P.O. Box 860

Tavernier, FL 33070-0860

Phone: 305 852 8722 Fax: 305 852 1940

Email: johnhammer@bellsouth.net

FDOT has proposed a fifth lane through Key Largo that was not announced by their representative when the annual program was presented to the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners, and is hidden in their “Five Year Work Program” cloaked as four separate “Resurfacing” projects. There are many reasons this proposal is wasteful and deeply offensive to the residents of Key Largo, as you will read below.

The Hurricane Evacuation question

Former Department of Community Affairs Secretary Thaddeus Cohen convened a “Hurricane Evacuation Work Group” in 2005 with a mission of reducing our hurricane evacuation clearance time. That sounded fine, until the public (and the Governor) realized that they would do so by simply not counting 1/3 of the potential evacuees and then calculating the time it would take those lucky enough to evacuate. The Governor and Cabinet (including current-Governor Crist) rejected the so-called “18-hour” evacuation. The members of Secretary Cohen’s Work Group included the Mayors of the County and the municipalities (Monroe County, Key West, Key Colony Beach, Layton, Marathon and Islamorada). One of the recommendations from this Working Group was to make “permanent improvements” to the roadway to improve our evacuation ability. “The [Work Group] did voice support for option (2), permanent roadway improvements [building additional lanes where they would be useful], but only as an element of a longer-term, regional evacuation plan and with the understanding that Islamorada vigorously opposes widening US-1 through the Village.”

FDOT is now cherry-picking one part of that statement as a rationalization for adding another lane in Key Largo as though the Working Group had more authority than our Board of County Commissioners and Comprehensive Plan. The Mayors of municipalities have no jurisdiction outside of their own borders. It’s easy to call for highway construction in somebody else’s neighborhood. Furthermore, the “…regional evacuation plan…” referred to, is critical to improving our evacuation safety, but has not been acted upon, as you will read below. Also as you will read, the constrictions to our hurricane evacuation traffic flow are elsewhere. Adding pavement in Key Largo will not help.

FDOT plans to construct four sections of “wide shoulder,” but those four sections are not continuous. Where is the sense of an intermittent third northbound lane with large gaps in its continuity? If this so-called “wide shoulder” is to be used for evacuation, the huge gaps (two 3-mile gaps – one from MM 90 to MM 93 and one between MM 97 and 100) represent guaranteed traffic jams during an evacuation.

Florida City has only two northbound lanes, with no indication that there will ever be a third northbound lane because of local opposition and environmental issues. When the “18-mile stretch” project is complete, there will be three lanes feeding Florida City (two on the “stretch” and one from Card Sound Road). Building another lane in Key Largo is thought by some to be a means to pressure other areas to accept additional lanes through their area – namely Islamorada and Florida City. Florida City specifically and South Miami-Dade County in general are restrictions to our evacuation for many reasons, and none of them have been evaluated. Despite promises to do so for a decade, FDOT and the Department of Community Affairs have not delivered a Regional Evacuation study that would evaluate the impact of rampant growth and road capacity issues in Miami-Dade County on our evacuation. A recent study by the South Florida Regional Planning Council failed to properly measure Monroe County’s evacuation because it used a over-simplified assumption that only measured the traffic flow through one “link” in our chain of islands, and did not include the role of the other 30 “links” in the Keys. Amazingly, the constrictions to evacuation in South Miami-Dade County are not included in our calculations of evacuation times.

The Miller Report on evacuation of the Keys understates the number of vehicles that would normally be able to transit Key Largo (900 vehicles per hour for each of the two northbound lanes) by assuming incorrectly that the traffic lights would all function with red lights that would repeatedly interrupt traffic flow during an evacuation. Miller did not calculate the “capacity” of the road through Key Largo accounting for the fact that traffic lights would be set to “flashing yellow” and thus not restrict the evacuation flow. Under these circumstances, the actual number of vehicles per hour used for calculations should have been 50% greater – 1350 vehicles per hour for a total of 2700 vehicles per hour for the two lanes. Using this correct figure would make an additional lane through Key Largo superfluous, particularly since there are places along the evacuation route where the additional lane would speed evacuation. There was no peer review of the Miller Report – and for that matter NO independent agency reviewed the conclusions of this consultant. Miller Consulting, Inc. (producers of the Miller Report) was selected and paid by FDOT.

Even if one were to assume (illogically) that the gaps in the fifth lane through Key Largo (cited above) would not cause massive traffic jams, and that there would not be worse traffic jams in Florida City, and assumed incorrectly that there were not more limiting constriction points throughout Monroe County and assumed the incorrectly low traffic flow figure through Key Largo, then calculations using the Miller computer Model show that FDOT’s proposed $21 million expenditure (funds that apparently are needed in other parts of the State) would reduce the predicted evacuation clearance time from 25 hours 58 minutes to 25 hours 32 minutes, for a savings of 26 minutes. It’s worth emphasizing that the number of lanes in Key Largo is not the limiting factor for our evacuation time and therefore adding a lane will not improve evacuation times. The restrictions to evacuation are elsewhere (primarily Florida City). Twenty lanes through Key Largo would not improve our evacuation measurably, since the restrictions remain elsewhere.

It is only when all of the incorrect assumptions are made simultaneously, that one gets the 26 minute “improvement” in evacuation clearance time. Put another way, correcting any of the incorrect assumptions means that there is absolutely no improvement in clearance time by adding another lane or wide shoulder or resurfacing or whatever other name one wishes to use to describe the wasteful paving that FDOT proposes through Key Largo.

