|
Hillsborough County MPO Truck Route Study Technical Memorandum #1
Click HERE for graphic. HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TRUCK ROUTE STUDY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM NUMBER 1 Regulatory and Institutional Setting, Transportation Planning Process and Truck Classification Profile Prepared for: The Hillsborough County Metropolitan Planning Organization Prepared by: Sprinkle Consulting Engineers, Inc. Frederic R. Harris, Inc. Street Smarts, Inc. April, 1994 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 PROBLEM DEFINITION 4 REGULATORY SETTING 19 INTEGRATION INTO THE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROCESS 23 VEHICLE CLASSIFICATION 29 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 42 LIST OF TABLES 1 Evaluation of FHWA Vehicle Classification Scheme 33 2 Evaluation of AASHTO Vehicle Classification Scheme 34 3 Evaluation of HCM Vehicle Classification Scheme 35 4 Evaluation of DHSMV Vehicle Classification Scheme 36 5 Evaluation of FSUTMS/RTA Vehicle Classification Scheme 37 6 Summary Evaluation of Vehicle Classification Scheme 38 7 Proposed Vehicle Classification Scheme 41 APPENDICES A Current Prohibitions under Ordinance 85-1 B Complaints Received - Signs not Posted C Pinellas County Truck Route Plan D City of Tampa Truck Route Plan E Summary of FHWA Vehicle Classification Scheme F Summary of AASHTO Vehicle Classification Scheme G Summary of Vehicle Classification Scheme H Summary of DHSMV Vehicle classification Scheme I Summary of FSUTMS/RTA Vehicle Classification Scheme j Truck Recognition Silhouettes ii INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND Truck traffic is an essential part of everyday life in Hillsborough County. Trucks are an important means of sustaining the community by delivering products to stores for purchase, transporting raw materials and finished products for industries, hauling materials for the construction of roads, schools, businesses and homes, and serving other vital functions. Trucks share the roads with personal automobiles, however, and their size and weight cause drivers and pedestrians to be concerned about potential hazards. Hillsborough County officials are responding to complaints by citizens that trucks are using county roads that are not suitable for use by large vehicles. Citizens are concerned for the safety and health of their communities and have expressed their displeasure about trucks using roads near or adjacent to their homes. A major goal of this study is to encourage mutual appreciation of the important role which trucks play both in expanding the economy of the region and also in preserving and enhancing residential areas HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TRUCK ROUTE PLAN Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) intends to address the problem of large trucks on roads unsuitable for their use by developing and adopting, by ordinance, a Truck Route Plan for the county. This plan is being developed by a project team composed of the MPO staff and a group of transportation consultants. Information is being gathered concerning current truck problems by interviewing the parties that would be most directly affected by an ordinance (businesses, the trucking industry, and enforcement agencies) to gain insight into their 1 concerns and needs. The plan will also incorporate an assessment of the suitability of individual road segments based on engineering, safety and land use criteria. The goal is to develop a methodology and a plan that identifies a network of truck routes and ensures safe, efficient truck operations while satisfying the public need for adequate protection and separation. To accomplish this goal it is important to develop a plan that is acceptable to all parties involved, technically achievable and enforceable by the county law enforcement officials and the court system. DATA SOURCES The methodology employed in this planning process is based on making maximum use of existing, readily available data sources that have previously been identified for use in this project. These data include the following: Functional classification of roadways . Responsible governmental jurisdictions . Roadway and pavement characteristics . Bridge characteristics . Railroad grade crossings . Truck traffic volumes . Truck accident data . Truck terminal locations . County and city comprehensive plans The sources of these data include county and city agencies and the Florida Department of Transportation. Using these existing sources is important in that it enables the development of the Truck Route Plan to be consistent with other ongoing aspects of 2 transportation planning and engineering in Hillsborough County. Another source of data will be the public involvement program which involves gaining public input to the truck route planning process and to the plan itself. 3 PROBLEM DEFINITION Understanding the conflicts between truck traffic and the general public requires taking stock of the different interests at stake. Therefore, the Project Team conducted interviews with various government agencies, law enforcement agencies, and trucking companies to gain their perspectives on the causes of the current problem and potential solutions. In addition to these interviews, public workshops have been scheduled throughout the truck route planning process. These workshops offer the public the opportunity to have input to the plan as well as to understand the status of the plan development process. The Project Team determined that input from all affected parties early in the process would lead to a strong problem definition and clearly defined study parameters. It was also believed that representing all interests equally would create a better working relationship for resolving issues in the later stages of the study. The results of the interviews are summarized below. GOVERNMENT AGENCY INTERVIEWS The Project Team contacted government agencies in Hillsborough County to request information identifying truck complaints and problems. A list of agencies contacted is given below. . Hillsborough County Metropolitan Planning Organization . Hillsborough County City-County Planning Commission . Hillsborough County Engineering Services Department . Hillsborough County Planning and Development Management Department . Hillsborough County School Board . The City of Tampa 4 . The City of Temple Terrace . The City of Plant City . The Florida Department of Transportation The information received from each