 68116/143510 L ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1-4 30715/69721 10374/25345 - 41089/95066 U.S. 92 389/969 77/242 - 466/1211 ON S.R. 60 - 3004/6508 - 3004/6508 S.R. 5741 3371/7857 - 3371/7857 S.R. 1909/4168 - 1909/4168 S.R. 674 3063/6719 - 3063/6719 S.R. 676@ 663/1701 - 663/1701 S.R. 62 - 2855/7934 2855/7934 S R. 64 6555/17820 6555/17820 S.R. 70 - - 1001/2716 1001/2716 Subtotal 31104/70690 22461/52540 10411/28470 63976/151700 ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL 6634/19790 74210/153166 41017/93784 10411/28470 132092/295210 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 3 TABLE 2.3 Worst Case: Hillsborough (revised.8/13/82) Evacuation Route Pasco Co. Pinellas Co. Hillsborough Co. Manatee Co. Sarasota Co. Total Out of Region Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People -- - i- U.S. 41 3160/9128 2199/4909 2461/6940 7820/20977 U.S. 301 1561/5074 3875/8235 20333/40146 25789/53455 1-75 319/884 30928/65988 - 31247/66872 Subtotal 5040/15086 37002/79132 22794/47086 64856/141304 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1-4 - 30701/69721 12235/28142 - via 1-75 - - - 8208/18058 - Subtotal 51144/115921 U.S. 92 - 389/969 77/242 - .466/1211 S.R. 60 - - 3770/7930 3770/7930- S.R. 574 - 4140/9285 4140/9285 S.R. 640 - 1909/4168 1909/4168 S.R. 674 3063/6719 3063/6719 S.R. 676 - - 663/1701 - - .663/1701 S.R. 62 - - - 2871/7988 - 2871/7988 S R. 64 - - - 7468/20110 - @468/20110 S.R. 70 - - - 1001/2716 - - via U.S. 41 301 - - - 11496/25291 Subtotal 12497/28007 S.R. 72 - 2304/5065 2304/5069 Subtotal 31090/70690 25857/58187 11340/30814 22008/48418 90295/208109 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- TOTAL 5040/15086 68092/149822 48651/105273 11340/30814 22008/48418 155151/349413 "EGIONAL EVACUATIO IiNSCENARIO 4 TA 1-1 L F, 2. 4 Worst Case: Manat-e (revised 8/13/82) Evacuation Route Pasco Co. Pinellas Co. ijillsborough Co. 14a.natee Co. Sarasota Co. Total out of Region Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People U.S. 41 2335/6688 867/1891 734/1287 3936/9866 U.S. 301 1561/5074 3111/4771 13005/26600 17667/36445 1-75 319/ 884 17564/43109 - 1788 3/43993 Subtotal 4215/12646 21542/49771 13739/27887 39486/90304 ------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1-4 17821/35360 516.4/9844 v i a 1-75 - - 16089/32178 Subtotal 39074/77382 u . S. 92 389/969 77/242 466/1211. IL S.R. 60 3004/6508 3004/6508 co S R. 574 2392/5063 - - 2392/5063* R. 64 0 1772/3721 - - 1772/3721, S.R. 674 3063/6719 - - 3063/6719 425/1117 - - 425/1117 S . R. 676 S.R. 62 - 2979/8250 - 2979/8250 S R. 64 7468/20110 - 7468/20110 S.R. 70 2145/5896 - - 22533/45066 - Via U. S. 41 301 - Sub,@otal 24678/50962 4517/9034 4517/9034 S . R. 72 Subtotal 18210/36329 15897/33214 12592/34256 43139/86278 -89838/190077 ---------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL 4215/12646 39752/86100 29636/61101 12592/34256 43139/86278 129324/280381 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 5 TABLE. 2. 5 Worst Case: Sarasota (revised 8/13/82) Evacuation Route Manatee Co. Sarasota Co. Charlotte Co. Lee,Co. Collier Co. Glades Co. Hendry Co. Total Out of Region Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People 1-4 - 16089/32178 8417/15151 31954/70293 8101/17012 @64561/122566 via 1-75 S.R. 62 2979/8250 - - - - 2979/8250 S.R. 64 7468/20110 7468/20110 S.R. 70 2145/5896 - - - - - via U.S. 41 & 301 - 22533/45066 5308/9554 4929/10844 393/825 Subtotal 35308/72185 S.R. 72 4517/9034 via U.S. 41 - 1393/2507 1293/2845 103/216 Subtotal 7306/14602 Kings Highway 3219/5794 4652/10234 372/781 8243/16809 U.S. 17 3109/5596 4493/9885 359/754 7961/16235 S.R. 31 8229/18104 902/1894 9131/19998 U.S. 27 2363/4238 9203/20247 1714/3599 259/259 430/43.0 13969/28773 S.R. 721 - - - 318/318 318/318 S.R. 78 - - - - - 301/301 301/301 Subtotal 12592/34256 43139/86278 23809/42841 64753/142452 11944/25082 878/878 430/430 157545/331767 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL 12592/34256 43139/86278 23809/42841 64753/142452 11944/25082 878/878 430/430 157545/332217 Ri7,GIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 6 TABLE 2.6 Worst Case: Charlot@e (revised 8/13/82) Evacuation Route Sarasota Co. Charlotte Co. Lee Co. Collier Co. Glades Co. Hendry Co. Total Out of Region Ieh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Y 1-4 via 1-75 8208/18060 8417/15151 31954/70293 13277/27882 61856/131386 S.R. 70 J, From Sarasota li496/25291 - via U.S. 41 & 301 1 5308/9554 4929/10844 646/1357 Subtotal 22379/47046 S.R. 72 2304/5069 1393/2507 1293/2845 169/355 5159/10776 Kings Highway 3219/5794 4652/10234 609/1279 8480/17307 3109/5596 4493/9885 588/1235 U.S. 17 8190/16716- S.R. 31 - 8229/18104 1478/3104 - - .9107/21208 U.S. 27. 2363/4238 9203/20247 2809/5899 259/259 430/430 15064/31073 S.R. 721 318/318 - 318/318 S.R. 78 301/301 - 301/301 Subtotal 22008/48418 23809/42840 64753/142452 19576/41111 878/878 430/430 131154/276131 - ----------------- ------------------------------------------------ 7----------------------------------------------- TOTAL 22008/48418 23809/42840 64753/142452 19576/41111 878/878 430/430 148663/276131 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 7 TABLE 2.7 Worst Case: Lee/Collier (revised 8/13/82) 1 Evacuation Route Charlotte Co. Lee Co. Collier Co. Glades Co. Hendry Co. Total Out of Region Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People 1-4 8417/15151 32134/70695 14639/29278 55190/115124 via 1-75 S.R. 70 5308/9554 4956/10903 707/1414 10971/21871 via U.S. 41 & 301 S.R. 72 1393/25.07 1300/2860 186/372 2879/5739 via U.S. 41 Kings Highway 3219/5794 4649/10294 672/1344 8540/17432 U.S. 17 3109/5596 4518/9940 649/1296 8276/16832 S.R. 31 - 8275/18205 1630/3260 9905/21465 U.S. 27 1755/4238 .9256/20363 3098/6196 259/259 430/430 14798/31486 S.R. 721 - - - 318/318 - 318/318 S.R. 78 - - - 301/301 - 301/301 Subtotal 23201/42841 65088/143260 21581/43160 878/878 430/430 111178/230569 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ TOTAL 23201/42841 65088/143260 21581/43160 878/878 430/430 111178/230569 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 8 TABLE 2.8 Worst Case: (revis!-d 8/13/82) Evacuation Route Sarasota Co. Charlotte Co. Lee Co. Col I i er Co. Glades CO. Hendry Co. T o t a I Out of Region Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./Peopl_e _Veh./People 1-4 via 1-75 @6379/14672 2974/5651 14204/31249 7108/14927 30665/66499 S . R 70 via U.S. 41 & 301 '8934/20549 1874/3561 2191/4820 345/725 13344/29645 S . R . 72 v i a U . S . 41 1791/4119 492/935 575/1265 91/191 2949/6510 Kings Highwa - 2068/4550 326/685 y 1138/2162 3532/7397 U . S . 17 1099/2088 315/662 3411/7143 S.R. 31 - 3658/8048 791/1661 - - 4449/9709 U . S . 27 835/1587 4091/9000 1504/3158 259/259 430/4,30 7119/14434 S . R . 721 318/318 318/318 S . R . 78 - - - - 301/301 - 301/301 Subtotal 17104/39340 8412/15984 28784/63325 10480/22009 878/878 430/430 66088/141966 ---------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 'JOTAL 17104/39340 8412/15984 28184/63325 10480/22009 878/878 430/430 66088/141966 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 9 TABLE 2.9 Worst Case: (revised 8/13/82) 1 Evacuation Route Sarasota Co. Charlotte Co. Lee Co. Glades Co. Hendry Co. Total Out of Regi.on Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People 1-4 via 1-75 11900/24990 2974/8651 14166/31165 - - 29040/61806 S . R .70 - via U.S. 41 & 301 16667/35000 1874/3561 2185/4807 - - 20726/43368 S.R. 72 v i a U.S. 41 3341/70116 492/935 573/1261 - - 4406/9212 Kings Highway - 1138/2162 2063/4539 - - 3201/6701 U.S. 17 1099/2088 1992/4382 - - 3091/6470 S.R. 31 - 3648/8026 - - 3648/8026 U.S. 27 835/1587 4081/8978 259/259 430/430 5605/11254 S.R. 721 - - 318/318 - 318/318 S.R. 78 - - - 301/301 - 301/301 Subtotal 31908/67006 8412/15984 28708/63158 878/878 430/430 70336/147456 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL 31908/67006 8412/15984 28708/63158 878/878 430/430 70336/147456 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 10 TABLE 2.10 Worst Case: (revised 8/13/82) Eva cu at i on"' Route Charlotte C o Lee Co. Col lier Co. Glades Co. Hendry CO. Total Out of Rediion Veh./People Veh./People V e h . / P e o p I e Veh./People Veh./People 1-4 via 1-75 1730/3287 31954/70293 13277/27882 4696'1/101462 S . R . 70 via U.S. 4j & 301 109012071 4249/10844 646/1357 5985/14272 S . R . 72 v i a U . S . 4A 286/543 1293/2845 169/355 1748/3743 Kings High,',way 662/1258 4652/10234 609/127.9 592.3/12771 U S 17 639/1214 4493/9885 588/1235 5720/12334 S . R 31 - 8229/18104 1478/3104 970 7121208 U.S. 27 486/923 9203120247 28-09/5899 259/259 430/430 3187/27758 318/318 318/318 5 R 721 S R 78 301/301 - 301/301 Subtotal 4893/9296 64073/142452 19576/41111 878/878 430/430 89 8 5 0 / 194 16 7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ TOTAL 4893/9296 64073/142452 19576/41111 878/878 430/430. 8 9 8 5 0 194 16 7 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO 11 TABLE 2.11 Worst Case: (revised 8/13/82) Evacuation Route Lee Co. Collier Co. Glades Co. Hendry Co. Total. Out of Region Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People 1-4 via 1-75 7128/16394 14639/29278 21767/45672 S.R. 70 via U.S. 41 & 301 1100/2530 707/1414 1807/3944 S.R. 72 via U.S. 41 1288/662 186/372 474/1034 Kings Highway 1038/2387 672/1344 1710/3731 U.S. 17 1002/2305 649/1296 1651/3601 S.R. 31 1836/4223 1630/3260 - - 3466/7483 U.S. 27 2054/47. 24 3098/6196 259/259 430/430. 5841/11609 S.R. 721 - - 318/318 - 318/318 S.R. 78 - - 259/259 - 259/259 Subtotal 14446/33225 21580/43160 878/878 430/430 37334/77693 - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------- TOTAL 14446/33225 21580/43160 878/878 430/430 37334/77693 REGIONAL EVACU@TION SCENARIO 12 2.12 Worst '--'ase: Parallel (revised 8/13/82) Evacuation Roule Pasco Co. Pinellas Co. Hillsborough Co. Manatee Co. Sarasota Co. Total Out of Region --Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People U.S. 41 3136/9070 1316/2922 '734/1287 5186/13279 U.S. 301 1561/5074 3503/7305 12823/26222 17887/38601 1-75 319/884 25371/52732 - 25690/53-616 Subtotal 5016/15028 .30190/62959 13557/27509. 48763/105496 ---------- ------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1-4 16422/36793 4611/9401 - via 1-75 - - 8208/18060 - U.S. 92 389/969 - - 38.9/969 S.R. 60 2509/5133 2509/5133 S.R. 574 2392/5063 2392/5063 S.R. 640 1443/2733 - 1443/2733 S R. 674 2811/5950 - 2811/5950 S.R. 676 48/95 - - 48/95 S.R. 62 - 1855/4967 - 1855/4967 S R. 64 5076/13292 - S.R. 70 1011/2716 - via U.S. 41 3101 - 11496/25291 S.R. 72 2304/5069 Subtotal 16811/37762 13814/28375 7942/20975 22008/48420 ---------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- TOTAL 5016/15028 47001/100721 27371/55884 7942/20975 22008/48426 REGIONAL EVACUATION SCENARIO TABLE 2.12 (Continued) Worst Case: Parallel (revised 8/13/82) Evacuation Route Charlotte Co. Lee Co. Collier Co. Glades C.o. Hendry Co. Total Out of Region Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People Veh./People_ 1-4 - - - via 1-75 6250/11250 32134/70695 14639/29278 - Subtotal 82264/175477 S.R. 70 - - - via U.S. 41 & 301 3936/7085 4956/10903 707/1414 - Subtotal 22106/47409 S.R. 72 - - - via U.S. 41 1033/1859 1300/2860 186/372 Subtotal 4823/101.60 Kings Highway 2391/4303 4679/10294 672/1344 7742/15941 U.S. 17 2309/4156 4518/9940 649/1296 7476/15392 S.R. 31 - 8275/18205 1630/3260 9905/21465 U.S. 27 1755/3159 9256/20363 3098/6196 259/259 430,/430 14798/30407 S.R. 721 - - - 318/318 - 318/318 S.R. 78 - 301/301 - 301/301 Subtotal 17674/31812 65118/143260 21581/43160 878/878 430/430 166256/355062 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL 17674/31812 65118/143260 21581/43160 878/878 430/430 215019/460568 TABLE 3.1 EGIONAL SCENARIO 1 (revised 8/13/82) other Pasco Pinellas Hillsborough Manatee Counties Total Total Evacuation 21706 115392 57514 23115 217727 opulation -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I v4cuation Pop. 21706 70419 27509 119634 ntering viithlacoochee I egion No. of People 10744 23801 10618 45163 esiring Shelter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- vacuation Pop. 44973 30005 23115 98093 Intering . Central '[email protected] lo. of People 15201 11582 7859 34642 Desiring Shelter C-29 TABLE 3.2 REGIONAL SCENARIO 2 (revised 8/13/82) Other Pasco Pinellas Hillsborough Manatee Counties Totai Total Evacuation 19790 153166 93784 28470 29521 Population -------------------------------------------------------------------- 7----------- Evacuation Pop. 19790 82476 41244 1435J Entering Withlacoochee Region No. of People 9796 27877 15920 53591 Desiring Shelter -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Evacuation Pop. 70690 52540 28470 151701 Entering Central Florida.Region No. of People 23893 20280 9680 53853 Desiring Shelter C-30 TABLE 3. 