The Role of Transit in Emergency Evacuation Special Report 294 (2008) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4 Evidence from the 38 Largest Urbanized Areas
4 Evidence from the 38 Largest Urbanized Areas
Pages 74-117
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 74... ...
census data for information on population, land area, demographic statistics, and car owner ship; the National Transit Database for data on transit agency size, service area, and equipment by type; the annual bus fleet survey of the top 100 school districts for school bus numbers; the Urban Mobility Report of the Texas Transportation Institute for the congestion indicator; and the annual Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) database on presiden tially declared disasters for data on the most common disasters by state.
|
From page 75... ...
• umber of railcars (for transit agencies with ≥100 vehicles operated in maximum N service) • umber of demand response vehicles (for transit agencies with ≥100 vehicles N operated in maximum service)
|
From page 76... ...
UAs represent the most densely populated part of a region, where transit service is likely to be most extensive, and thus where the need for transit could be significant in an emergency evacuation. The results of the statistical profile are summarized in Table 4-1 and shown in detail in Annex 4-1. The profile, particularly the detailed sta tistics, reveals the variety of conditions even among the largest UAs -- the 38 selected for this study.
|
From page 77... ...
, even though the data represent the maximum levels of equipment likely to be operational in the event of an emergency. At the other end of the spectrum, with the exception of Boston and Houston, the largest UAs -- those in the top triad with respect to population size -- are served by two or more transit agencies; the very largest UAs -- New York and Los Angeles -- have 17 and 9 transit providers, respectively. Not sur prisingly, the supply of transit equipment is also larger in these areas; New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles lead the group, with 18.5, 6.6, and 5.3 tran sit vehicles per 1,000 persons, respectively.
|
From page 78... ...
; number of transit d vehicles is from 2005 National Transit Database for all UA transit properties with ≥100 vehicles operated in maximum service. e Source: 2005 National Transit Database, Appendix D; all UA transit properties with ≥100 vehicles operated in maximum service.
|
From page 79... ...
0.81 2 Severe storms, flooding, tornadoes 1.94 1 Severe storms, flooding, tornadoes 0.20 1 Severe storms, flooding, tornadoes 0.34 1 Severe storms, flooding, tornadoes 0.44 1 Flooding, severe storms (heavy rain, wildfires) 5.30 9 Flooding, severe storms, landslides, mudslides, earthquakes 2.22 5 H urricanes, flooding, tropical storms, severe storms, tornadoes 0.68 1 Severe storms, flooding, tornadoes 1.50 3 Flooding, severe storms, tornadoes 0.48 1 S evere storms (flooding, hurricanes, tropical storms)
|
From page 80... ...
. Even taking into account the greater carry ing capacity of transit vehicles, the numbers serve as a reminder that cars will be the primary mode of transportation in an emergency evacuation.
|
From page 81... ...
The documents of the 16 UAs with publicly available plans were reviewed to answer 14 questions; both the questions and a summary matrix of the results can be found in Appendix C. In 11 of the 16 UAs, transit was included in emergency evacuation plans. However, only seven plans clearly indicated transit's role in the chain of command in the event of an emergency, and an equivalent number identified available transit equipment.
|
From page 82... ...
Results of the Committee's Case Studies In response to its charge, the committee conducted five in-depth case studies to enhance its understanding of the various roles transit can play in an emergency evacuation. The case study results are summarized here and presented in greater detail in Appendix D
|
From page 83... ...
. At each of the case study sites, representatives of city and county emergency management agencies, transit agencies, state and local departments of transportation (DOTs)
|
From page 84... ...
c Low = 1–2 transit agencies; medium = 3–4 transit agencies; high = ≥5 transit agencies.
|
From page 85... ...
Kennedy School of Govern ment shared results of a case study it had conducted on the San Francisco–Oakland UA, which included information on the potential use of ferries in emergency evacuation.
|
From page 86... ...