agency differed greatly. Some agencies had a significant number of truck complaints and had them chronologically catalogued, while others had few or no complaints on record. In the final analysis most truck complaints were from the City of Tampa and the unincorporated areas of Hillsborough County. Between 1985 and 1993, complaints were logged in Hillsborough County resulting in "No Thru Truck" signs being posted at 233 locations on specific roads to restrict vehicles over 1-ton capacity. These signs were generally posted as a result of a traffic study conducted subsequent to receiving the complaint. The areas of the county where the majority of these complaints have been concentrated include Town & Country, Carrollwood, Brandon and River view. In many cases citizens are complaining about trucks on roads in their area which may be there in conjunction with local deliveries or construction sites. The locations are listed in Appendix A. Complaints were also logged at 34 additional locations in the county but, following further study, did not result in truck regulations being posted. These areas include Citrus Park and Lake Fern in the northwest part of the county where commercial and residential development is underway and the Brandon and Bloomingdale areas in the southern part of the county where large trucks are utilizing rural roads for access to the interstates. These locations are listed in Appendix B. The City of Tampa kept the most detailed records of truck complaints. In 1993, there were 80 complaints made to the Traffic Department. In all cases, an officer was assigned to the case, and a response was issued within two weeks. Many of the complaints could be characterized as citizens upset that trucks were using their local 5 streets which are not designated as truck routes in the City's ordinance. In many cases the specific problems were resolved through communication with the trucking company or through improved signage. LAW ENFORCEMENT INTERVIEWS The law enforcement agencies in the county were contacted and interviewed about truck problems in their respective jurisdictions. The following agencies were contacted: . The Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office . The Florida Highway Patrol . The City of Tampa Police Department . The City of Temple Terrace Police Department . The City of Plant City Police Department Of these agencies only the City of Tampa has an ordinance establishing truck routes. Research into adjacent counties to determine if they had truck route ordinances revealed only one other, Pinellas County. The Pinellas County plan is discussed in more detail in Appendix C. Interviews with law enforcement officials were very diverse in the responses received. Based on the level of jurisdiction and the area patrolled, different truck problems were identified. Departments in the smaller cities in the county, namely Temple Terrace and Plant City, reported that complaints of large trucks using city streets were very infrequent and were not kept on record. The City of Tampa Police Department (TPD) reported isolated incidents with trucks, mostly from residential neighborhoods where people did not want trucks on their local roads. The city has established truck routes that are clearly stated on a map (see Appendix D). The map has been issued to trucking dispatchers, and truck drivers are 6 expected to comply. Offices stated that cooperation with the trucking industry is an important factor for compliance. According to the law, trucks are allowed to "deviate only at the intersection nearest to its first destination point 1." One problem that was reported by TPD is that the costlier fines issued to trucks are often contested in court and thrown out. The typical defense consists of the statement that the route they were traveling is on the shortest path to their destination. TPD cited loose interpretation of the ordinance as the reason for trucks being able to contest regulatory actions successfully. The most extensive analysis of truck problems came from the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office (HCSO). Officials mentioned specific areas of concern. However, even though numerous complaints have been reported, problems differ depending on the location in the county. For example, in the northwest area of the county, where the network of available roads is very sparse which trucks may use without undue circuity Of travel, the county received complaints about dump truck traffic bringing payloads from Pasco County for Veterans Expressway construction sites. These trucks use the two-lane rural roads in the northern part of the county accelerating deterioration of the pavement which may not be suitable for heavily-loaded truck traffic. Furthermore, residential homes close to the edge of the road experience noise and vibration disturbances. This situation is compounded when the trucks are traveling at high rates of speed. Further, the construction operations continue throughout the day and into the night, resulting in complaints about serious disturbances to residential neighborhoods. Trucks traveling too slowly and holding up traffic was discussed during the interviews but was not found to be the subject of complaints as often as heavily-loaded trucks and fast-moving trucks. 1taken from Section 25-183 of the Code of Municipal Ordinances 7 Hillsborough County has responded to this problem by aggressively enforcing weight limitations and by imposing time of day restrictions on truck operations. Construction of the Veteran’s Expressway is the major contributing factor to the trucking problems in northwest Hillsborough County. Presumably, when the expressway construction is complete, a major part of the truck traffic should be eliminated. Under normal conditions, the predominance of truck traffic in this part of Hillsborough County is oriented to local deliveries. By contrast, complaints from the southern part of the county are directed toward the phosphate mining trucks that travel to and from the Port of Tampa and crop trucks that are transporting their harvests to market. In both cases trucks make use of rural roads as a direct route to the Interstates, I-4 and I-75. The narrow width of the roadways and the pavement structure are specific examples of why these roads may experience accelerated deterioration when subjected to repeated use by heavily-loaded trucks. Several types of complaints regarding truck traffic were cited by law enforcement agencies. Listed below are typical complaints received