3 REGIONAL SCENARIO 3 (revised 8/13/82) Other Pasco P inellas Hillsborough - Manatee Counties Total Total Evacuation 15086 149822 105273 30814 48418 349413 Populati,on -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Evacuation Pop. 15086 79132 47086' 141304 Entering Withlacoochee Region No. of People 7468 26747 18175 52390 Desiring Shelter - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Evacuati-on Pop. 70690 58187 30814 See 208109 Entering Central Next Fiorida Region Table !@o. of. People 23893 22460 10477 See 58830 ,lDesi.-ing Shelter Next (4 cnty,( Table only) C-31 TABLE 3.3 (continued REGIONAL SCENARIO 3 (revised 8/13/82) Glades & Sarasota Charlotte Lee Collier Hendry Total Pop. Subject to Evacuation 86196 86196 No. of People Leaving County 29511 29511 (.34 of Row 1) No. of People Desiring Shel. 39112 39112 (.45) of Row 1) No. of People Not Finding 18909 18909 Shelter in County Excess Capacity in Other Counties 0 0 Evac. Pop. Cut of Region (Row 48418 48418 2 + 4 - 5 Evacuees ent@ering regions 0 0 other than CFRPC and -@--iRPC TOTAL 48418 48418 m Sources: 1. Table 15, Southwest Fl orida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Study 2. Table 4, Appendix D, Behavorial Survey Analysis 3. Tables 7 through 11, Appendix J, Shelter Needs, Shelter Assignments C-32 TABLE 3.4 REGIONAL SCENARIO 4 (revised 8/13/82) Other Pasco P inellas Hillsborouqh Manatee Counties Total Total Evacuation 12646 86100 61101 34256 86278 230381 Population -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -Evacuation Pop. 12646 49771 28877 90304 Entering Witblacoochee Region No. of People 6260 16823 11147 34230 Desiring Shelter -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -Evacuation Pop. 36329 33214 34256 See 190077 Entering Central Next Florida* Region Table No. of People 12279 12820 11647 See 36746 Desiring Snelter Next (4 cnty Table only) C-33 TABLE 3.4 (continued) REGIONAL SCENARIO 4 (revised 8/13/82) Glades & Pop. Subject Sarasota Charlotte Lee Collier Hendry Tot to Evacuation 127390 127390 No. of People - Leaving County 43313 4331J (.34 of Row 1) No. of People Desiring Shel. 57326 57326 (.45) of Row 1) No. of People Not Finding 42965 42961 Shelter in County Excess Capacity in Other Counties 0' 0 Evac. Pop. Out of Region (Row 86278 8627J 2 + 4 - 5) Evacuees entering regions other than CFRPC 0 0 and WRPC TOTAL 86278 86278 Sources: 1. Table 15, Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Stiry 2. Table 4, Appendix D, Behavorial Survey Analysis 3. Tables 7 through 11, Appendix J, Shelter Needs, Shelter Assignments C-34 TABLE 3.5 REGIONAL SCENARIO 5 (revised 8/13/82) Pasco P inellas Hillsborough Other Manatee Counties Total Total Evacuation 34256 297961 332217 Population -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Evacuation Pop. Entering Withlacoochee Region No. of People Desiring Shelter ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Evacuation Pop. See ,Entering Central 34256 Next 34256 Florida.Region Page N o.'of. People 11647 See 11647 Uesiring snelter Next - Page C-35 TABLE 3.5 (continued) REGIONAL SCENARIO 5 (revised 8/13/82) Glades & Sarasota Charlotte Lee Collier Hendry Totall- Pop. 9-U-b3ect to Evacuation 127390 54229 202368 61412 7116 452515 No. of People - Leaving County 43313 18438 68805 20880 2420 153856 (.34 of Row 1) No. of People Desiring Snel. 57326 24403 91066 27635 3202 203362 (.45) of Row 1) No. of People Not Finding 42965 24403 87093, 17935 172396 Shelter in County Excess Capacity in Other Counties 0 0 335 185 520 I'vac. Pop. Out of Region (Row 86278 42841 155563 38630 2420 325732 2 + 4 5) Evacuees ent ering regions 13111 13548 1112 27771 other than CFRPC and '@-4RPC TOTAL 86278 42841 142452 25082 1308 297961 Sources: 1. Table 15, Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Study 2. Table 4, Appendix D, Behavorial Survey Analysis 3. Tables 7 through 11, Appendix J, Shelter Needs, Shelter Assignments C-36 TABLE 3.6 IREGIONAL SCENARIO 6 (revised 8/13/82) Glades & Sarasota Charlotte Lee Collier Hendry Total t op. Subject o Evacuation 86916 54229 202368 85746 7116 436375 No. of People F eaving County 29511 18438 68805 29154 2420 148328 (.34 of Row 1) o. of People lNesiring Shel. 39112 24403 91066 38586 3202 196369 (.45) of Row 1) to. of People Not Finding 18.909 24403 87093 34348 -- 164753 -lielter in tou'l-ity ,,xcess Capacity n Other.Counties 0 0 335 185 520 Evac. Pop. Out "@;n' on (Row 48418 42840 155563 63317 2420 312558 4 U+ 4 5) vacuees 1@`ntering regions 0 0 13111 22206 1112 36425 other than CFRPC nd WRPC (OTAL 48418 42840 142452 41111 1308 276129 ources: 1. Table 15, Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Study t 2. Table 4, Appendix D, Behavorial'Survey Analysis 3. Tables 7 through 11, Appendix J, Shelter Needs, Shelter Assignments C-37 TABLE 3.7 REGIONAL SCENARIO 7 (revised 8/13/82) Glades & Sarasota Charlotte Lee Collier Hendry Tot Pop. Subject to Evacuation 54229 204940 89755 7116 54@ 1 No. of People Leaving County 18438 69680 30517 2420 12015 (.34 of Row 1) No. of People Desiring Shel. 24403 92223 40390 3202 160218 (.45) of Row 1) No. of People Not Finding 24403 87 .. 093 36152 14718 Shelter in County Excess Capacity in Other Counties 0 335 185 521 Evac. Pop. Out of Region (Row 42841 156438 66484 2420 2643 2 + 4 - 5) Evacuees entering regions 13178 23324 1112 376J other than CFRPC and WRPC TOTAL 42841 143260 43160 1308 230569 Sources: 1, Table 15, Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation SAY 2. Table 4, Appendix D, Behavorial Survey Analysis 3. Tables 7 through 11, Appendix J, Shelter Needs, Shelter Assignments C-38 TABLE 3.8 REGIONAL SCENARIO 8 (revised 8/13/82) Glades & Pop. Subject Sarasota Charlotte Lee -Collier Hendry Total to Evacuation 75371 40882 164447 40556 7116 328372 Uo. of People Leaving County 25626 13900 55912 13789 2420 111647 (.34 of Row 1) No. of People fesiring Shel. 33917 18397 74001 18250 3202 147767 (.45) of Row 1) No. of People U Not Finding 13714 2081 13572 20292 49659 nelter in County Excess Capacity in Other Counties 0 0 335 185 520 Evac. Pop. Out lof Region (Row 39340 15984 69149 33896 2420 160789 .'2 + 4 7 5) lEvacuees entering regions 0 0 5824 11887 1112 18823 tner than CFRPC nd WRPC TOTAL 39340 15984 63325 22009 1308 141966 Uources: 1. Table 15, Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Study .2. Table 4, Appendix D, Behavorial Survey Analysis 3. T abl es 7 through 11, Appendix J, Shelter Needs, Shelter Assignments c-39 TABLE 3.9 REGIONAL SCENARIO 9 (revised 8/13/82) Glades & Sarasota Charlotte Lee Collier Hendry Total Pop. Subject to Evacuation 110391 40882 164447 7116 322836 No. of People Leaving County 37533 13900 55912 2420 110547 (. 34 of Row 1) No. of People Desiring Shel. 49676 18397 74001 3202 145276 (.45) of Row 1) No. of People Not Finding 29473 2081 13572 45126 Shelter in County Excess Capacity in Other Counties 0 0 520 -- 520 Evac. P'op. Out of Regi.on (Row 67006 15984 68964 2420 154374 2 + 4 - 5) Evacuees entering regions other than CFRPC 0 0 5806 1112 6918 a*nd WRPC TOTAL 67006 15984 63158 1308 147456 Sources: 1. Table 15, Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Study 2. Table 4, Appendix D, Behavorial Survey Analysis 3. Tables 7 through 11, Appendix J, Shelter Needs, Shelter Assignments c-40 TABLE 3.10 REGIONAL SCENARIO 10 (revised 8/13/82) Glades & Sarasota Charlotte Lee -Collier Hendry Total Pop. s-ubject to Evacuation 27343 .202368 85746 7116 322573 No. of People Leaving County 9297 68805 29154 2420 109676 (. 34 of Row 1) No. of People Desiring Shel. 12304 91066 38586 3202 145158 (.45) of Row 1) No. of People Not Finding -- 87093 34348 -- 121441 Shelter in County Ex'cess C*apacity 335 185 520 in Other Counties (26312)* (26832)* lEvac. Pop. Out of Reg.ion (Row 9296 155563 63317 2420 230596 2 + 4 - 5) Evacuees entering regions -- 13111 22206 1112 .36429 other than CFRPC and WRPC TOTAL -- 9296 142452 41111 1308 194167 Sources: 1. Table 15, Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation Study 2. Table 4, Appendix D, Behavorial Survey Analysis 3. Tables 7 through 11, Appendix J, Shelter Needs, Shelter Assignments *Spaces available in Charlotte and Sarasota Counties if all shelter facilities are open to.evacuees from other coastal counties C-41 TABLE 3.11 REGIONAL SCENARIO 11 (revised 8/13/82) Glades & Sarasota Charlotte Lee Collier Hendry Tot Pop. Subject to Evacuation 106702 89755 7116 903-9 No. of People Leaving County 36279 30517 2420 69211 (.34 of Row 1) No. of People Desiring Shel. 48016 40390 3202 9160P (.45) of Row 1) No. of.People Not Finding 36152 36152 Shelter in C ou nt y Excess Capacity 520 in Other Counties (26844)* -- 520 Evac-. Pop. Out of- Region 'k'T-,ow 36279 66484 2420 1051 2 + 4 - 5) Evacuees er-itering regions other than CFRPC 3054 23324 1112 27490 and WRPC TOTAL 32225 43160 1308 77691- Sources: 1. Table 15, Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation St Y 2. Table 4, Appendix D, Behavorial Survey Analysis 3. Tables 7 through 11, Appendix J, Shelter Needs, Shelter Assignments *Number of spaces available to evacuees if shelter facilities A opened in Lee, Charlotte and Sarasota Counties. C-42 TABLE 3.12 t EGIONAL SCENARIO 12 (revised 8/13/82) Other Pasc-o Pinellas Hillsborough Manatee Counties Total Total Evacuation 15028 100721 55884 20975 See Next 460568 t opulation Table ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Vacuation Pop. 15028 62959 27509 131186 Entering Withlacoochee egion No. of People 7439 21280 10618 39337 t esiring Shelter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- vacuation Pop. 37762 28375 20975 See 355112 kntering Central Next -lorida-Region Table 10. of People 12673 10953 7132 See 30758 Desiring Shelter Next (4 cntys Table only) c-43 TABLE 3.12 (continued) IZEGIONAL SCENARIO (revised 8/13/82) Glades & Sarasota Charlotte Lee Collier Hendry Total Pop. Subject to Evacuation 86196 52499 204940 89755 7116 440506 No. of People -Leaving County 29511 17850 69680 30517 2420 149978 (.34 of Row 1) No. of People Desiring Shel. 39112 23625 92223 40390 -- .195350 (.45) of Row 1) No. of People Not Finding 18909 13963 87093 36152 156117 Shelter in @_ounty Excess Capacity 0 0 @35 185 520 in other Counties E%7aC. Pop. Out of Region (Row 48420 31812 156438 66484 2420 305574 2 + 4 - 5) Evacuees entering regions 0 13178 23324 1112 37614 other 11--han CFRPC and WRPC TOTAL 48420 31812 143260 43160 1308 267960 sources: 1. Table 15, Southwest Florida Regional Hurricane Evacuation 2. Table 4, Appendix D, Behavorial Survey Analysis 3. Tables 7 through 11, Appendix J, Shelter Needs, Shelter Assignments C-44 Appendix D Track of Hurricane Donna Across Florida September, 1960 29.20 Inches jAciammaj, ims 11 - 1,6 MPH Ousts 67 Mn W .......... a" OLO SCALE to 34 vOLMA.. -j DkrrM BZACE, WB" 28.69 Inches 58 Milz ousts e66 mn c1TWA lAkiLUM, YlbRnA BAROGRAX Rainfall 4.56 in. 9/10/60 9/11/60 Ila-as is WW,t 03 06 09 Ism BURG VARS 21 88 Inches 28. 62 MPH Gusts 96 MPS 29.56 21 1.- 4N, ';R WA 28.r>6 inches I,) Gusts 69 XPE -LAMAND, Rainfall 4.47 In. mwA 28.60 in be@ RE LA Gusts 6.61 1 a' % 29. 00j@ Rainfall t. 10 11 TAMPA VEAS @9.11' Inches. N 6'MCE, cripil 62 MPH Gusts 75 MPH 1:20-PW 8.60 In. (S.L.) I ,I .. . 29.42 Incbe$ P@@@@5949= .%.:. % 60 XPE is Is 21 cc Gusts 80 MPH "A"Ta wAUC WAR3 J HULk 26.110 inches IlORT MMS, -FIMIDk - LUOGRAK Gusts 100 MPH September 10, 1960 6@@ 0 06 09 IVAt5 to 21 V 29-50 W pAIM BUCE, VBAj@ FT. MMS) WBA&**-.- LywjMff-E11GRS. t.29.52 inches 28.08 Inches -L--C 29.20 Inches 46 XPE I -i Gusts 63 KFE 92 ..... Gusts 80 M Rainfall 1.53 Inches 00 Gusts 121 M-. . . i 5 In. Rainfall 4.95 InJ: Rainfall 2.9 COLL" 28.50 28 04 Inches .at. 100 WS I I A.M. Sept. 10 Tn:RGLk= I W)E MIAMI, VB0 28.15 Inches 29.32 Inches 150 XPE, --j 55 MPE 2: PX @-OE Gusts 82 MPH 4 21 00 03 06 OP 1 11 15 1 Rsinfall 7.01 RoKcs7TAD ATB 25?.17 Inches DONNA'S PATH ACROSS FLORIDA En - 60 MPH Gusts 89 MPH Rainfal.1-12.17 In Station Data: Lowest Sao Level Pressure Fastest Mile and Direction Gusts and Storm Rainfall @;eptember 10-11, 1960 % t 211 0" Re _J2 0 '6 r 111. 52" U. S. Weather Bur&ou, Lakeland, Florida KET V23- WBAS' 29.Z7 Inches 1Zii6i'hum CHLYR9 WARN - Weather Amateur Re -H 6 A porting Network 70 )c 27.98 inches CHURN - Cooperative Hurricane Reporting Network as. - 120+ MPH SO)OM6, %z Rainfall 12.10 In. 26.44 Inches D-1 W - lie M Gusts 150 X" I - I I I I I I I Appendix E Behavioral Survey I Analysis and Report I i I. I I I I I I I I Development, Administration, and Analysis of a Behavioral Survey for the Central Florida Hurricane Shelter Plan by Carnot E. Nelson and Michael Kleiman Department of Psychology Department of Sociology University of South Florida Submitted to the Central Florida Regional Planning Council June, 1982 E-I TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 METHODOLOGY , , , , * , , * * * * * * * , * * , * * * * , , * * , * * , , * , 1 Questionnaire Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Sampling Design and Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SURVEY RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Household Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . 5 Number of Persons and Age of Oldest Person in Household . . . . . . 5 Need for Special Evacuation Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Transportation Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Length of Residence in Area ... and Previous Hurricane Experience. . 8 Evacuation Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Anticipated Sources of Evacuation Advice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Anticipated Time Respondent would Evacuate . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Vehicles to be used for Evacuation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Anticipated Evacuation Destinations, Locations and Routes . . . . . 14 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . 19 E-3 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1 Number of Persons in Household by County (Percentage) . . . . . . . . . 20 2 Number of Persons in Household for Mobile Homes and Non-Mobile Homes by County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Age of Oldest Resident by County (Percentage) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4 Number of Residents in Homes Where Oldest Resident 65 or Older by County (Percentage@ .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . @23 5 Age of Oldest Resident for Mobile Homes and Non-Mobile Homes by County . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 6 Type of Residence By County (Percentage@ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 7 Special Needs of Residents by County (Percentage) . . . . . . . . . . . 26 8 Assistance Needed By County (Percent) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 9 Special Needs of Residents and Mobile Home, Non-Mobile Homes Residence by County . . . . . . . . . . . . . * . . . . . . . . 28 10 Type of Vehicles and Number by County (Percentage) . . . . . . . . . . . 29 11 Type of Vehicles, Number and Mobile Home, Non-Mobile Home Resident by County . . . . . . . . . . . . . * . .. . . . . . . . 30 12 Years Living In Five County Area By County (Percentage) . . . . o . . . 31 13 Years Living in Area and Mobile Home, Non-Mobile Home Residence by County . . . . . . . . . * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 14 Previous Hurricane Experience by County (Percentage) . . . . . . . . . . 33 15 Previous Hurricane Experience of Mobile and Non-Mobile Home Residents by County (Percentage) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 16 Year Around Residents by County (Percentage) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 17 Year Around Residency and Mobile Home, Non-Mobile Home by County . . . . 36 18 From Whom Seek Evacuation Advice by County (Percent Yes) . . . . . . . . 37 From Whom Seek Evacuation Advice, Mobile Home and Non-Mobile Home Dwellers by County (Percent Yes) . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . 38 4 LIST OF TABLES (continued) TABLE PAGE 20 When Residents Would Evacuate By County (Percentagel . . . . . . . . . . 39 21 When Mobile Home and Non-Mobile Home Residents Would Evacuate by County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 22 Years Living in Area and Would Not Evacuate By County . . . . . . . . . . 41 23 What Would Do If Order To Evacuate But Weather Fine By County (Percentage) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 24 What Mobile Home and Non-Mobile Home Residents Would do if Ordered to Evacuate But Weather Fine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 25 Vehicles Used to Evacuate By County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 26 Vehicles Used to Evacuate and Mobile Home, Non-Mobile Home Residence by County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 27 Where Residents Would Like to Go By County (Percentage) . . . . . . . . . 46 28 Where Would Go By County (Percent) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 29 Where Would Mobile Hom e and Non-Mobile Home Evacuate to by County . . . . 48 30 Time in Area and Where Would Go by County . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 49 31 County Would Go to By County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 32 County Would Evacuate to and Mobile Home, Non-Mobile Home by County. ... 51 33 Most Frequently Mentioned Routes By County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 34 Most Frequently Mentioned Routes and Mobile Home, Non-Mobile Home by County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 E-5 APPENDICES PAGE A Hurricane Preparedness Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 B TABLE # 1. Means, Standard Errors, and 95% Confidence Intervals for Selected Variables, Polk County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o o . 59 TABLE # 2 Means, Standard Errors, and 95% Confidence Intervals for Selected Variables, Hardee County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 TABLE # 3 Means, Standard Errors, and 95% Confidence Intervals for Selected Variables, Okeechobee County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 TABLE # 4 Means, Standard Errors, and 95% Confidence Intervals for Selected Variables, Highlands County, . . . * . . . . ... . . . . . . . . 62 TABLE # 5 Means, Standard Errors, and 95% Confidence Intervals for Selected Variables, DeSoto County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 E-6 INTRODUCTION The purpose of thi s study was to provide the Central Florida Regional Planning Council with behavioral data concerning residents' evacuation plans in the event of a hurricane. Data from this study will be used by the Council in developing an eva-cuation plan for the five county region (Polk, Hardee, Okeechobee, Highlands, and De Soto counties). Although not a coastal region, hurricanes preparedness is necessary for the region because of: (1) the necessity to evacuate mobile home residents because of high winds and the possibility of tornadoes, (2) the need to evacuate residents from flood prone areas* and (3) the large influx of coastal residents who would flee inland if a hurricane struck the coast. METHODOLOGY Questionnaire Desion The Request for Proposal specified nine questions that the study needed to answer. These questions were: i 1. The tendency to evacuate immediately if officially ordered by authorities even if storm conditions do not appear threatening to the resident. 2. When residents would tend to evacuate. 3. From what sources would the resident seek advice on whether and when to evacuate? - 4. The desired destination of'the resident when evacuating'. 5. Route the evacuee would take to reach desired destination. 6. Number and type of vehicles at the place of residence. 7. How many vehicles wo uld the household use in an evacuation? 8. Household characteristics: a. type of dwelling unit b. number of persons in household C. does household need transportation assistance? d. number of handicapped persons E-7 2 9. Previous hurricane experience of resident. Based upon these questions and the study conducted by H. W. Lochner, Inc. for the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, a questionnaire was developed which formed part of the proposal to conduct the study. This draft was modified after consultation with CFRPC staff and a pretest of 20 randomly chosen residents of the five county area. The final questionnaire (see Appendix A), in addition to being designed to answer the specific questions of the Request for Proposal, contained questions relating to the age of the residents, the length of time they had lived in the five county area and where residents would go if evacuated. Sampling Design and Data Collection The sampling design employed involved systematic sampling of residence listings in the phone directories covering the five-county area. This type of sampling is considered a close approximation to random sampling for studies su'ch as the present one, and provides a nearly complete coverage of househol.ds because the vast bulk,of households nowadays have listed phones. Sampling was done separately for each county to help ensure a sufficient sample size from the-less populous counties. To help ensure a sufficient numbers of mobile home households for analysis, a slight oversample of mobile homes was effected; it is estimated that th e proportion of mobile home residences in the sample was 4.0% higher than in the population. The total number of completed interviews was 1257; the number of cases upon which each of the statistics presented in this report is based are indicated in the tables in which the data are displayed. Interviewing was done by women from the Tampa Women's Survival Center, who were trained and supervised for accuracy by the principle investigators. Phone calls to sample members were made from 9:00 A.M. to 9:30-P.M. seven days E-8 3 a week to help ensure variation in which household member answered the p Ihone. Unless a particular phone number was not a working number or otherwise was unusable, an effort was made to make four attempts to reach someone at each number, to minimize bias which might occur by completing interviews only for persons who are easy to reach. The overall interview completion rate was 78.9%; that is, 21.1% of persons reached by phone refused to participate in the survey or the interview could not be completed because the individual being interviewed was hard of hearing or ill. This completion rate is within the range typically achieved for surveys of this.. type. . Information from the completed questionnaires was coded by the principle investigators and by trained assistants supervised by them. Coded data were keypunched by the University of South Florida's Keypunch Services. Apparent mispunches (which were few) were identified th rough the use of appropriate computer analysis by the principal investigators, and those potential mispunches were checked aga inst the survey forms and corrected if a keypunching error had occurred. The data are stored on magnetic'tape so that further analyses can be undertaken to address any future questions planning agencies may have. Several cautions which derive from the sampling methodology should be observed when interpreting the findings from the study. First, because of the oversample of mobile homes, analyses which aggregate mobile home with non-mobile home residences likely will include a larger proportion of mobile home households than is the case for the actual five-county population. However, this is not expected to be a major biasing factor for most analyses because the oversample of mobile homes was not large (see above). A second caution which should be observed in interpreting the findings involves results which are based on small numbers of cases (the numbers of cases are indicated E-9 4 i nthe each of report's tables). Sampling error is likely to be larger when small numbers of cases are involved than when results are derived from analyses based upon a large number of survey respondents. So that the reader will have a better idea of the accuracy of the sampling, Appendix B contains the means, standard errors, and 95% confidence intervals for selected study variables, by county. The standard error aids judgment of the accuracy of the sampling because it helps in determining the potential degree of discrepancy between the sample mean and the population mean; in our case, between the means calculated from the data we collected and the actual means one would be able to calculate if one had complete data on everyone, rather than just a sample of persons, from each county. Information on the exact statistical procedures for estimating standard errors for studies such as ours; that is, for which the researcher has data from one sample and does not know the true population means, can be found in most good texts dealing with inferential statistics for survey research. Another measure which helps in judging the accuracy of sampling is the 95% confidence interval. A 95% confidence interval is calculated from the sample mean and the standard error. This means that there is a 95% chance that the population mean lies within this interval. Because of the possibility, in any sampling procedure, of discrepancy between the values observed in the sample and the true population values, users of this report or of any study based on sample data should proceed with.. caution when it appears that the sampling may introduce inaccuracies