Speaking of cost versus the benefit, what was the result of FDOT’s Cost/Benefit analysis of this project? Did they do such an analysis?

Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan limits US-1 to four lanes

Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan

Policy 301.4.1

The capacity of US-1 in unincorporated Monroe County shall be limited to four lanes. Densities and intensities on the Future Land Use Map and allowed by the permit allocation system shall not exceed those that can be accommodated by the four lane limitation on US-1.

While that would seem clear and unequivocal, in 2003, FDOT petitioned for and gained the following authority by virtue of Florida Statute Section 335.02.

“Notwithstanding any general law or special act, regulations of any county, municipality, or special district, including any instrumentality thereof, shall not apply to existing or future transportation facilities, or appurtenances thereto, on the State Highway System.”

When the Governor signed this law over strong objections, he issued a statement to accompany the legislation, which states: “…I expect, and indeed direct, the Department of Transportation to reinforce its collaborative efforts with local governments. The transportation planning process that builds upon local priorities has been developed in this spirit, codified in state and federal law and that extensive public involvement in the various stages of this process must continue…It is my full expectation that in those limited situations where local requirements come into conflict with statewide objectives that the issues will be satisfactorily resolved in the true spirit of state and local cooperation. In those rare situations where issues cannot be resolved, the Department of Transportation is directed to notify my office prior to proceeding to the next phase of project implementation.” Does attempting to sneak the fifth lane into the Five Year Work Program and attempting to get the Monroe County Commission to accept the entire package without mentioning the fifth lane constitute the “true spirit of state and local cooperation?”

Look! Up in the sky! It’s a LANE; no, it’s RESURFACING; no, it’s A SUPER SHOULDER!

FDOT is playing word games to avoid speaking directly to the issue. If they were to use the term “lane,” then they would be in violation of Monroe County’s Comprehensive Plan which limits the road to four lanes, so they use the term “wide shoulder.” If we had a prohibition to “wide shoulders”, they would call it a “narrow lane”!

The FDOT Five Year Work Program documentation does not identify any new highway construction in Key Largo. The fifth lane is hidden from the public by labeling it “resurfacing.” How can the paving of a previously unpaved area be called “REsurfacing?” One can only “Resurface” something that has been “surfaced.” Does calling it “Resurfacing” circumvent some of the planning, reporting or funding obligations such as PD&E (Project Development and Environmental)?

When asked about the wide shoulder or evacuation lane, FDOT officials stated that, no it’s actually a standard shoulder, and is being installed for driver safety (?). Then why isn’t there “resurfacing” to add a similar 10-foot shoulder/lane planned for the southbound side?

How does FDOT explain that their Work Program Manager Linda Glass-Johnson did not mention the fifth lane as part of her Five Year Work Program presentation to the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (December 19, 2007)? Growth Management Director Drew Trivette pointed out that he had questions about the additional hurricane evacuation lane after Ms. Glass-Johnson had finished her presentation. After Mr. Trivette raised the subject, Ms. Glass-Johnson referred to the additional “hurricane-evacuation lane,” without adequately describing the scope of the projects involved. Not even Monroe County Engineer David Koppel knew about the fifth lane because - as he stated in an email - “The information contained in the [FDOT] 5 Year Plan did not contain sufficient information to identify the hurricane evacuation lane”

This deception is particularly disturbing considering that FDOT employees Alice Bravo and Barbara Culhane participated in a very contentious meeting in October, 2003 which included now-deceased Commissioner Murray Nelson, current-Commissioner Sylvia Murphy, this writer, Jill Patterson, Ron Miller and several other interested citizens, during which the subject of the fifth lane was discussed heatedly.

After the Miller Report suggested a third northbound lane through Key Largo, the community was outraged. FDOT District Six Secretary Martinez and Alice Bravo (October 29, 2003 Free Press article) told the community that constructing a third northbound lane would not be necessary, that the “recommendations” of the Miller Report were not mandatory, and in the unlikely event another lane were needed, then one of the two southbound lanes would be "contra-flowed" or used for northbound traffic for that purpose. The capability already exists. The Monroe County Sheriff’s Office does this every year for the Reporter 4th of July Parade, and is part of the Sheriff’s Office plan if needed for an evacuation.

The headline of the Free Press article was “FDOT officials say no fifth lane in Key Largo.”

What has changed?

Ms. Bravo and Ms. Culhane were well aware that the fifth lane was not supported by the Key Largo community, and yet on December 19, 2007, an attempt was made to slip the project into the Five Year Work Program without telling the public, in hopes that the BOCC would adopt it without the public knowing the fifth lane projects existed until it was too late.

Wide shoulder adds dangers

According to Florida Department of Highway Safety documents, passing on the right "…appears to be the most important contributing factor in traffic fatalities as it relates to aggressive driving." A “shoulder” that is as wide as a “lane” would be used by aggressive drivers for dangerous passing. FDOT has expressed similar concerns regarding dangerous passing on the evacuation lane that will be part of the “18-mile stretch” project. Furthermore, the false impression given to the public that extra lanes (where they are not needed) would improve evacuation will lead evacuees to delay their departure.

Unresolved Issues

What is the relationship between the third northbound lane and the planned Overseas Heritage Trail, which would provide a nearly continuous paved bike path the length of the Keys? They would appear to be competing for the same space on the northbound side of the road.

Conclusion

The Florida Department of Transportation should honor their previous pronouncements that they would not pave a fifth lane through Key Largo. Furthermore, FDOT should apologize to the citizens of Monroe County for their seedy tactics in this matter.

Sincerely,

John Hammerstrom

February 24, 2008