that were specifically mentioned during the interviews: . excessive speed . reckless driving . spillage and debris . excessive noise and vibration . odor . sensitivity to time of day . clipping signs and cars with wide turns Truck accidents were found not to be concentrated in a few places but rather were spread throughout the roadway system. In 1992 there were 13,811 vehicle crashes in 8 (unincorporated) Hillsborough County. Of those crashes, 1,300, or 9 percent, involved commercial vehicles. This is comparable to the percentage of trucks present in the overall traffic stream on major roads in Hillsborough County. This indicates that, when considered on a County-wide basis, trucks are not involved in either more or fewer traffic accidents than other types of vehicles in the community. However, it was often mentioned in the interviews that, when they occur, truck accidents tend to be more severe than non-truck accidents and, thus, may be perceived as occurring more frequently. The examination of truck law enforcement on the different classes of roads in the county revealed a fragmented structure. The following information was gathered on enforcement: . The Florida Highway Patrol (FHP) enforces trucking laws on state roads and interstates. Their jurisdiction extends to County and City roads, however, they do not possess the resources to patrol those roads on a consistent basis. FHP will stop, weigh (if necessary), and ticket trucks for any violation (speeding, over weight, mechanical deficiency, etc). . The Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office has County-wide jurisdiction and can provide enforcement on any road, including state roads and interstates. Their standard practice is to patrol the unincorporated areas and not to go inside city limits unless requested by the City. HCSO enforcement was formerly limited to writing tickets for speeding and reckless driving. However, a recent County ordinances expanded HCSO authority to allow for weighing trucks and ticketing for all state trucking laws. Sheriff's personnel have been trained by State personnel in exterior inspection procedures and truck weighing using portable scales. The BOCC has been responsive to the public 2Hillsborough County Ordinance Number 93-22, Adopted by BOCC, September 15, 1993. 9 request to resolve truck problems by making money available to the HCSO for training and extra patrols. . The City of Tampa Police Department patrols all roads within the city limits and will issue tickets to trucks for standard operating violations. TPD does not have the means to weigh trucks or the training to identify violations. Therefore, complaints pertaining to those matters are passed to the Motor Carrier Compliance Office under the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). . The Plant City and Temple Terrace Police Departments patrol roads within their respective municipal limits and issue traffic citations for violations. However, like Tampa, they pass overweight truck complaints to the Motor Carrier Compliance Office. . All law enforcement agencies interviewed said they do respond to citizen complaints. In most cases, a unit is sent to the location to investigate. The HCSO also monitors the County's Traffic Accident Records System (TARS). In addition to responding to complaints, Sheriffs personnel will target their surveillance and enforcement activities to high-accident locations. Based on the results, action is taken which could be in the form of a ticket or warning issued to the trucking company or a recommendation for regulatory signage. TRUCK INDUSTRY ISSUES It has often been said that people complain but packages do not. This philosophy has allowed traditional planning to ignore largely the freight component of the traffic stream. Subsequently, when problems arise, restrictions are often imposed on the truck operations. The ISTEA (Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991) inclusion of goods movement gives the planning community the focus to include, proactively, the needs of the freight handlers. This section reviews the needs of the trucking industry and the issues for large vehicles in order to develop a better 10 understanding and appreciation of the freight component of the traffic stream and to integrate more fully this important aspect of the planning process. Further insight will be gained from a survey of the trucking industry which will be conducted in a subsequent task. This survey is being conducted in concert with surveys of the business community and residential groups and with an overall public involvement program. There are a wide variety of ways in which trucks are impacted by their operating environment. From the perspective of the carrier, some trucking issues relate to operations, location decision, size and weight limits, enforcement and commodities. These all have some impact on the time and cost of transporting goods. Based on dialogues between the Protect Team and local trucking firms, operation issues are characterized by terminal, roadway and vehicle conditions. Terminal issues are items such as loading and unloading time, paperwork, size and weight limit conformance and access/parking adequacy. The internal workings of the terminal are outside the scope of this study. However, their access to the road network and institutional requirements are relevant for further examination. The trucking industry perspectives expressed in this section were obtained from telephone interviews with representatives of trucking companies in Hillsborough County. The following were selected randomly from the yellow pages of the telephone directory for inclusion in the interviews: . J&J Trucking on Cambridge (961-2379) . Florida Flatbed on US 92 (621-3528) . Strickland Transport on US 301 (988-127) . Florida Rock and Tank on Dale Mabry (837-9461) . H&W Trucking on Idlewild (884-0821) . Vantage Trucklines on Broadway (626-3567) 11 . Transus on Palm River Road (621-2002) . Yellow Freight on Maislin Drive (985 6301) The following companies were also contacted but were unavailable to answer questions: . Trinity Trucking on Broadway . Bentz Tractor and Excavating on Parsons . ABF Freight Systems . Cypress Creek Transport Where terminals locate is certainly related to access. Restrictive road designations have the potential of making a good location less desirable. Representatives of several trucking companies based in Hillsborough County and the Florida Motor Truck Association cited the changes on Gunn Highway as an