large enough to meaningfully bias conclusions drawn from the data. Due to the nature and complexity of the information contained in the present report, confidence intervals or related statistics are not presented for all findings in this report. However, the standard errors and confidence intervals E-10 5 presented in Appendix B provide a' useful guide to the degree of precision in the samples employed. Users of this report who have a need for information on the sampling accuracy relevant to particular report findings should contact the principal investigators of the study prior to employing the study results for planning decisi-ons. SURVEY RESULTS This section of the report will present findings relevant to the nine questions specified in the Request for Proposal and restated under "Questionnaire Design,!' above. The findings are oroanized into two broad categories. First, demographic and household characteristics are presented. These are characteristics which help describe the nature of the people in the five-county area -- for example, what type of housing do people have, how many households consist of an elderly person living alone, and so forth. These demographic and household descriptions are important because they can help identify some of the special needs of the population in an evacuation. Second, evacuation-related findings are presented. These findings deal with such issues as individual's willingness to evacuate, the route they might take in an evacuation, and so forth. Household Characteristics Number of persons and age of oldest person in household. Information on household size and on the number of elderly residents is important because it can help pinpoint the number of people who would evacuate and the proportion of elderly residents who live alone. Household size varies somewhat from county to county (see Table 1). For example, about one in five (20.7%) households in Highlands county consists of a lone resident. The analogous E-11 6 percentages for.Polk and De Soto c ounties are 16.9 and 14.6, respectively, but' in Hardee (9.9%) and Okeechobee (8.6%) counties less than one in ten households are comprised of a single person living al one. Breakdown of these data separately for mobile home and non-mobile home.residents (Table 2) suggests only fairly small differeinces bet ween these two types of residences with regard.to the proportion of single person households. The potentially critical nature of the above information is highlighted when one examines the age data. As can be seen in Table 3, for example, between 28.9% (Okeechobee county) and 44.4% (DeSoto county) of households in the five-county region include a household member age 65 or over. Furthermore, in each county a large proportion of these households consists of an elderly (over age 65) person living alone or with one other person also age 65 or older (Table 4). Combining the above information from Table 3 with that from Table 4 allows us to calculate the percentage of total households in each county which consist of an aged individual living alone or with one other person who is elderly also. These percentages are 26 for Polk, 18.3 for Hardee, 12.6 for Okeechobee county, 32.8 for Highlands, and 27.5 for DeSoto. The large number of families which contain at least one elde rly individual, and-especially the high proportion of households which consist of an aged person living alone or with one other person over 65, suggests that planners may wish to give extra consideration to the special needs of the aged when designing evacuation programs, planning for the operation of public shelters, and.so forth. (See the discussion on special needs and Tables 7, 8, and 9 below.) One additional aspect of households with an aged resident or residents should be mentioned. In each county, mobile hornes are more likely to contain an elderly household member than are non-mobile home households (Table 5). E-12 7 That this dwelling type (mobile homes) which is especially susceptible to wind damage is also especially likely to house the aged further complicates the evacuation planning. An estimate of the proportion of households in each county which are mobile homes is shown in Table 6; these percentages range from 50.0 for Okeechobee county to 16.2 for Hardee county. The reader should keep in mind, however, that these figures are slight overestimates because of the required oversampling of mobile homes. Need for special evacuation assistance. In order to help determine the independent ability of people to evacuate, we asked whether anyone in the household would need special assistance to travel, whether outside assistance would be required to evacuate those persons, and whether transportation suc.h as a bus or taxi would be needed. Data relevant to these questions are presented in Tables 7, 8, and 9. Shown in Table 7 are both the proportions of households which contain someone who needs special assistance to travel, as well as the specific reasons given for the need for assistance. The percentages of households with such needs are 8.6 for Polk, 11.3 for Hardee, 5.3 for Okeechobee county, 9.2 for Highlands, and 5.1 for DeSoto. The-percentages of households for which outside assistance would be needed, due to the handicaps in Table 7, for evacuation are 5.5 for Polk, 7.7 for Hardee, 3.3 for Okeechobee county, 7.5 for Highlands, and 2.2 for DeSoto (Table 8). Outside assistance in the form of bus or taxi transportation will also be needed for some households; the percentages of households which need assistance of this type are, for the above counties, respectively,.2.8, 2.8, 3.3, 5.2, and 1.5 (Table 8). These data are disaggregated in Table 9 so that the percentages are calculated separately for mobile home and non-mobile home dwellers. E-13 8 Transportation resources. Survey respondents were asked to specify the number of cars and trucks in the household, and to indicate the types of vehicles owned (sedan, station wagon, jeep, pickup truck, or van). This information is presented in Table 10 and is decomposed for mobile home and non-mobile home residents in Table 11. The data from this portion of the survey are consistent with that regarding ne eds for evacuation assistance (see above) in suggesting that only a small proportion of households is without household-owned transportation. For example, the proportions of households with no vehicle range from 5.2% in Highlands county to 2.6% in Okeechobee county. Furthermore, these percentages are, for each county except Highlands, higher than those.indicating the proportion of persons needing transportation such as a bus or taxi (see Table 8). These results imply that members of some households with no vehicle may be able to get transportation from a neighbor or friend. In any event, the vast bulk of households have at least one vehicle, and when one considers that few households contain more members (see Table 1) than can fit in a typical. car or truck, it becomes clear why so few households specify a need for bus or taxi transportation. Lenqth of residence in area, seasonal residence, and previous hurricane experience. Length of residence in the area can be an important factor in a hurricane because persons who are relative newcomers may not be familiar with the local civil defense system, public shelter network, roads, and other elements crucial to a successful evacuation effort. As can be seen in Table 12 at least one out of ten persons in each county has lived in the region for four years or less; for Okeechobee county and Highlands county the proportions are almost one in four (23.7%) and close to one in three (29.9%), respectively. Inspection of Table 13 reveals that the "typical" mobile home E-14 dweller is likely to have more recently settled in the area than is the case for his non-mobile home counterparti In each county, the median number of years in the area is lower for mobile home residents than for non-mobile home residents. It will also be useful in developing an evacuation plan to'know how many persons have experienced a hurricane previously, and how many have been evacuated. This type of information provides yet another indication of the extent of the public's inexperience with hurricane evacuations. As can be seen in Table 14, the vast majority of the region's residents have never been evacuated due to a hurricane. The county with the highest proportion (21.7%) of residents which have experienced an evacuation is Okeechobee. And, about one in three (32.91/0) of Okeechobee respondents said they had experienced Hurricane Frederick in 1979. With regard to the other counties, much smaller Percentages of residents than is the case for Okeechobee havebeen evacuated, and the most common hurricane experience involved Hurricane Donna, which occured more than twenty-years ago, in 1.060. It would seem, then, that experience with previous hurricanes and hurricane evacuations is not widespread in the five-county region, and thus planners will not be dealing with a populace which has had widespread direct familiarity with hurricane conditions. The breakdown of these results by residence type (Table 15) shows some interesting patterns. In all counties except De Soto, mobile home residents are less likely than non-mobile home residents to have been in a hurricane. Yet in three of the five counties, mobile home residents are more likely to have been evacuated. These data are consistent with findings to be presented later (Tables 21 and 23) which will show that mobile home residents are more likely than non-mobile home residents to say they will evacuate, will evacuate E-15 10 immediately upon an evacuation order if the weather were fine, and will leave before an.official order if a hurricane were to make landfall. These various findings sugge st that mobile home residents may be aware of the particular dangers a hurricane will pose for them and are by and large willing to evacuate, and to do so in short order, if the need arises. Tables 16 and 17 show that most residents of the region are year-round residents. It is important to note, however, that for several counties the proportion of mobile home residents who are seasonal is high. For example, 20.1% of mobile home residents in Polk county are seasonal, and the analogous figures for Highlands and De Soto counties are 17.9% and 15.1%, respectively. As.might be expected, the bulk of these seasonal residents are "snowbirds" who are here from November/December to April/May. Evacuation Behavior The information presented thus far has concerned the household and demographic characteristics of the residents of the five county region. Of. more direct concern is the anticipated behavior of those residents in an evacuation. The present section of this report will present selected-findings relevant to the prediction of evacuation behavior. These findings will address the issues of (1) the sources from which individuals will seek evacuation advice, (2) if and whe n residents will evacuate, (3) the vehicles they will use to evacuate, and (4) the desired and anticipated shelters, and their locations, to which evacuation will occur, as well the roadways which evacuees will use to travel to those locations. Anticipated sources of evacuation advice. Survey respondents were asked from whom they would seek advice on whether and when to evacuate. Four sources--neighbor, friend, local government or law enforcement officials, and E-16 National Weather.Service advisories on radio or television -- were presented to the persons interviewed, who were. encouraged to specify all sources from which they would seek information. As can be seen in Table 18, for each county more than 9 out of every 10 respondents specified National Weather Service advisories -as a source from which they would seek evacuation advice. These percentages are high for both non-mobile home and mobile home residents (Table 19). These results suggest that, while ideally all available media should be employed to ensure that publicity of an evacuation reaches as many persons as possible, from the standpoint of effi.ciency or in a situation of limited resources National Weather Service advisories may provide the most effective single source for disseminating evacuation information. Anticipated time respondent would evacuate. Persons interviewed were asked, "If a hurricane were to hit the coast when, if ever, would you evacuate: (a) before an official order to do so, (b) when given the official order to do so, or (c) woul d not evacuate." Individuals who indicated that they would evacuate before an official order to do so were asked'how soon before the hurricane was expected to hit the coast they would leave, and persons who said they would leave when given the