• ransport up to 395,000 people by school buses under contract to the New York T City Office of Emergency Management (NYCOEM) from their transit destination at public evacuation centers the short remaining distance to local shelters.
|
From page 87... ...
private ferries through a joint agreement in process between NYCOEM and the New Jersey Office of Emergency Management to provide transport for commuters to new docking berths at Liberty State Park. Chicago Case Study In a no-notice major emergency, transit, commuter rail, and intercity passenger rail would play the following roles: • ransport passengers away from the incident site by converting Chicago Transit T Authority (CTA)
|
From page 88... ...
• rovide transport by school buses on evacuation routes to shelters for those without P a car in unincorporated county areas without transit service, use school buses as shuttles to relieve evacuee overflow at crowded shelters, and provide special school bus transport for the homeless to several shelters that are "homeless friendly." • vacuate special-needs populations, using paratransit providers and school buses, E to special-needs shelters. • eturn residents from area shelters or friends and family to their point of R departure.
|
From page 89... ...
Often, the evac uation of special-needs populations will involve paratransit services that may or may not be operated by the primary transit authority and require accessible lift-equipped vehicles.11 If paratransit services are contracted out, this poses additional complexity in terms of control over equipment and drivers in an evacuation. One way to address these issues is to involve paratransit providers with other transit agencies in the development of emergency plans and as part of the response team.
|
From page 90... ...
Their role is to transport ambulatory and wheelchair-bound special-needs populations to these shelters. When a mandatory evacuation has been declared, Hillsborough and Pinellas County transit operators also play a role in transporting the disadvantaged and the homeless, as well as those in the general population who lack access to a private vehicle, either to a shelter or to other in-county destinations along evacuation routes.
|
From page 91... ...
In future incidents, the New York City Office of Emergency Management (NYCOEM) will notify transit agencies of resources and support needed for transporting emergency personnel to an incident site at the time, and plans have evidently been developed for this eventuality.
|
From page 92... ...
In Tampa, school buses are an integral part of evacuation plans, and vehicle dispatch is coordinated with area transit providers at the county emergency operations centers (EOCs) , which are activated in a major incident.
|
From page 93... ...
Metra will supplement CTA services, and Amtrak will assist with equipment to the extent it can. Area emergency managers are working to see whether a coordination system among freight carriers could be accessed in an emergency to help clear the tracks for use by Metra and Amtrak.14 The role of commuter rail, which is under the umbrella of MTA in New York, is an integral part of emergency evacuation plans that have already been described.
|
From page 94... ...
NYCOEM and the New Jersey Office of Emergency Management are currently working on a joint agreement with five major private ferry com panies to help return New Jersey commuters from Manhattan in the event of a future emergency evacuation, and new berths have been provided for docking at Liberty State Park, which will operate as the main reception center in northern New Jersey. Ferries do not play a role in the other four case study sites.
|
From page 95... ...
In all the case study sites, transit agencies are full partners with emergency managers in emergency evacuation plans. Those transit agencies with the most active roles have close working relationships with local emergency managers.
|
From page 96... ...
In all cases, transit agencies help keep evacuation plans up-to-date by periodically reviewing equipment availability and emergency contact information. Integral Role in Emergency Operations and Communications Capabilities In general, transit agencies at the case study sites are well integrated into emergency operations plans that go into effect in the event of an emer gency incident.
|
From page 97... ...
In New York, transit agencies can use TRANSCOM, an electronic communica tions system, to communicate with one another.19 At two of the case study sites, Houston and Chicago, EOCs are collocated with state-of-the art transportation management centers (TMCs) -- Transtar in Houston and the Joint Operations Center in Chicago.20 TMCs provide valuable informa tion about real-time traffic conditions and incidents that can be of great use to emergency managers in coordinating with transit and other trans portation agencies in an emergency evacuation.21 Public outreach both in advance of and during an emergency is critical to an orderly evacuation, including evacuation by transit.
|
From page 98... ...
Finally, an extensive hurricane infor mation program has been developed for public housing residents, and special efforts are made to inform the homeless and the disadvantaged about transportation and shelter resources in an emergency evacuation. In New York, which does not have a culture of evacuation as does the Gulf Coast, NYCOEM sent all New York City residents who live in an evacuation zone the Ready NY Guide, a brochure that tells residents how to prepare for an emergency and whom to contact for assistance.
|
From page 99... ...