example of such a negative change. A restriction which may have been intended to deal with one specific type of freight movement (e.g., dirt haulers) was imposed upon all categories of cargo. This has driven up the operating cost for all trucking firms with facilities in this vicinity by forcing them to seek out alternative routes or to change their operating times. It was stated that, for many truckers, the Gunn Highway restriction resulted in a detour of up to 40 miles. One company noted some difficulty due to restrictions on parts of the Northwest Expressway from Sheldon to Van Dyke. Another noted Bayshore, South Westshore and Memorial Highway. The roadway issues are generally related to geometrics (lane widths, grades, curb radii, etc.), congestion, inadequate signage and automobile interaction. In a survey conducted in Worcester, Massachusetts, the results indicate that geometric deficiencies are among 12 the main concerns for carriers ("Making the Numbers Work: The Freight Planning Process", James E. Murphy, The Second Annual National Freight Planning Conference Report February 1994, p. 23): "The locations and types of travel impediments were identified and mapped. The most common types of problems reported were poor ramp design, bridge height and weight limitations, poor bridge conditions, traffic running red lights, restriction of use due to weather conditions, congestion and poor road conditions generally." Earlier studies in other parts of the country support this finding. Although public agency design specifications generally call for geometrics sufficient for large vehicles, compromises are often made. Lower speed limits are sometimes posted for trucks in order to compensate for deficient geometry. In other places, it is presumed that the trucks will slow down to accommodate inadequate geometry. One local firm indicated that they avoid Hillsborough Avenue because it is too narrow and too bumpy. Signage is also an issue for truck drivers, particularly those from out-of-town. When inadequate signing is a problem, trucks may recirculate using streets which are less desirable for large vehicles. Operation issues related to the vehicle condition are acceleration and deceleration performance, turning radii requirements and types of vehicle containers (boxes, tanks, livestock, refrigerated, hazardous materials, etc). The trailer type is a function of the commodity to be transported. The sizes of vehicles available for various operations range from vans and small single unit trucks to large multiple trailer combinations. Companies choose their fleet mix based on the demand (quantity of freight and characteristics) and the operating environment. Large trucks including semi-tractor trailers and tandem trailer units are more efficient for long-haul operations and, therefore, are preferred for over-the-road hauls. However, in older areas with narrow streets and constrained intersections, vehicles adequate to handle the freight, with small 13 turning radii would be the preferred choice. If the operating conditions are excessively constrained or hindered by traffic congestion, the trucking company may be forced to transfer the freight from a larger, more efficient vehicle to a smaller, less efficient vehicle or to restrict their operations to certain times of days. These can be very costly alternatives. Other operational issues include the logistics of routing for truckload hauls and less than truckload hauls. Freight planning is generally based on the number of origins and destinations, the locations of these origins and designations and the modes of transport connecting these locations. The concept of a "trip" in freight transportation always implies transportation from point of origin to point of destination, including all ground and air modes. For example, a piece of freight might originate in another state bound for a destination in Hillsborough County. The trucking company would pick up the cargo at its origin and ship it through a series of "hub" terminals. At each successive hub, the cargo would be transferred from one truck to another. Finally the cargo would arrive at the local terminal serving Hillsborough County where it would be loaded onto a city delivery truck and delivered to its ultimate destination. In such a process, efficiency is of critical importance for safety and timely delivery. In contrast, passenger "trips" are often thought of only in terms of each mode. The mode to mode connections often receive secondary consideration. However, the ISTEA emphasis on multimodal transportation promises to give greater consideration to the complete origin to destination transport in both passenger and freight transportation. ("Learning from Freight", Matthew A. Coogan, The Second Annual National Freight Planning Conference Report' February 1994, p. ~9.) Issues related to size and weight limits include enforcement, permits, shipper/receiver requirements, and longer combination vehicles. Enforcement will be discussed further in the next paragraph. Permits require additional time and expense for carriers when 14 they must carry oversize or overweight loads. Routing is also an issue for permitted loads. Many communities around the country have restrictions which may be "excused" by permit. This creates concerns for the trucking industry as well as the enforcement community. Size and weight restrictions for safety reasons, such as bridges with weight limits, are understood by the motoring public Reasons for restrictions are not always this obvious or consistent which makes it problematic both for trucking companies and also for the police. Shipper and receiver requirements sometimes create debate within a community with respect to the tradeoffs related to size or weight limits and carrying goods more efficiently. Interestingly, one of the Hillsborough County firms indicated their desire for more enforcement. This firm consistently operates within legal size and weight limits but feels that some of their competitors do not Consistent, or logical restrictions, adequately enforced would not penalize law abiders. Lack of enforcement or laws which are difficult to enforce give an unfair advantage to those who risk transporting excessive loads. Longer combination vehicles are often an issue because of restricted access for these vehicles. This ties back to locational decisions. New facilities can choose sites within the constraints of the STAA (Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982) access route criteria. Existing