official order to do so were asked how soon, assuming everyone were home, they would be ready to leave. Results for these survey items are presented in Table 20 for all types of residences combined, and separately for mobile homes and non-mobile homes in Table 21. The percentages of respondents who would not evacuate even if given an official order to do so range from 9.9 (for Okeechobee county) to 24.1 (for Hardee county), although in each county the proportion of mobile home residents who say they would not evacuate is much lower than the analogous percentage for non-mobile home residents (Table 21). The fact that at least roughly one in ten respondents, and as high as almost one in four persons E-17 12 interviewed (in-Hardee county), said they would not evacuate suggests that evacuation orders should stress the necessity of evacuating and perhaps be worded in such a way that persons understand the risks involved in failing to evacuate. In this regard, one important factor which helps identify those persons who are reluctant to evacuate is long-term,residence in the five county area (Table 22). In three of the five counties studied, respondents who have resided in the area for 30 years or more are substantially more likely than are their neighbors who are more recent arrivals to say they will not evacuate. For those three counties (Polk, Hardee, and Highlands) evacuation personnel may wish to try to orient evacuation announcements toward these "old timers," if possible. Most respondents, however, indicated that they would evacuate, and the most frequently stated time of evacuation, for both mobile home and non-mobile home dwellers, is,when given the official. evacuation order rather than before such an order is issued. Yet, it should be stressed that in general mobile. home residents exhibit substantially greater evacuation readiness than do their non-mobile home counterparts (Table 21). As stated above, mobile home dwel-lers are more likely to evacuate, and they also are more likely to evacuate before an official order than are non-mobile home residents. Regardless of residence type, the. data suggest that, typically, individuals will be ready to leave almost immediately, assuming everyone is home. In no category in Table 20 or Table 21 is the median time needed to be ready to leave over one hour. These results suggest that residents of the five-county region do not feel that they will need a long time period to pack up or otherwise put things in order, and that delays of this type are not likely to be a problem in a hurricane evacuation in this area. The reader should E-18 13 remember, however, that the survey question assumes that all household members are home, and that a substantial proportion of individuals surveyed say they will not evacuate at all (see discussion above). The information in Tables 20 and 21 can serve as a rough guide for planners and others-in estimating the time sequencing of demands on roadways, shelters, and the like in the event of an evacuation. What these data provide is a means for estimating the numbers of people who will evacuate before an evacuation order, and how long before that order those persons will evacuate; the numbers of individuals who will leave when the evacuation order is forthcom ing and how soon those persons would be ready to leave; and the numbers of individuals who would not evacuate at all. This type of information can be critical in judging the gradualness or suddenness of the '.'phase-in" of traffic build-up, need for special evacuation assistance, influx to public shelters, and so forth. However, it should be stressed that these data should be employed in a judgmental sense rather than as an exact predictive model. The reason for this is that the phase-in may diverge from that suggested by Tables 20 and 21 as the conditions associated with the particular hurricane vary. For example, it seems reasonable to assume that more people would evacuate before an official evacuation order if the order were given very late and the weather appeared very ominous, than if the evacuation were given early on and the weather were fine. To get a perspective on this particular issue, we asked what respondents would do if told to evacuate but the weather were fine. Between 62.7% and 78.4% of persons in each county said they would leave immediately (Table 23), and, except for Okeechobee county, mobile home residents are more likely than non-mobile home residents to do so (Table 24). Additional details are available from Tables 23 and 24. E-19 14 Vehicles to be used for evacuation. Data concerning the number and types of vehicles which survey respondents anticipate they would use if they were to evacuate are shown in Tables 25 and 26. Perhaps the most relevant point here relates to'the proportions of respondents who specified that two or more vehicles would be employed. These proportions are generally low for both mobile home and non-mobile home dwellers. This finding jibes with the information on household size (Tables 1 and 2) presented earlier, and that regarding number of vehicles per household (Tables 10 and 11), which suggests that the vast bulk of households have a vehicle and are small enough that all household residents probably can fit in that vehicle. The likelihood that the overwhelming majority of households will use one vehicle to evacuate can be used in conjunction with data from Tables 20 and 21 (when they would evacuate) to help judge the extent of traffic in an evacuation. Again, however, this information should be used in a judgmental sense,because such factors as the number of persons who would not evacuate may change with specific conditions (for example, the weather) associated with a particular hurricane. Anticipated evacuation destinations, locations, and routes to be taken. Persons interviewed were asked both where they would like to go if evacuated and-where they would go. Responses were sought both in terms of the type of evacuation destination (public shelter, friend or relative, or motel), its geographic location, and the majo r streets and highways respondents would use to travel to the destination. .Data on respondents' desired evacuation destinations are given in Table 27. The most frequently mentioned such destination is a public shelter. Around half the persons interviewd from each of the three counties Polk (49.4%), Hardee (51.2%), and Highlands (54.4%) specified this type of facility; the analogous percentages for Okeechobee and De Soto counties are E-20 15 39.6 and 58.5, respectively. Planners thus should keep in mind that in an evacuation in the se five counties, demand for public shelter space may be very high, and that the public shelter system may well be asked to accommodate between four and six out of every ten households. In this regard, it should also be noted that the vast bulk of households (between 89.6% and 98.6%) may want to use a public shelter in the county of residence rather than in another county. Besides public shelters, the next most frequently mentioned desired evacuation destinations, in order of frequency of mention, are "friend" and 11motel Roughly one-f-ifth to one-third of respondents specified friend, and about one-tenth to one-fifth of persons interviewed mentioned motel. It is worth noting that evacuees are more likely to desire to travel out of county to reach these two types of destinations; this is especially true for Hardee county residents desiring to go to a motel. It should also be mentioned that between 8.1% (for Hardee co unty) and 16.6% (for Polk county) of survey respondents indicated that they do not know what type of shelter-they would like to travel to in an evacuation. Additional details on desired evacuation destinations and locations are available from Table 27. It is perhaps worth stressing again the heavy demand on public shelters which may be likely to occur in an evacuation. Not only do many people state outright they would want to go to a public shelter (see above), it is also true that among respondents who said they would want to go to a friend or relative, for each county more than half specified the location of the friend or relative as within the same county as that in which the person being interviewed resides. Of course, it is possible or perhaps even likely that the friend or relative that the survey respondent had in mind when answering would himself have to evacuate. In such a case, the friend or relative would E-21 16 not constitute a viable evacuation destination, and such evacuees may show up at a public shelter (a motel may also not be a suitable location for the same reason). The above data on persons' desired destinations parallel those regarding where respondents feel they would go (Tabl es 28 and 29), at least as far as the ordering of frequency of mention of destinations is concerned. That is, the most frequently mentioned destination remains public shelter, followed by friend or relative and motel in that order. This pattern holds both for all residents and separately for mobile home dwellers and non-mobile home residents. However, mobile home residents (except those in Polk county) ar e somewhat more likely to say they would go to a public shelter than are their non-mobile home counterparts, and are somewhat more likely to know what shelter type (public shelter, friend or relative, or motel) they would seek .(again, Polk county is the exception). In general, as might be expected, respondents were more likely to say they don't know where they would go (Tables 28 and 29) than to say they don't know where they would like to go (Table 27). If we assume that respondents who indicate they do not know where they would go will end up at a public shelter, the proportion of evacuees who will have to be taken care of by public shelters ranges from 82.1% in Highlands to 59.9% in Okeechobee County. One finding from Table 28 which planners will want to heed involves the large proportions of persons who say they would go to a public shelter, who do not know where that public shelter is located. These proportions range from 38.8% (Polk) to 83.6% (De Soto). One possibility here is that individuals know which facilities are likely to be used as public shelters but do not know which particular shelter they would use. But another possibility is that E-22 17 people do not know the locations of their public shelters or likely public shelters at all. Thus, planners fruitfully might give some thought to providing clear and intensive information about public shelter locations prior to a potential hurricane landfall, to ensure that confusion about where the public shelters are-located is kept to a minimum during the actual evacuation. As a possible aid in such publicity efforts, Table 30 disaggregates information on where people would go by number of years of residence in the five-county area. In addition to knowing the types of facilities people would seek out in an evacuation, it will-be useful to know how many individuals feel they will travel out-of-county or out-of-state. Information of this sort for each facility type and with regard to where individuals would like to go is presented in Table 27 and was summarized briefly above. Tables 31 and 32 show these results aggregated for all facilities and with regard to where persons say they would go. All three of the tables just mentioned suggest that people generally will travel within their county of residence rather than going out-of-state or out-of-county. This pattern holds both for all dwellinq types as a group, and separately for mobile homes and non-mobile homes. But, between 31.9% (Okeechobee county) and 12.2% (De Soto county) of residents do expect to travel beyond their coun ty line, and evacuation personnel may wish to use the information in Tables 31 and 32 to estimate the amount and directions of inter-county travel. However, these data should be used as a rough guide only., in conjunction with the specifics of the particular threatening hurricane. For example, although 11.0% of Hardee respondents said th ey would evacuate to Polk.county, that figure may be lessened if weather reports are forecasting extensive damage in the Polk area. As a last observation regarding Tables 31 and 32, it is interesting to note how many E-23 18 respondents specified they would go out-of-state (including Georgia) or "north". For all counties except De Soto, roughly one out of ten persons interviewed so responded. Interestingly, for DeSoto the comparable figure is. only 2.4%. . Tables 33 and 34 show the most freque ntly mentioned routes respondents said they would take in an evacuation. For Polk county residents, routes 60 (18.0% mentioned -this route) and 27 (22.8%) may experience heavy travel, as to a lesser extent may route 98 (8.8%), 1-4 (6.0%) and 1-75 (11.2%). Hardee county residents say they will use routes 17 (31.3%), 64 (11.9%) and 27 (8.9%). For Okeechobee county, a variety of roadways were mentioned, most commonly routes 441 (37.4%) and 70 (18.7%). Highlands county residents overwhelmingly say they will use route 27 (45.9%), along with local roads (43.2%), and some will use 1-75 (9.4%). De Soto county residents mentioned two routes most frequently: 17 (35.2%) and 70 (25.3%). It should be noted that in addition to the routes mentioned above, in all counties local roads are likely to be fairly heavily traveled. The percentages of respondents who mentioned local roads.are 28.8 for Polk, 47.8 for Hardee, 12.1 for Okeechobee, 43.2 for Highlands, and 30.1 for De Soto. In using these results for planning purposes, two things should be kept in,mind. First, as with some of the other data presented in this report (see above), road usage may vary somewhat with the particulars of the hurricane involved. Second, it is likely that many individuals mentioned the most major rout.es they might use. Planners should be sensitive as well to the possibilities for heavy traffic problems on more minor routes, such as short access roads leading from population centers to the more major thoroughfares shown in Tables 34 and 34. E-24 19 General Conclusions In this section we will presentsome of the most important highlights for plannings purposes. 