Participation in Exercises and Drills Transit agencies in Houston, Tampa, and New York have all had experi ence with a major emergency evacuation. In several of the case study sites, transit agencies are involved in annual emergency exercises and drills, an important means of practicing for an emergency evacuation.
|
From page 100... ...
Driver responsibility in an emergency evacuation can be clarified to help ensure driver support and participation. Some of these issues can be addressed in contract negotiations.
|
From page 101... ...
Because many transit agencies have the capability to map the home locations of employees, notifications to these employees can be more specific once the location of an emergency incident is known. Because of the importance of transit worker availability in an emergency evacuation, identification and evaluation of the effectiveness of workforce family evacuation assistance programs and other workforce availability plans are suggested as research topics (see Chapter 5)
|
From page 102... ...
Nevertheless, if an emer gency incident required evacuation beyond county lines, transit assistance from other counties and municipalities or the state could be provided through the statewide mutual-aid agreement to which most counties are signatory.24 Finally, although emergency managers are not planning for a mass evacuation in the Los Angeles area, if a major incident should occur, California has a long history of voluntary mutual-aid agreements among police and fire departments and, in some cases, transportation providers, which have worked well in the past to meet emergency needs if a particu lar community is overwhelmed. Factors That Limit the Role of Transit The ability of transit to play an effective role in an emergency evacuation depends on the integrity of the system itself, as well as on factors that fall largely outside of transit agency control.
|
From page 103... ...
Hurri cane Rita forced the Houston UA to confront the complexities of a regional evacuation, and subsequent emergency planning has focused on a more regional approach to evacuation and a stronger state role to help broker arrangements with pass-through and destination jurisdictions should a major evacuation of Houstonians prove necessary in the future. Houston METRO has a major role in such plans, reflecting in part its broader range of responsibilities relative to what is typical of many transit systems.25 In Florida, the state is working through regional planning councils to develop a statewide evacuation plan that would link and presumably help fill gaps in individual county emergency evacuation plans.
|
From page 104... ...
A new tunnel is being constructed under the Hudson River that should nearly double NJT-Rail capacity and service to Manhattan and provide redun dancy at a critical point in the system. In Chicago, emergency managers are working with freight carriers to devise an operational solution that would give local transit agencies and Amtrak precedence in the event of an emergency evacuation.
|
From page 105... ...
Los Angeles has an extensive bus transit system, but as the most con gested of all the 38 UAs, it would face great difficulty in using bus transport for any distance in an emergency evacuation. The Los Angeles County Office of Emergency Management has identified major evacuation routes, and certain freeway lanes have been dedicated for ingress by emergency vehicles, but the actual routes are to be determined at the time of an incident.
|
From page 106... ...
The case studies provide some examples of states that have been proactive in addressing these needs. Fol lowing Hurricane Rita, the Texas DOT installed 80 new web-accessible cameras in rural areas, as well as electronic signs at points where highways converge that will be used to disseminate information to evacuees, such as shelter locations, in the event of another major evacuation.
|
From page 107... ...
The numbers of paratransit and other demand response vehicles are particularly low relative to the size of populations with disabilities who need such vehicles for transport in an evacuation. In addition, the location of special-needs populations in a particular UA, their actual need for tran sit in an emergency evacuation, and the availability of drivers and equip ment to serve them at the time of an incident remain largely unknown.
|
From page 108... ...
These include collaboration with emergency managers in evacuation planning and integration with emergency operations plans. In all the case study sites, the primary tran sit agencies are part of evacuation plans; transit staffs are represented on the decision-making team when activation of EOCs is required; and transit operators have the capability of communicating with emergency managers and with other transit providers in real time, although few have fully interoperable systems.
|
From page 109... ...
Finally, plans for workforce availability, asset deployment and safety, and mutual-aid agreements to help meet surge demands in an emergency evacuation are all recognized as important to the successful use of transit, but they are addressed to varying degrees by the case study sites. The case studies also suggest the limits of transit's role in an emer gency evacuation.
|
From page 110... ...