facilities may be forced into circuitous truck routings. Enforcement issues relate to time and expenses associated with vehicle diversion or detainage for enforcement inspections. It also, and more importantly, relates to consistency. Laws must be written to be reasonably and consistently enforced. Trucking companies can choose to comply and generally avoid the enforcement costs for suspected violations. Enforcement is necessary for size and weight limits, permitted loads and safety regulations. Commercial vehicles must divert to and sometimes stop at weigh stations for enforcement activity. Trucks must also stop for mobile weight 15 enforcement and safety inspection along the roadway. Time is an issue when enforcement requires offloading or load adjustment. Carriers must spend time and money to comply with safety regulations such as drivers' hours of service records, equipment inspection records, fuel and vehicle tax records. The most frequently heard comment during interviews with Hillsborough County trucking concerns was that trucking companies want consistency in enforcement. This requires laws to be well-written and public safety officers to be knowledgeable. SUMMARY OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY CITIZENS' CONCERNS WITH TRUCKS After reviewing the foregoing information collected from the interviews a list of problems was compiled that expresses the opinions and views of the involved parties. Care was taken to represent the views of all parties objectively as a guide to the subsequent analysis. 1. The following problems are identified and will be used as criteria for developing an objective approach for establishing truck routes for Hillsborough County. 2. Many existing roads in the county appear to have inadequate safety and engineering conditions to allow extensive use by large trucks. 3. In sparsely developed areas of the County, there may be only a few roads available for trucks to use. Some of these roads may not continue across railroad tracks, rivers or political boundaries, further narrowing the available choices. Truck trips are typically programmed by the dispatcher of the trucking company. In order to minimize travel time and operating costs, dispatchers will typically select the shortest or most direct path from origin to destination. Prohibiting truck movements could impact the regional economy negatively by forcing trucks to take circuitous routes. This results in higher costs for shippers, 16 reduced revenue and income for the haulers/truck drivers, and indirect effects in the marketplace due to reduction in on-time delivery. These factors may lead to higher costs for consumers. Thus, it is in the public's interest that freight planning be conducted in a rational, proactive manner. 4 Other surrounding jurisdictions (mainly cities and adjacent counties) may have truck route plans currently in place. These plans will have routes that connect directly to roads in Hillsborough County. The analysis and subsequent truck route plan must be done to provide adequate connectivity for through trucks. Where conditions change from one side of the County line to the other, adequate advance signing should be provided to enable the truckers to select alternate routes. 5 Many large trucks may be engaged in local deliveries necessitating using local roads for access. These trucks may also deliver to multiple destinations. This requires the drivers to consider not only how to access the delivery site but also how to egress the site in order to continue on to the next delivery. Traffic restrictions or physical roadway features, such as median separators, may force truck drivers to use circuitous routes, such as local roads, for access. 6. Some truck-related problems, such as access to construction sites, are temporary in nature. Upon completion of the construction, the materials delivery traffic will cease. Other problems are long term or even permanent traffic conditions. The temporary or permanent nature of the problem affects the types of solutions which may be considered. 7 Many truck delivery patterns are long-established. In many communities, land has been developed without giving adequate attention to truck traffic. Many such communities are now finding that the truck traffic is a disturbance to the community. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY The recognition of these issues clearly defines the truck problems for Hillsborough 17 County and provides the opportunity to establish an overall goal that will govern the study. This goal is stated as such To develop a Truck Route Plan that identifies a network of connecting routes that can safely and efficiently serve through truck traffic while providing the public adequate protection through proper separation of vehicle types and enforcement. The following set of objectives have been established to complement the study goal. . To identify specific routes for through truck traffic that will balance efficient truck movements and public safety . To reduce the number of truck-related complaints made by county citizens . To develop a plan for identifying routes that is defensible and based on sound engineering and safety judgment . To develop a plan that is easily understood by public officials, law enforcement officials, citizens, the business community and the trucking industry. . To develop a plan that provides continuity with existing truck routes within and outside the County . To provide a tool for objectively re-evaluating the County Truck Route Plan in the future . To build mutual trust and understanding between the community and the trucking industry 18 REGULATORY SETTING To ensure that this Truck Route Plan can be implemented within the regulatory jurisdiction of Hillsborough County, the Office of the County Attorney has reviewed existing statutes regarding the limitation of truck traffic. These legal parameters establish the types of vehicles and cargo that can be regulated, as well as the conditions under which they can be restricted. Listed below are the pertinent Federal, State, County, and City regulations relative to truck traffic. FEDERAL TRUCKING REGULATIONS 1. The federal regulations apply only to the transportation of hazardous waste and do not apply to the establishment of local truck routes. The creation of local truck routes is completely at the discretion of the administering state and local jurisdictions. 