1. The population in general and especially those who live in mobile homes is -elderly. 2. Although a relatively small percentage of the residents need special assistance to evacuate or are without transportation, in absolute numbers this could be a substantial amount of people. 3. Although a substantial percentage of the respondents indicated experience with hurricanes, this experience except for Okeechobee county was with Donna in 1960. 4. The National Weather Service is the source of advice most frequently mentioned. 5.. Although most people will evacuate when ordered to do so, a substantial proportion would never evacuate and mobile home dwellers would tend to evacuate prior to the order to so. 6. If family members are home, respondents indicated they could be ready to leave almost immediately. 7. In general only one vehicle per residence will be used. 8. Most people would evacuate to public shelters within their own county. Based on these data, there will be a great demand placed on public shelters. 9. A substantial proportion of respondents do not know where their public shelter is. SP134:E E-25 Tabl e 1 Number Persons in Household By County (P-e-rcentage) County Polk Hardee Okeechobee H* hlands DeSoto Number 'PA) (N=137) (N=650) N=142) (N=152) 1 16.9 9.9 8.6 20.7 14.6 2 42.0 33.8 44.7 51.1 45.3 3 18.6 23.2 21.2 11.5 17.5 4 13.5 13.4 16.4 13.8 13.9 5 6.0 11.3 5.9 1.1 5.8 6or more 2.9 8.4 2.8 1.7 2.9 E-26 21 Tabl e *2 Number of Persons in Household for Mobile Homes and Non-Mobile Homes by County County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH Number (N=159) (N=491) (N=23) (N=119) (N=76) (N=76) (N=39) (N=135) (N=53) (N=84) 1 15.7 17.3 13.0 9.2 9.2 7.9 17.9 21.5 13.2 15.5 2 50.3 39.3 31.9 56.6 32.9 64.1 47.4 60.4 35.7 3 12.6 20.6 30.4 21.8 17.1 26.3 10.3 11.9 15.1 19.0 4 12.6 13.8 8.7 14.3 10.5 22.4 5.1 16.3 7.5 17.9 5 5.7 6.1 ---- 13.4 3.9 7.9 2.6 1.5 1.9 8.3 6 or more 3.2 2.8 4.3 9.2 .2.6 2.6 ---- 1.5 1.9 3.6 Median 2.18 2.33 2.35 2.90 2.22 2.85 2.00 2.1 2.11 2.47 @ N 1 2 3 4 22. Table 3 Age of Oldest Resident By County (Percentage) County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto (N=641) (.N=141) (N=152) (N=170) (N=137) 24 and Under 1.2 2.1 2.6 4.2 2.2 25 - 34 11.9 10.7 7.9 8.8 8.7 35 - 44 15.1 18.4 13.2 8.8 13.2 45 - 54 14.2 19.9 21.7 5.9 .15.3 55 64. 17.4 14.1 18.7 18.8 16.1 65 74 26.5 19.9 19.0 24.7 29.9 84 11.5 10.6 7.9 15.9 12.4 85 and Over 1.2 4.3 @2.0 2.9 2.2 Me than 59.8 53.4 50.0 65.0 60.7 Percentage of residences 39.2 34.8 28.9 43.5 44.5 with at least one per- son 65 and over E-28 23 Tabl e 4 Number of Residents in Homes Where Oldest Resident 65 or Older by County (Percentage) County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto Number (N=258) (N=49) (N=54) (N=94) (N=61) 1 30.2 18.4 13.0 28.7 21.3 2 56.2 57.1 59.3 62.8 67.2 3 9.3 10.2 14.8 4.3 6.6 4or more 4.3 .14.3 13.0 4.3 4.9 Nolte: Percentage of cases where second older resident also 65 or over 64.2 60.0 56.5 74.6 60.4 Note:* Percentage of either alone or with person 65 or over 66.3 52.7 43.5 75.5 61.9 E-29 24 Tabl e 5 Age of Oldest Resident for Mobile Homes and Non-Mobile Homes by County County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto MH NMH MH NMH MH . NMH MH NMH MH NMH Age (N=159) (.N=483) .(N=22) (N=119) (N=76) (,N=76) (N=38) (N=132) (.N=53) (N=84) 34 and under 12.7 13.3 18.2 11.8 7.9 13.2 7.9 12.1 13.2 9.5 35 - 64 38.6 49.2 40.9 54.6 47.4 60.5 13.2 38.7 35.0 51.2 65 and over 48.7 37.5 40.9 33.6 45.7 26.3 78.9 49.2 52.8 39.3 Median 62.2 58.1 56.5 52.9 60.5 53.0 68.2 64.2 64.8 59.7 25 Tabl e 6 Type of Residence By County (Percent'age) County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto Type (N=651) (N=142) (N=152) (N=174) (N=137) Single Family 67.7 80.3 46.7 70.7 55.5 Two Family 2.0 2.1 2.6 3.4 4.4. Apartment 5.7 1.4 0.7 2.9 1.5 Mobile Home 24.4 .16.2 50.0 22.4 38.7 Other 0.2 ---- ---- 0.6 ---- E-31 26 Tabl e 7 Special Needs of Residents By County (Percentage) County' Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto Need (N=645) (N=142) (N=152) (N=174) (N=137) Elderly 1.8 3.5 2.6 1.1 1.5 No Car or Doesn't Ori've 1.1 1.4 --- 2.8 0.7 Blind 0.3 0.7 0.6 0.7 Walks With Cane 0.5 --- --- --- --- Arthritis 0.5 --- 0.6 Parkinson's Disease 0.2 --- --- Retirement Home 0.2 --- --- --- Retarded 0.3 1.4 Paralyzed 0.2 Bad Knees or Legs 0.3 --- --- --- --- Wheel Chair Bound 0.5 0.7 1.3 0.6 0.7 Invalid 0.2 0.7 --- 1.1 --- Heart Trouble & Stroke 0.5 1.4 0.7 1.7 0.7 Braifi Tumor --- --- --- --- 0.7 Bad Sight & Hearing --- 0.6 --- Multiple Sclerosis 0.2 --- Mentally Ill 0.2 Emphys'ema 0.2 --- Diabetes 0.2 --- --- Doesn't Want to Travel 0.2 --- Need Oxygen --- --- 0.7 Handicapped --- 0.7 --- Not Specified 0.5 0.7 --- --- --- No Need. 91.4 88.7 94.7 90.8 94.9 E-32 27 Tabl e 8 Assistance Needed By County (Percent) Coun'ty Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto (N=651) (N=142) (N=152) (N=174) (N=137) Assistance Because of Handicap 5.5% 7.7% 3.3% 7.5% 2.2% Assistance Because Need Bus or Taxi 2.8% 2.8% 3.3% 5.2% 1.5% Number of People Who Need Assistance and Have No Car 19 4 6 1 E-33 28 Ta'b] e. 9 Special Needs of Residents and Mobile Home, Non-Mobile Homes Residence by County County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto i' MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH IMH NMH (N=159) (N=492) (N=23) (N=119) (N=76) (N=76) (N=39) (N=132) (N=53) (N=84) Percent with Special Needs 8.2 7.5 13.0 14.3 3.9 5.3 10.3 7.4 9.5 Assistance Needed Because of Handicap 6.3 5.3 13.0 6.7 3.9 2.6 7.7 7.4 ---- 3.6 Need Bus or Taxi 1.9 3.0 ---- 3.4 2.6 3.9 5.1 5.2 ---- 2.4 29 Table 10 Type of Vehicles and Number by County (Percentage) County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto Number (N=650) (N=139) (N=152) (N=122) (N=137) Total 0 4.5 3.6 2.6 5.2 2.9 1 37.4 33.8 33..6 55.8 51.1 2 42.4 38.1 38.8 26.2 32.8 3 11.8 .15.8 21.1 8.7 8.0 4 3.1 6.5 2.6 2.3 2.9 5 or more 1 .1 2.1 1.4 1.7 2.1 Sedans 0 13.7 27.1 20.4 17.3 19.7 1 58.2 49.3 54.6 69.4 68.6 2 23.1 20.7 23.0 10.4 ---9.5 3 .4.0 2.9 2.0 2.3 2.2 4 0.6 ---- ---- 0.6 ---- 5 or more 0.3 ---- ---- ---- ---- Station Wagons 0 90.9 81.0 88.2 88.4 86.1 1 8.9 17.6 11.2 10.4 13.9 2 or more 0.2 ---- 0.7 1.2 Jeeps 0 98.0 92.9 96.7 99.4 97.8 1 or more 2.0 7.1 3.3 0.6 2.2 Pick Up Trucks 0 70.3 50.0 52.0 75.1 64.2 1 26.3 41.4 41.4 22.0 33.6 2 or more 3.5 8.5 6.6 2.9 2.2 Vans 0 95.4 95.0 93.4 93.6 92.7 .1 or more 4.6 5.0 6.6 6.4 7.3 E-35 Table I]-. Type of Vehicles, Number and Mobile Home, Non-Mobile Home Resident by.County County Polk Hardee Okeec@hobee Highlands DeSoto. MH NMH AH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH Number (N=159),(N=491) (N=23) (N=116) (N=76) (N=76) (N=39) (N=lj3). (N=53) (N=84)" Total 0 1.3 5.5 ---- 4.3 2.6 2. *6 5.1 5.3 1.9 3.6 1 50.9 33.0 56.5 29.3 47.4 19.7 69.2 51.9 69.8 39.3 2 34.6 44.6 34.8 38.8 35.5 42.1 23.1 27.1 20.8 40.5 3 11.3 12.0 8.7 17.2 10.5 31.6 2.6 10.5 3.8 10.7 4 or more 1.8 4.9 ---- 7.8 3.9 3.9 ---- 5.3, 3.8 6.0 Sedans 0 13.8- 13.7 34.8 25.6 25.0 15.8 20.5 16.4 28.3 14.3 1 67.3 55.3 52.2 48.7 57.9 51.3 .74.4 67.9 66.0 70.2 2 15.7 25.5 13.0 22.2 14.5 31.6 5.1 11.9 5.7 11.9 3 or more 3.1 5.5 ---- 3.4 2.6 1.3 ---- 3.7 3.6 Station Wagons 0 90.6 91.0 73.9 83.8 92.1 84.2 89.7 88.1 84.9 86.9 1 or more 9.4 8.8 26.1 16.2 7.9 14.5 10.3 11.9 15.1 13.1 Jeeps 0 99.4 97.6 100.0 9i.5 96.1 97.4 100.0 99.3. 100.0 96.4 I or more 0.6 2.4 8.5 3.9 2.6 ---- 0.7 ---- 3.6 Pick Up Trucks 0 73.0 69.4 60.9 47.9 51.3 52.6 87.2 71.6 66.0 63.1 1 or more 27.0, 30.6 39.1 52.1 48.7 47.4 12.8 28.4 34.0 36.9 Vans maw 93.1 96.1 95.7 94.9 96.1 90.8 92.3 94.0 94.3 91.7 =6.0= AN' WW3 M.1' 3W OW M 5.M 8�W'- 31 Table 12 Years Living In Five County Area By County (Percentage) County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto Years (.N=647) (N=140) (N=152) (N=174) (.N=137) 0 - 4 15.8 10.0 23.7 29.9 17.5 5 - 9 16.2 12.9 22.4 17.2 27.0 10 - 14 13.7 10.7 18.4 19.5 17.5 15 - 19 8.2 11.4 7.2 3.4 9.5 20 - 24 8.1 12.1 4.0 7.5 9.5 25 - 29 7.9 4.3 3.9 5.2 4.4- 30 - '34 6.5 7.2 3.3. 4.6 6.1 35 - 39 .6.3 3.5 3.3 4.0 0.7 40 - 44 5.4 4.3 2.6 24 2.2 45 - 49 2.4 4.3 3.3 0.6 1.5 50 or more 9.7 19.3 7.9 5.7 5.1 Median 16.6 10.0 9.8 10.2 E-37 32 Table 13 Years Living in Area and Mobile Home, Non-Mobile Home Residence by County County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH Years (N=159) (N=488). (N=22) (N=118) (N=76) (N=76) (N=39) (N=135) (N=53) (N=84) 0 - 9 56.6 24.0 36.4 20.3 56.6 35.5 71.8 40.0 43.4 45.2 10 - 19 20.8 22.3 27.2 21.2 27.6 .23.7 23.1 23.0 28.3 26.2 20 - 29 11.3 17.2 18.2 16.1 6.6 .9.2 ---- 16.3 18.9 10.7 30 - 39 7.5 14.6 ---- 12.7* 5.3 7.9 2.6 10.3 7.5 4.8 co 40 - 49 1.9 9.6 4.5 9.4. 1.3 10.5 ---- 3.7 6.0 50 or more 1.9 12.3 16.6 20.3 2.6 13.2 2.6 6.7 1.9 7.1 Median 7.4 20.4 15.0 22.3 7.3 12.5 4.9 11.6 9.9 11.0 33 Tabl e 14 Previou s Hurricane Experience By County (Percentage) qounty Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto Percent (N=651) (N=142) (N=152) (N-174) (N=137) Yes 64.7 67.6 80.3 67.8 67.2 Donna 1960 29.3 39.4 6.6 22.4 29.2 Frederick 1979 4.1 2.1 32.9 12.6 2.2 1938 Storm ---- ---- ---- 1.1 6.6 1964 Storm ---- ---- 4.6 ---- .1969 Storm -- -- 7.0 ---- ---- ---- Several 1.1 4.9 9.9 5.7 4.4 Evacuated 9.1 11.3 21.7 10.9 12.4 E-39 34 Tabl'e'l 5 Previous Hurricane Experience of Mobile and Non-Mobile Home Residents by County (Percentage) County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH (N=159) (N=490), (N=23) (N=118) (N=76) (N=76) (N=39) (N=135) (N=53) (N=84) Percent Yes 54.1 68.1 56.5 70.3 78.9 81.6 43.6 74.8 71.7 64.3 Donna 1960 20.8 32.1 34.8 40.3 3.9 9.2 7.7 26.7 20.8 34.5 Frederick 1979 5.0 3.9 8.7 0.8 34.2 *31.6 12.8 12.6 3.8 1.2 Several 1.3 1.0 0.8 6.6 13.2 10.3 4.4 3.8 1.2 Evacuated 10.1 8.7 4.3 12.6 31.1 13.3 7.7 11.9 .13.2 11.9 35 Table 16 Year Around Residents By County (Percentage) County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto Live Year Around (N=649) (N=141) (N=151) (N=174) (N=137) Yes 91.7 96.5 94.0 90.8 94.2 No 8.3 2.8 6.0 9.2 5.8 E-41 36 Table 17 Year Around Residency and Mobile Home, Non-Mobile Home by County County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH Live Year Around (N=159) (N=490)- (N=23) (N=118) (.N=76) (N=75) (4=39) (N=135) CN=Z53) (N=84) Yes 79.9 95.5 91.3 98.3 90.8 97.3 82.1 93.3 84.9 100.0 No 20.1 4.5 8.7 1.7 9.2 2.7 17.9 6.7 15.1 ---- 37 Tabl e 18 From Whom Seek Evacuation Advice By County (Percent Yes) County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Hi hlands DeSoto Whom (N=633) (N=139) (N=149) (V68) (N=131) Neighbor 29.1 23.0 18.8 20.2 17.4 Friend 32.0 35.0 26.4 25.1 19.0 Local Government or Law Enforcement Official 66.0 72.7 60.8 58.3 56.5 National Weather Service on Radio or TV 92.7 94.2 94.0 92.3 91.7 E-43 38 Tabl'e 19 From Whom Seek EVacuation Advice, Mobile Home and Non-Mobile Home Dwellers by County (Percent Yes) County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH Whom (N=153) (N=480) (N=22) (N=117) (N=74) (N=75) (N=36) (N=133) (N=52) (N=80)' Neighbor 30.1 28.7 22.7 23.1 18.4 18.7 16.7 21.2 21.2 15.0 Friend 34.4 31.2 43.5 33.3 23.3 29.3 25.0 25.2 24.5 16.7 Local Government or' Law Enforcement Official 66.0 66.0 65.2 74.1 54.1 67.6 54.1 59.5 43.4 65.4 41 National Weather Service on Radio or TV 94.2 92.1 100.0 93.1 94.7 93.2 97.3 90.8 96.2 88.6 39 Tabl e 20 When Residents Would Evacuate By County (Percentage) County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto When (N=647) (N=138) (N=152) (N=172) (N=135) Before Official Order 16.1% 13.9% 27.0% 13.9% 17.0% Median Time Before Hit Coast 2.0 Hrs 4.2 Hrs 2.3 Hrs 2.5 Hrs 2.5 Hrs When Given Official Order 68.9% 59.9% 61.2% 62.2% 66.7% Median Time After Order 0.3 Hrs 0.2 Hrs 0.2 Hrs 0.2 Hrs 0.1 Hrs Percent Leaving Within 1 Hour of Receiving Order 94.1% 92.6% 94.6% 95.3% .94.4% Would Not Evacuate 10.9% 24.1% 9.9% 18.6% 15.6% Use Own Judgment 1.5% 2.2% ---- ---- ---- Do No@ Know 2.6% 0.7% 2.0% 5.2% 0.7% E-45 40 Table 21 When Mobile Home and Non-Mobile Home Residents Would Evacuate by County County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH When (N=159) (N=492)- (N=22) (N=116) (N=76) (N=76) (N=39) (N=133) (N=53) (N=82) Before Official Order 32.7 10.6 27.3 11.2 34.2 19.7 20.5 12.9 20.8 14.6 Median Time Before 2.0 1.8 8.0 3.5 3.25 1.5 1.5 3.0 2.5 2.5 Hit Coast Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours When Given Official Order 62.3 70.5 63.7 58.6 57.9 64.5 74.4 62.9 67.9 65.9 Median Time After 0.30 0.29 0.14 0.26 0.17 0.20 0.10 0.24 0.17 0.13 Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Percentage Leaving With One Hour 91.9 94.1 100.0 91.0 97.7 91.8 100.0 93.6 97.2 92.6 Would Not Evacuate 3.1' 13.4 4.5 27.6 5.3 14.5 5.1 24.2 9.4 19.5 Use Own Judgment 1.2' 0.2 ---- 2.8 ---- ---- ---- ---- Do Not Know 0.6 4.1 4.5 ---- 2.6 1.3 ---- ---- 1.3 41 Table 22 Years Living In Area And Would Not Evacuate By County County Years In Area Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto 5 or less 2.2 16.7 8.3 16.4 16.2 (N=136) (N=18) (N=48) (N=55) (.N=37) 6 - 14 11.2 10.7 12.5 17.0 16.7 (N=152) (N=28) (N=48) (N=53) (N=48) 15 - 29 8.1 13.9 4.5 15.4 13.3 (N=149) (N=36) (N=22) (N=26) (N=30) 30 and over 19.8 40.7 12.9 34.5 115.8 (N=192) (N=54) (N=31) (N=29) (N=19) Entri es: Percentage Not Evacuating N= Tdtal N for Particular Years in Area E-47 42 Table 23 What Would Do If Order To Evacuate-But Weather Fine By County (Percentage) County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto What Do (N=595) (N=126) (N=146) (N=149) (N=125) Leave Immediately. 70.1 62.7 65.1 67.1 78.4 Wait One Hour 4.5 4.8 10.3 4.7 7.2 Wait Two or More Hours 1.8 7.1 3.4 4.1 7.2 Use Own Judgment 23.5 .25.4 21.2 23. 5 7.2 or Do Not Know E-48 43 Tab I x-- - 24 What Mobile Home and Non-Mobile Home Residents Would do if .Ordered to Evacuate But Weather Fine County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH What Do (N=151) (N=444) (N=21) (N=103) (N=75) (N=71) (N=38) (N=111) (N=51) (N=82) Leave Immediately 77.5 67.6 73.9 60.2 62.7 67.6 76.3 64.0 78.7 70.7 Wait One Hour 5.3 4.3 4.3 4.8 10.7 9.9 2.6 5.4 3.9 8.5 Wait Two or More Hours 2.6 0.9 8.7 6.8 1.3 5.6 --- 6.3 10.2 4.9 Use Own Judgment or Do Not Know 16.0 26.6 8.7 28.1 25.3 16.9 21.1 24.3 8.1 6.1 44 Tabl e 25 Vehicles Used To Evacuate By County County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto Vehicle (N=588) (N=127) (N=141) (N=160) (N=129) Sedan 72.8 52.8 46.2 72.5 65.9 Station Wagon 7.8 12.6 9.8 .5.6 9.3 Jeep 1.4 2.4 0.7 0.6 ---- Pick Up Truck 9.7 .18.9 25.2 10.6 14.7, Van 2.6 3.1 2.8 3.8 4.6 0 t h e r 1.7 3.1 2.8 3.1 1.6 Two or More 4.1 7.1 12.6 3.8 3.9 E-50 45 Table 26. Vehicles Used to Evacuate and Mobile H ome, Non-Mobile Home Residence by County County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH Vehicle (N=159) (N=437) (N=23) (N=104) (N=72) (N=71) (N=39) (N=126) (N=53) (N=76) Sedan 71.5 73.2 47.8 53.8 45.8 46.5 74.3 71.4 66.0 65.8 Station Wagon 7.3 8.0 21.7 10.6 6.9 12.7 5.7 5.6 11.3 7.9 Jeep 0.7 1.6 ---- 2.9 1.4 ---- ---- 0.8 ---- Pick Up Truck 9.3 9.8 17.4 19.2 27.8 22.5 8.6 11.1 13.2 15.8 Van 2.6 2.5 4.3 2.9 2.8 2.8 5.7 3.2 3.8 5.3 Other 4.6 0.7 4.3 .2.9 2.8 2.8 2.9 3.2 1.9 1.3 Two or More 4.0 4.1 4.3 7.7 12.5 12.7 2.9 4.0 3.8 3.9. 46 Table 27 .Where Residents Would Like To Go By County (Percentage) County Polk Hardee oktechobee Hi hlands VeSoto (N=609) (N=123) N=144) (9!149) (N=123) Public Shelter 49.4 51.2 39.6 54.4 58.5 Where (N=291) (N=64) (N=54) (N=80) (N=71) Polk 89.6 3.1 ---- ---- 1.4 Hardee 0.3 90.6 ---- Okeechobee 1.6 90.7 ---- Highlands 0.3 3.1 91.2 DeSoto 0.7 1.6 1.2 98.6 Other 1.0 @1.2 ---- Do Not Know 7.9 9.3 6.2 ---- Friend 21.7 31J 31.9 18.1 21.1 'Where (N=105) (N=30) (N=27) (N=20) .(N=22) Polk 64.7 13.3 ---- 5.0 13.6 Hardee 1.9 53.3 ---- -Okeechobee 3.3 51.8 5.0 ---- Highlands 1.0 3.3 3.7 70.0 DeSoto ---- 72.3 Other 14.3 3.3 22.2 10.0 4.5 Do Not Know 18.1 20.0 22.2 10.0 9.1 Motel 12.3 8.9 19.4 13.4 9.8 Where (N=@O) (N=7) (N=19) (N=17) (N=6) Polk 48.3 14.3 5.9 16.7 Hardee 14.3 ---- 5.9 ---- Okeechobee ---- ---- 36.8 ---- Highlands ---- -10.5 35.3 ---- DeSoto ---- 33.3 Other 16.7 28.6 5.2 11.8 ---- Do Not Know 35.0 42.8 47.4 .41.2 50.0 Do Not Know 16.6 8.1 9.0 14.1 10.6 E-52 47 Tabl e 28 Where Would Residents Go By County (Percent) County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto Where (N=542) (N=119) (N=137) (N=129) (N=119) Public Shelter 47.2 36.8 35.8 52.7 46.2 Know Where It Is 38.8 67.4 57.8 56.3 83.6 Friend 13.8 25.2 21.9 11.6 16.0 Know Where It Is 73.6 69.6 81.5 61.5 70.6 Motel 9.6 4.2 18.2 5.4 5.0 Know Where It Is 67.4 60.0 68'. 2 66.7 66.7 Other 3.1 7.6 ---- 1.6 4.2 Do Not Know 25.6 26.0 24.1 29.4 28.6 E-53 48 Tabl e 29 Where Woul d Mobi I eHome and Non-Mobile Home Evacuate to by County County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands Desoto MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH Where (N=137) (N=405). (N=22) (N=97) (N=67) (N=70) (N=31) (N=98) (N=49) (N=70) Public Shelter 31.4 52.6 54.5 33.0 38.8 32.9 58.1 51.0 49.0 44.2 Friend 21.2 11.1 22.7 25.8 14.9 28.6 12.9 11.2 18.4 14.3 Motel 12.4 8.6 5.1 26.9 10.0 3.2 6.1 6.1 4.3 Other 5.1- 3.2 4.5 8.2 ---- ---- 3.2 1.0 2.0 5.7 Do Not Know 29.2 24.4 18.2 27.8 19.4 28.6 22.6 30.6 24.5 31.4 49 Tab] e 30 Time in Area and Where Would Go by County County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto Years PS DKN PS DKN PS DKN PS DKN PS DKN 5 or less 44.3 29.6 38.9 5.6 35-.6 20.0 46.8 34.0 30.0 29.4 (N=115) (N=18) (N=45) (N=47) (N=34) 6 - 14 35.7 32.5 32.0 24.0 31.0 26.2 51.2 34.1 50.0 31.0 (N=126) (N=25) (N=42) (N=41) (N=42) 15 - 29 45.9 26.3 38.2 32.4 47.6 23.8 50.0 15.0 44.0 20.0 -(N=133) (N=34) (N=21) (N=20) (N=25) 30 and over 54.0 16.9 39.0 29.3 34.5 27.6 68.2 18.2 33.3 22.2 (N=166) (.N=41) (N=29) (N=22) (N=18) N Total N for particular years in area. PS Public shelter. DKN Do not know where they would go. 50 Table 31 County Would Go To By County- County In Polk Hardee Okeecho'bee Highlands DeSoto County or State Go To (N=361) (N=82) (N=94) (N=1:04) (N=82) Pol k 77.0 11.0 1.1 1.0 3.6 Hardee 0.3 69.5 ---- ---- ---- Okeechobee ---- ---- 68.1 1.0 Highlands 2.4 3.2 81.7 ---- DeSoto, 0.6 1.1 87.8 Georgia 5.0 6.1 6.4 ---- 2.4 out of State North 5.3 4.9 5.3 9.6 ---- Orang'e 1.4 2.4 1.9 ---- .Alachua ---- ---- ---- 1.9 Central Florida ---- 2.1 ---- Far Away 1.1 2.1 ---- ---- Palm Beach ---- ---- 2.1 ---- ---- North Carolina 0.8 ---- ---- Marion 0.8 Illinois 1.1 ---- ---- Oceola 0.8 ---- ---- E-56 51 Table 32 County Would Evacuate to and Mobile Home, Non-Mobile Home by County County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto County or MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH. IMH NMH State Go To (N=95). (N=266) (N=14) (N=68) (N=55) (N=39) (N=31) (N=73) (N=34) (N=49) Polk 75.8 '77.4 14.3 10.3 1.8 ---- ---- 1.4 2.4 4.1 Hardee ---- 0.4 78.6 67.6 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- I Okeechobee ---- ---- ---- ---- 70.9 64.1 ---- 1.4 ---- ---- Highlands ---- 2.9 1.8 5.1 80.6 82.2 ---- ---- DeSoto ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 1.4 .85.3 87.8 Georgia 3.2 5.6 7.1 5.9 5.5 7.7 ---- ---- ---- 4.1 Out of State 3.2 6.0 ---- 5.9 5.5 5.1 12.9 8.2 4.5 ---- North ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 52 Table 33 Most.Frequently Mentioned Routes By-County County Route Polk Hardee Okeechobee Hi?hlands DeSoto (N=250) (N=67) (N=91) N=74) (N=71) 60 18.0 ---- ---- 27 22.8 8.9 12.1 45.9 ---- 1-4 6.0 --- ---- ---- Local Streets 28.8 47.8 12.1 43.2 30.1 .1-75 11.2 ---- 7.7 9.4 7.0 98 8.8 8.9 ---- ..37 4.0 ---- ---- 64 ---- 11.9 ---- 17 ---- 31.3 ---- 35.Z 70 ---- ---- 18.7 '25.3 441 ---- 37.4 Turnpike ---- 6.6 710 ---- ---- 6.6 ---- 31 ---- 7.0 E-58 53 Tab Ie. 34 Most Frequently Mentioned Routes and Mobile Home, Non-Mobile Home by County County Polk Hardee Okeechobee Highlands DeSoto MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH MH NMH Route (N=68) (N=182) (N=14) (N=53) (N=46) (N=45) (N=22) (N=52) (N=29) (N=38) 60 25.0 15.4 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 27 27.9 20.8 ---- 9.4 13.0 17.7 45.5 46.1 ---- ---- 1-4 4.4 6.0 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Local Streets 25.0 29.1 35.7 50.9 8.7 15.5 54.5 38.5 34.4 36.8 1-75 11.7 11.0 ---- 8.7 ---- ---- ---- ---- 7.9 98 10.9 6.7 ---- ---- ---- ---- 37 2.9 4.4 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 64 ---- ---- 14.3 11.3 ---- ---- ---- 5.8 17 5.8 2.2 28.6 32.1 ---- 4.4 ---- ---- 27.6 44.7 70 ---- ---- ---- 26.0 11.1 ---- ---- 37.9 18.4 441 ---- ---- ---- 34.8 40.0 ---- ---- ---- Turnpike 13.3 ---- ---- ---- ---- 710 ---- ---- ---- ---- 10.9 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 31 ---- ---- 6.5 ---- ---- ---- 54 Appendix A HURRICANE PREPAREDNESS QUESTIONNAIRE Name Interviewer Code No. Address' Res pondent Code No. Phone No. 1 2 3 4 Date of Attempt Time of Attempt Result of Attempt Person and Time to call back Hello, I am of the University of South Florida. We are doing a study for the CEn-tral Florida Regional Planning Council regard- ing peoples' plans for hurricane evacuation. I hope that you will answer the few questions we need to ask so that evacuation plans can be developed. All your responses will remain anonymous in that after the data are coded all identifying information will be destroyed. Is this Mr. or Ms. ? If no, do you live at this resid yes no If yes, continue. If no, find out when re"s-idenfs-will be there. 1. What type of home do you live in? __single family house. -two family house __apartment -mobile home E-60 2 55 2. How many persons live in your house or apartment? What are their ages? Does anyone in your home have special transportation needs or need special assistance to travel . . . for example is anyone handicapped or elderly? __yes -no If yes, why do they have special needs? Would you need outside assistance to evacuate them? __yes .'. no 3. How many cars or trucks are there in your household? What kinds of vehicles are they? sedan- station wagon- Jeep- pickup truck- van- other (spec ify) (If zero to.question 3): Would you need transportation such as a bus or taxi? yes- no% 4. If you were to evacuate, A ich of the vehicles would you use? Specify, E-61 3 56 5. From whom would you seek advice on whether and when to evacuate? Neighbor: ye s- n q- Friend: ye s- no' Local government or law enforcement officials: ye s- no- National Weather Service advisories on radio or TV: yes- no-. @6. If a hurricane were to hit the coast when, if ever, would you evacuate? a. Before an official order to do so. b. When given the official order to do so. C. Would not evacuate. (If a.) How soon before the hurricane was expected to hit the coast would you leave? hours. (If b.) Assuming everyone i's home, how soon would you be ready to leave?' hou rs. 7. What would you do if told to evacuate but the weather was fine outside? (e.g., wait, leave immediately). If wait, when would you leave? hours (0 hours for leave immediately) E-62 4 57 8. If you evacuated, where would you like to go? Public shelter in the five-county area (DeSoto, Hardee, Polk, Highlands, Okeech obee) (If yes, in wbich county? Friend or relative (if yes, where do they live? city and county) Motel (if yes, where city and county) Don't know (Do not say this) 9. If you evacuated, where would you go? (city and county, also record don't.know) Do you know where that is? yes no- (If no, go to question 11). 10. What route wou .ld you take to get there, especially maj'or streets and highways? 11. How long have you lived in the five-county area? 12. Do you. live here all year round? yes- no- If no, during what manths do you live here? E-63 5 58 13. Have you ever been in a'hurricane?. ye s- n p- If yes, wfiere and when Have you ever been evacuated because of a-hurricane? yes- no- Thank you for your help. SP26:P E-64 59 Appendix B TABLE 1 Means, Standard Errors, and 95% Confidence Intervals for Selected Variables, Polk County Standard Confidence Variable X Error Interval Number of household residents 2.60 0.05 2.50-.2.70 Age of oldest household resident 56.45 0.66 55.16-57.74 Total number of vehicles in household 11.75 0.04 1.67- 1.83 Time in hours would leave before expected landfall 8.31 1.89 4.61-12.01 Time in hours to be' ready to leave, assuming everyone home 0.84 0.27 0.30- 1.38 Time to leave if told to evacuate but weather fine 0.91 0.10 0.71- 1.11 Years of residence in the five- county area 21.46 0.68 20.13-22.80 E-65 60 Appendix B TABLE 2 Means, Standard Errors, and 95% Confidence Intervals for Selected Variables, Hardee County Standard Confidence Variable Error Interval Number of household residents 3.14 .0.13 2.89-.3.39 Age of oldest household resident. 