In the following and final chapter, the committee's recommendations with respect to funding as well as a range of measures that could enhance transit's role in emergency evacuation are presented. References Abbreviations AASHTO Association of American State Highway and Transportation Officials DHS Department of Homeland Security MIPRC Midwest Interstate passenger Rail Commission 511 Coalition.
|
From page 111... ...
Petersburg 2,062,000 802 254 578,000 Virginia Beach 1,384,000 527 369 1,211,000 Washington 3,934,000 1,157 692 1,306,000 San Juan 2,217,000 892 198 1,177,000 (continued on next page)
|
From page 112... ...
Petersburg 74,404 9 102,958 11 Virginia Beach 45,688 9 41,775 8 Washington 181,846 12 105,604 7 San Juan 205,563 28 66,603 9 37274mvp84_127 112 11/24/08 10:50:34 AM
|
From page 113... ...
Evidence from the 38 Largest Urbanized Areas 113 Recent Immigrantsd Number of Population ≥5 Years Who Percent of Population Foreign Born, Speak English Less Than ≥5 Years Who Speak English Entry ≥2000 "Very Well" Less Than "Very Well" 182,576 309,073 9 49,914 75,010 4 171,643 371,534 10 306,385 1,050,086 14 20,416 25,826 2 21,365 60,570 4 35,030 46,106 4 242,703 670,082 17 74,045 189,556 10 91,839 186,787 5 229,066 755,097 20 29,660 45,097 4 29,084 55,819 4 70,321 203,416 15 683,329 3,078,504 28 393,540 1,101,880 23 20,435 63,524 5 72,670 137,853 6 7,979 31,906 4 908,066 2,779,817 17 50,621 121,190 11 131,556 278,775 6 168,031 392,001 13 15,620 26,208 2 62,927 145,085 9 30,213 103,217 9 66,254 364,495 23 74,672 173,921 13 34,783 51,085 3 46,073 190,012 15 115,752 401,071 16 187,222 597,956 21 106,204 318,718 23 124,766 249,789 10 60,230 131,549 7 16,071 31,026 2 254,984 472,303 13 18,048 N.A.
|
From page 114... ...
e Disabledd Population Percent of Population Percent of Living Population ≥5 Years Population Below Living Below with a ≥5 Years with Urbanized Area Poverty Line Poverty Line Disability a Disability Atlanta 329,370 10 346,408 10 Baltimore 223,637 11 276,686 15 Boston 345,562 9 453,759 12 Chicago 890,127 11 912,085 12 Cincinnati 143,599 10 207,231 15 Cleveland 195,668 11 250,308 16 Columbus 122,682 11 138,780 13 Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington 462,881 11 468,076 12 Denver–Aurora 163,522 8 205,260 11 Detroit 434,974 11 553,977 16 Houston 533,269 14 416,926 11 Indianapolis 108,931 9 169,420 15 Kansas City 124,340 9 170,822 13 Las Vegas 141,432 11 158,880 12 Los Angeles–Long Beach– 1,934,022 17 1,257,885 11 Santa Ana Miami 676,102 14 662,918 14 Milwaukee 149,701 12 162,754 14 Minneapolis–St. Paul 171,317 7 248,106 11 New Orleans 200,558 20 146,169 16 New York–Newark 2,425,106 14 2,049,640 12 Orlando 126,529 11 139,443 12 Philadelphia 569,503 11 686,741 15 Phoenix–Mesa 339,140 12 362,136 12 Pittsburgh 180,555 11 247,247 16 Portland 154,416 10 203,871 13 Providence 137,423 12 180,401 17 Riverside–San Bernardino 249,020 17 194,139 12 Sacramento 181,692 13 217,835 16 St.
|
From page 115... ...
Evidence from the 38 Largest Urbanized Areas 115 Commutersd Supply Number of Workers Density ≥16 Years Using Public (population/ Number of Number of Number of Transport (excluding taxi) square mile)
|
From page 116... ...
a Source: 2000 Census of Population and Housing as summarized in the Federal Transit Agency's 2005 National Transit Database. b Source: 2005 National Transit Database, profiles over and under 200,000 in population.
|
From page 117... ...
2 N.A. Flooding, severe storms, hurricanes h Source: School Bus Fleet 2005 Annual Top 100 School District Fleet Survey.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.