2. The regulation of the transportation of hazardous materials is governed by the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. App. 1804. This act provides that the Secretary of the Department of Transportation shall issue regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials. 3. Hazardous materials are defined as those capable of posing an unreasonable risk to health, safety, and property when transported in commerce. 4 The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act states that all motor vehicles transporting hazardous materials must be marked accordingly. STATE UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL - FLORIDA STATUTES 1. State or local authorities may lower load, weight, and speed limits whenever it is judged that a road, or any aspect of a road, is liable to be destroyed or damaged by motor vehicles, trailers, or semi-trailers. 19 2. State or local authorities may restrict any specified class or size of motor vehicle whenever regulation is necessary to provide for the public safety and convenience on the highways by reason of traffic density. 3. Notice of truck routes and restrictions shall be posted at conspicuous places at road junctions and crossroads. 4. County and city authorities shall not place restrictions on roads which interfere with traffic on state roads or established state road detours. 5. Roadways which have restricted access must be clearly marked with posted notice of the restriction. HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY TRUCK REGULATIONS 1. The County s ability to establish truck routes is governed by the Florida Statutes Section 316.555 (1993). 2. County ordinance 85-1, adopted in 1985, sets forth the existing procedures for restricting truck traffic on Hillsborough County roads. 3 An administrative directive issued in 1992 has established the following guidelines for the placement of No Through Trucks, Over One Ton Capacity signs on Hillsborough County maintained roads. (a) Consideration of design features. (b) Consideration of functional class. 1. Arterial roads should not be posted. 2. Collector roads should be considered in accordance with the guidelines contained herein. 3. Local roads shall qualify for posting. (c) Consideration of roadway width. 20 (d) Consideration shall be given to adjacent land use. (e) Availability of alternate routes within 3 miles. (f) Consideration of public health, safety, and welfare. Appendix A lists the current prohibitions for Hillsborough County under Ordinance 85-1. CITY OF TAMPA TRUCK REGULATIONS 1. Truck routes shall include all state roads. 2. Truck routes shall include all streets in the central business area. This is area is bounded on the east by Ybor Channel, on the west by the Hillsborough River, and on the north by a line running along Scott Street, east to Orange Avenue, south to the Cass Street, east to the CSX Railroad, and northeast to Adamo Drive. The only exception within this area is Florida Avenue from the Crosstown Expressway offramp to Scott Street. On this section of Florida Avenue, the use of trucks carrying hazardous materials is prohibited. 3. Truck routes shall include any other streets so designated by city ordinance. 4. Truck routes shall include Cypress Street from Dale Mabry Highway to North Boulevard. 5. All trucks within the city shall be operated only over and along the established truck routes with the following exceptions: (a) Operation on street of destination. (b) Authorized emergency vehicles. (c) Detoured trucks. 21 6. Every truck weighing one ton or more, shall proceed only over established truck routes, and shall deviate only at the intersection nearest to its destination point. Appendix D contains the adopted City of Tampa Truck Route Plan. 22 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROCESS The Hillsborough County Truck Route Plan will incorporate the goals, objectives, principles, and policies of area comprehensive plans. In addition, the Plan will recognize truck regulations and planning guidelines outlined in the Florida Statutes, Division of Statutory Revision, 1993, and the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA), US. Department of Transportation. This chapter identifies the existing and proposed objectives, policies, and principles, and summarizes state and federal truck planning provisions. Future of Hillsborough, Comprehensive Plan for Unincorporated Hillsborough County, Transportation Element, HCCCPC The policies listed in this section are proposed and have not yet been adopted. OBJECTIVE 5.1 The County shall assist, wherever possible, in providing intermodal, especially highway and public transit, links to airports, seaports, and rail and trucking facilities. POLICY 5.3.1 By October, 1994, the MPO shall-produce a truck route plan for Hillsborough County identifying major thoroughfares in the County which are suitable for commercial truck travel. POLICY 5.3.2 Within one year of the adoption date of this comprehensive plan, Hillsborough County and the Metropolitan Planning Organization shall have an inventory 23 (including map(s)) of the major commercial truck and railroad terminals within the county. POLICY 7.2.3 Continue to review and update the truck route ordinance and associated map to ensure neighborhood traffic concerns associated with truck traffic are addressed. Tampa Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Element, HCCCPC POLICY 3.2.3 Continue to review and update the truck route ordinance and associated map to ensure neighborhood traffic concerns associated with truck traffic are addressed. OBJECTIVE 8.4 By 2000, the City will implement a goods management strategy that will minimize unnecessary congestion caused by the time and location of truck deliveries and pickups. POLICY 8.4.2 The City will modify the timing of traffic signals at intersections with large volumes of trucks to compensate for the acceleration, deceleration, and turning characteristics of large trucks. The City also will make necessary geometric improvements at these intersections as needed. OBJECTIVE 9.13 The City of Tampa shall assist, wherever possible, in providing intermodal links, especially highway and public transit, links to airports, seaports, and rail and trucking facilities located within and adjacent to the Tampa city limits. 3 This is a proposed objective. 