55.03 1.44 52.21-57.85 Total number of vehi.cles in household 1.96 0.09 1.78- 2.14 Time in hours would leave before expected landfall 14.77 7.2 0.66-28.88 Time in hours to be ready to leave, assuming everyone home 0.40 0.07 0.26- 0.54 Time to leave if told to evacuate. but weather fine 1.69 0.26 1.18- 2.20 Years of residence in the five- county area 27.01 1.74 23-60-30.42 E-66 61 Appendix B TABLE,3 Means, Standard Errors, and 95% Confidence Intervals for Selected Variables, Okeechobee County standard Confidence Variable Error Interval Number of household residents 2.80 0.11 2.58-.3.02 Age of oldest household resident 55.70 1.28 53.19-58.21 Total number of vehicles in household 1.93 0.08 1.77- 2.09 'Time in hours woul'd leave before expected landfall. 6.57 1.73 3.1.8- 9.96 Time in hours to be ready to leave, assuming everyone home 0.33 0.06 0.21- 0.45 Time to leave if told to evacuate but weather fine 1.14 0.21 0.73- 1.55 Years of residence in th e five- county area 16.68 1.37. 13.99-19.37 E-67 62 Appendix B TABLE 4 Means, Standard Errors, and 95% Confidence Intervals for Selected Variables, Highlands County Standard Confidence Variable Error Interval Number of household residents 2.39 0.14 2.12- 2.66 Age of oldest household resident 61.08 1.27 58.59-63.57 Total number of vehicles in household 1.52@ 0.07 1.45- 1.59 Time in hours would leave before expected landfall 8.15 2.23 3.78-12.52 Time in hours to* be ready to leave, assuming everyone home 1.04. 0.65 0.00- 2.3l.' Time to leave if told to.evacuate but weather fine 1.59 0.23 1.14- 2.04 Years of residence in the five- county area 15.17 1.14 12.94-16.31 E-68 63 Appendix B TABLE 5 Means, Standard Errors, and 95% Confidence Intervals for Selected Variables, DeSoto County Standard 'Confidence Variable Error Interval Numb er of household residents 2.61 0.11 2.39- 2.83 Age of oldest household resident 57.45 1.40 54.71-60.19 Total number of vehicles in household 1.66 0.09 1.48- 1.84 T ime in hours would leave before expected landfall 6.67 2.08 2.59-10.75 Time in hours to be ready to leave, assuming everyone home 0.29 0.06 0.17- 0.41 Time to leave if told to evacuate. but weather fine 0.66 0.16 .0.35- 0.97 Years of residence in the five- county area 15.62 1.29 13.09-18.15 E-69 Appendix F Examples of Letters to Owners of Alternate Shelters JIKE S P 0 L K C 0_U N T y P.O. BOX 1336 PUBLIC SAFETY DIVISION BARTOW, FLORIDA 33830 PUBLIC SAFETY COUNCIL HEADQUARTERS BRENDA TAYLOR BLDG. 410 FRANK SMITH, JR. BARTOW AIR BASE JACK SIMMERS PHONE 533-7161 ERNIE CALDWELL G. WES GUNN, DIRECTOR ROYCEREADY Dear Early results of a hurricaneshel ter study conducted by the Central'Florida-Regional Planning Council show a deficit of shelter spaces in this county to house evacuees in a .mai o.r-hurricane. The county's primary shelters, mostly public schools, timply can- notlaccommodate all of -our mobile home residents,@--as well as those who live in flood- p ro ;1.e-areas, plus evacuees from coastal areas who will enter this county during a @urric1ne. Moreover, we cannot look to other central Florida counties for help, betaus, the same situati6n exists*elsewhere. We are very concerned about this lack of shelter space because it means an increased ri, to lives and property due to increased traffic on our roads and increased confusion as evacuees seek shelter. With the help of.the Regional Plann i*ng Co uncil, law enforcement officials and others, w are trying to identify additional shelter space to 'ease this burden. We are asking you and ot@lers in cur business and religious communities if we can count on the availabilit, of at least a portion of your building to be used as shelter during a hurricane. You m: be interested in knowing that Chapte r 252.51, Florida Statutes, states that private businesses serving as shelters cannot be held liable for accidents or injury. Please contact any of us if you can assist in this important project. In the meantime, thank you for your attention. Sincerely, G. Wes Gunn 7 Polk County Public Safety Director ce Stiner Polk County Commission Nola E. Osborn ,idge Area Chapter Greater Lakeland Chapter American Red Cross American Red Cross GWG/GS@NEOJdo AMBUL NCE EPT. CIVIL DEFENSE DEPT. FIRE-RESCUE DEPT. DALE -E. DAVIS, DIRECTOR CARL L. ALECK, EXEC. DIRECTOR HARRY T. CARTER, CHIEF F-1 HARDEE. COUNTY. COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Rm. A-204, Courthouse Annex. Samuel L. Rawis District I 412 West Orange Street Ralph Smith District II Wauchula, Florida 33873 John Ray Gough District III ~6qv~1~s~t~r~qi~ct It Luke Waldron District IV Commissioners Office (813)773-6952 Maurice Henderson District V Bookkeeping & Payroll (813)773-6932 County Administrator. Harry E. Lampe County Attorney. Joel Evers Clerk, Coleman W. Best Enviromental ATtorney. Judith S. Kavanaugh May 17, 1982 early results of a hurricane shelter study conducted by the Central Florida Regional Planning Council show a deficit of shelter spaces in this County to house evacuees in a major hurricane. The County's primary shelters, mostly public schools, simply cannot accomodate all of our mobile home residents, as well as those who live in flood-prone areas, plus evacuees from coastal areas who will enter this County during a hurricane. Moreover, we cannot look to other Central Florida Counties for help, because the same situation exists elsewhere. We are very concerned about this lack of shelter space because it means an increased risk to lives and property due to increased traffic on our roads and increased confusion as evacuees seek shelter. With the help of the Regional Planning Council, Red Cross, Law Enforcement Officials and others, we are trying to identify additional shelter space to ease this burden. We are asking you and others in our business and religious communities if we can count on the availability of a t least a protion of your building to be used as shelter during a hurricane. You may be interested in knowing that Chapter 252.51, Florida Statutes, states that private businesses serving as shelters cannot be held liable for accidents or injury. Please contact Ron Luke of the Disaster Preparedness Office at 773-6373 if you can assist in this important project. In the meantime, thank you for you attention. Sincerely, Harry E. Lampe County Administrator George F. Heine, Jr. Red Cross Representative HEL/GFH/vb F-2 "AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER" Appendix G Central Florida Inland Shelter Advisory Committee Membership October, 1982 Central Florida Inland Shelter Advisory Committee Members Captain Eric Adams Richard Smith, Coordinator Polk County Sheriffs Department BPD, South Flotida Area. Carl Aleck Chairman Paul Buxton, Chairman Polk County Civil Defense Director American Red Cross, Okeechobee Captain Larry Alexander Harry Carger Lakeland Police Department Florida Highway Patrol William Altman Kenneth Carlton Arcadia Fire Department Arcadia Police Department Reverend James Armstrong Superintendent R.. Clem Churchwell Lakeland Ministry Association Polk County School Board Wynelle Arnold Ray Cochran Okeechobee Civil Defense Director Lakeland Planning Department Thomas Barb, Administrator Sheriff John Collier H. H. Raulerson Hospital Okeechobee County Eugene Barry Reverend Harrison Conley W`VFM Radio First Baptist Church Joe Baxter Richard Cratsenberg Hardee County School Board Lakeland Fire Department Jerry Bishop Fred Crosby DeSoto County School Board National Weather Service Merle Bishop Greg Czerepak Polk County Planning Director Florida Department of Transportation Bryan Bogert, Administrator Dale Davis Highlands General Hospital Polk County EMS Captain L. D. Brady Ralph Davis Florida Highway Patrol Ridge Area Chapter American Red Cross Jim Brooks Chief Charles M. Deal Highlands Coun ty EMS Lakeland Fire Department Major Harold Brower Jim Degennaro Lakeland Police Department Polk County Community Development Chief Charles Brown Chief Richard Deloach Winter Haven Fire Department Sebring Fire Department Doyle Bryan Delores G. Dry Sheriff Hardee County HRS Deputy District Administrator G-1 Central Florida Inland Shelter Advisory Committee Members (Cont'd) Reverend Milton Dykes, President Maurice Henderson Bartow Ministry Association Hardee County Commissioner Richard Fellows Chairman Norman Heston .@dministrative Assistant Board of County Commissioners City of Okeechobee E.Gilbert Flatton, Administrator Ed Higby Hardee Memorial Hospital Lakeland Chapter American Red Cross Chief Mack Flowers Sergeant Roy Holland Avon Park Fire Department Haines City Police Department Kenneth Gammon Richard Irwin, Administrator Florida Department of Transportation DeSoto Memorial Hospital Paul Gormley Marvin Jackson Hardee Memorial Hospital Polk County School Board Chief Craig Graybill Betti Johnson Sebring Police Department Tanpa Bay Regional Planning Council Chairman R. V. Griffin Bob Keating East Central Fla. Reg. Plannin DeSoto County Commission,- g Counci Reverend James Guelzow Jerry Keen Peach Lutheran Church DeSoto County EMS G. Wes Gunn John Kinsaul, Superintendent Polk County Safety Director Okeechobee County School Board Bob Hanks Madge Lackey. Ridge Area Chapter American Red Cross Hardee Memorial Hospital Cathy Hancock Harry Lampe DeSoto County Civil Defense Hardee County Administrator Frank Haraburda Reverend Alex Harper, President Chairman James D. Lashley Ministerial Association Okeechobee County Commission R. G. Harris Homer Latham Glades County Civil Defense Florida Power and Light Paul Hartley Lisle T. Lenny, Administrator DeSoto County Sheriffs Department Polk General Hospital Captain Gary Helm Chief Raliegh Lowe Lake Wales Police Wauchula Police Department G-2 Central Florida Inland Shelter Advisory Committee Members (Cont'd) James Lofton, Coordinator Joseph M. Pelissier BDP, Central Florida Area National Hurricane Center Ronald L. Luke Art Perry liardee Disaster Preparedness Highlands General Hospital Harold Macon Chief Ray Peters Winter Haven Police Wauchula Fire Department Tim Mack Chief Tim Pitts Florida Highway Patrol Bartow Fire Department John C. Martin Jim Platt Highlands County School Board Wauchula Fire Department Gerald Martin Royce Ready Polk County Planning Department Polk County Commis sion Chief Ronald Martin Eugene Ritch C, Winter Haven Police Arcadia Police Department Reverend Richard McDermott, President Bill Sager, Administrator Winter Haven Ministerial Association Walker Memorial Hospital Major Dale McDonald Bruce W. Savage Winter Haven Police Department Highlands Civil Defense Captain W. R. McIntyre Allen Saxe Florida Highway Patrol City of Winter Haven Anthony Messina Stephanie Schlesser Arcadia Fire Department Southwest Florida Regional Planning Gouncil L. E. Mitchum Lakeland Fire Department Gabriele Seeling Louie Mims Bill Segler Sheriff of Polk County Winter Haven Fire Department Ray Nowack Sergeant Lamar Saufert Kissimmee River Volunteer Fire Department Florida Highway Patrol Aubry O'Pry Lieutenant Doug Sexton DeSoto County Civil Defense Director Bartow Police Department Executive Director Nola Osborn Danny Shea Lakeland Chapter American Red Cross National Guard Armory Butch Parkinson Reverend Don Shearer Okeechobee Sheriffs Department New Wine Fellowship Sergeant T. G. Parrish Joe Sheppard Florida Highway Patrol Sheriff of Highlands County G-3 Central Florida Inland Shelter Advisory Committee Members (Cont'd) Chief Robert Singletary Judd Wood Avon Park Police Department American Red Cross Florida Chairman Josephine Smail A@nerican Red Cross Kevin Smith Withlacoochee Regional Council James Sorenson Arcadia Fire Department Lieutenant Tony Sparks Bartow Police Department Reverend Richard Starr William Stephenson Planning Director Grace Stiner, Manager American Red Cross Glen Sutphin Planning Director Armon Summerall Director Public Safety, DeSoto County Sheriff Robert Thomas DeSoto County Chief Louis K. Tomey, Jr. Okeechobee Fire Department Spencer Thompson Bowling Green Police Department Dan Trescott Bureau Disaster.Preparedness Captain J. E. Vann Florida Highway Patrol Dr. & Mrs. J. W. Vaughn Jim Verplanck Director Planning & Zoning Clayton White Planning Director Frank Williams Florida Highway Patrol G-4 NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY 3 6668 14111093 4