24 POLICY 9.3.14 Cooperate with the MPO in the development of a truck route plan for Hillsborough County to ensure that the City of Tampa s Truck Route Ordinance will be incorporated into the Plan to promote coordinated truck movements within the County. POLICY 9.3.25 Within one year of the adoption date of is comprehensive plan, the City of Tampa and the Metropolitan Planning Organization shall produce an inventory (including map(s) of the major commercial truck and railroad terminals within the City of Tampa. POLICY 9.3.35 The City shall continue to enforce and update, if necessary, the Truck Route Ordinance and maintain appropriate signage for truck routes to ensure compliance. Hillsborough County 2010 Long Range Transportation Plan, MPO PRINCIPLE 4.2 Encourage land development patterns that promote transportation efficiency. . Enhance the efficient movement of freight. 4 This is a proposed policy. 5 This is a proposed policy. 25 Future of the Region, A Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan, TBRPC POLICY 13.1.6 Local governments shall prepare a hazardous materials and hazardous waste movement report, the objective of which is reduction of risks associated with transportation and protection of public health, safety and welfare. POLICY 20.7.6 Coal and phosphate shipment by truck on public highways shall be discouraged due to high transport costs and potential for road surface and subgrade deterioration. POLICY 20.7.7 Where no alternative to shipment by truck exists, allowable coal and phosphate shipments shall mitigate for impacts on roadways by one or more of the following means: . Safety assurances and/or corrective measures . Flow assurances and/or corrective measures . Limited access assurances . Right-of-way/corridor preservation assurances . Abnormal wear assurances and/or corrective measures POLICY 20.7.8 The scheduling of coal and phosphate transport shall consider the peak period traffic flow. 26 POLICY 20.7.9 The shipment of coal, phosphates, petroleum products and any hazardous material by barge, tanker, rail, or transmission pipeline shall be conducted in a safe and environmentally-sound manner. Florida Statutes, Division of Statutory Revision, 1993 339.155 Transportation planning In developing the Florida Transportation Man, the department shall consider access to major freight distribution routes. Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, U.S. Department of Transportation Section 1024 Metropolitan planning (a) General Requirements - It is in the national interest to encourage and promote the development of transportation systems embracing various modes of transportation which will efficiently maximize mobility of people and goods and minimize fuel consumption and air pollution. Metropolitan planning organizations, in cooperation with the State shall develop transportation plans and programs for urbanized areas. Plans and programs shall provide for the development of transportation facilities which will function as an intermodal transportation system. The process for developing such plans and programs shall provide for consideration of all modes of transportation (f) Factors To Be Considered - In developing transportation plans and programs, each metropolitan planning organization shall, at a minimum, consider the following: 27 (7) International border crossing and access to ports, airports,intermodal transportation facilities, major freight distributionroutes, national parks, recreation areas, monuments and historic sites, and military installations. (11) Methods to enhance the efficient movement of freight. Section 1025 Statewide Planning (c)State Planning Process - Each State shall undertake a continuous transportation planning process which shall, at a minimum, consider the following: (4) International border crossings and access to ports, airports, intermodal transportation facilities major freight distribution routes, national parks, recreation and scenic areas, monuments and historic sites, and military installations. 28 VEHICLE CLASSIFICATIONS This Chapter develops a method for classifying vehicles for incorporation into the Hillsborough County Truck Route Plan process. The vehicle classification determines how various categories of vehicles will be regulated under the ordinance. METHODOLOGY The methodology for developing a vehicle classification scheme for application to the Hillsborough County Truck Route Plan included the following: . Reviewing vehicle classification schemes employed in other applications. . Developing evaluation criteria pertaining to the Hillsborough County Truck Route Plan. . Evaluating vehicle classification schemes from other applications based on the criteria developed for Hillsborough County and identifying their strengths and weaknesses. Developing a vehicle classification scheme that builds on the strengths and minimizes the weaknesses of the other schemes. REVIEW OF EXISTING VEHICLE CLASSIFICATION SCHEMES Numerous classification schemes were reviewed to determine how vehicles are classified in other applications. These applications generally are for purposes other than regulating truck traffic. They included the following: . The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Scheme . The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) scheme . The 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) scheme 29 . The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) Scheme . The scheme employed by FDOT in its Florida Standard Urban Transportation Modeling Structure (FSUTMS) and Regional Transportation Analysis (RTA) These schemes, together with their applications, are described in greater detail in Appendices E through I, respectively. EVALUATION CRITERIA Based on the studies conducted to date, several criteria have been developed to guide the development of a vehicle classification system for particular application to the Hillsborough County Truck Route Plan. These criteria include: 1) The classification scheme should be straightforward and readily understandable by local residents and business persons, trucking interests, public officials and enforcement officers. 2) The method should encompass most vehicles commonly encountered on roadways in Hillsborough County (i.e., there should be relatively few vehicles which cannot be classified). 3) For ease of compliance and enforcement there should be as few categories as possible. 4) Vehicles included in a category should have something in common with other vehicles included in the same category (e.g., dimensions, weight, power, etc). 5) The method should enable vehicles to be classified readily based on visual observation. 6) The classification scheme should promote the objectives of the Hillsborough County Truck Route Plan. 30 EVALUATION OF EXISTING CLASSIFICATION SCHEMES The existing schemes described in Appendices E through I were evaluated according to the six criteria stated above. The evaluation of each scheme was conducted by assigning a numeric score to each criterion. A score of zero indicates that the scheme fails to satisfy the criterion. A score of five indicates that the scheme satisfies the criterion very well. Tables 1 through 5 contain the evaluation of the following schemes, respectively: . Table 1 - The FHWA Scheme . Table 2 - The AASHTO Scheme . Table 3 - The 1985 HCM Scheme . Table 4 - The DHSMV Scheme . Table 5 - The FSUTMS/RTA Scheme . Table 6 summarizes the evaluations of the five classification schemes. Table 6 illustrates several points resulting from the evaluation of the existing classification schemes:. . The FHWA Scheme progresses in a straightforward manner from the smallest vehicle to the largest. The FSUTMS/RTA Scheme contains only two categories (light trucks and heavy trucks). . Four of the schemes classify all vehicles. The FSUTMS/RTA Scheme may be too generalized for purposes of the Hillsborough County Truck Route Plan. . The DHSMV and FHWA Schemes have so many categories of trucks that it would be difficult to classify a truck in motion. A trained police officer might be able to classify a moving vehicle but confusion could result in citizen complaints. 31 The score related to promoting the objectives of the study is a composite evaluation relating to the following general objectives: . Promote truck traffic on roads which are suitable for use by large trucks from an engineering and safety standpoint. . Reduce impacts of truck traffic in areas of sensitive land uses. . Achieve a balance between local and through truck traffic. . Provide for ease of enforcement. 32 Table 1- Evaluation of FHWA Classification Scheme Summary of Scheme: 14 Categories of Vehicles Primary Use: Design of Pavements and Bridges Criterion Score* Remarks 1. Straightforward, 4 Scheme progresses stepwise Understandable from smallest vehicle to largest 2. Classify All Vehicles 5 "Other" category applies to ATR devices only. 3. Minimum Number of 2 Contains 13 Categories categories "other" Three categories are for passenger vehicles. 4. Mutually Inclusive Categories 4 5. Visual Classification 3 Requires counting number of trailers and number of axles. 6. Promote Objectives 4** * Evaluation Scores 0 - Does not satisfy criterion 5 - Satisfies criterion very well ** Composite Score relating to general objectives of: Suitable roads; sensitive land uses; balance between local and through truck traffic; ease of enforcement 33 Table 2 - Evaluation of AASHTO Scheme Summary of Scheme: 15 Categories of Vehicles Primary Use: Geometric Design Criterion Score* Remarks 1. Straightforward, 3 Understandable 2. Classify All Vehicles 5 3. Minimum Number of 3 Contains 15 categories. Categories Seven categories are for passenger vehicles. 4. Mutually Inclusive Categories 4 5. Visual Classification 2 Some categories May require measurement of wheelbase 6. Promote Objectives 4** * Evaluation Scores 0 - Does not satisfy criterion 5 - Satisfies criterion very well ** Composite Score relating to general objectives of: Suitable roads sensitive land uses; balance between local and through truck traffic; ease of enforcement 34 Table 3 - Evaluation of HCM Classification Scheme Summary of Scheme: 6 Categories of Vehicles Primary Use: Capacity Analysis Criterion Score* Remarks 1. Straightforward, 2 The difference between Understandable "Light" trucks and "Standard" trucks is not clearly explained. The ratio of weight to horsepower is not commonly understood. 2. Classify All Vehicles 5 3. Minimum Number of 4 Contains 6 categories. Categories Three categories are for passenger vehicles. 4. Mutually Inclusive 4 Categories 5. Visual Classification 4 Number of tires (four or more than four) is readily observed. Distinction between "Light" trucks and "Standard" trucks is not readily observed. 6. Promote Objectives 3** * Evaluation Scores 0 - Does not satisfy criterion 5 - Satisfies criterion very well ** Composite Score relating to general objectives of: Suitable roads; sensitive land uses; balance between local and through truck traffic; ease of enforcement 35 Table 4 - Evaluation of DHSMV Classification Scheme Summary of Scheme: 36 Categories of Vehicle Type, Vehicle Use & Trailer Use Primary Use: Traffic Safety Statistics Criterion Score* Remarks 1.Straightforward, 1 Very complex system Understandable 2. Classify All Vehicles 5 3. Minimum Number of 0 Contain three main categories Categories and 36 subcategories 4. Mutually Inclusive 4 Categories 5. Visual Classification 2 Scheme is designed to classify vehicles while they are standing still. Difficult to classify while vehicle is in motion 6. Promote Objectives 3** * Evaluation Scores 0 - Does not satisfy criterion 5 - Satisfies criterion very well ** Composite Score relating to general objectives of: Suitable roads; sensitive land uses; balance between local and through truck traffic; ease of enforcement 36 Table 5 - Evaluation of FSUTMS/RTA Classification Scheme Summary of Scheme: 2 Categories of Vehicles Primary Use: Long-Range Traffic Projections Criterion Score* Remarks I. Straightforward, 5 Understandable 2. Classify All Vehicle 2 Does not address tractor- trailer combinations engaged in local deliveries. 3. Minimum Number of 5 Categories 4. Mutually Inclusive 3 Categories are very broad. Categories 5. Visual Classification 5 6. Promote Objectives 3** * Evaluation Scores 0 - Does not satisfy criterion 5 - Satisfies criterion very well ** Composite Score relating to general objectives of: Suitable roads; sensitive and uses; balance between local and through truck traffic; ease of enforcement 37 Table 6 - Summary Evaluation of Vehicle Classification Schemes Criterion Scheme/Score* FHWA AASHTO HC DHSMV FSUMS M RTA 1. Straightforward, 4 3 2 1 5 Understandable 2. Classify All Vehicles 5 5 5 5 2 3. Minimum Number of 2 3 4 0 5 Categories 4. Mutually Inclusive 4 4 4 4 3 Categories 5. Visual Classification 3 2 4 2 5 6. Promote Objectives** 4 4 3 3 3 * Evaluation Scores 0 - Does not satisfy criterion 5 - Satisfies criterion very well ** Composite Score relating to general objectives of: Suitable roads; sensitive land uses; balance between local and through truck traffic; ease of enforcement 38 PROPOSED VEHICLE CLASSIFICATION SCHEME Based on the foregoing analysis, a vehicle classification scheme is proposed for application to the Hillsborough County Truck Route Plan. This scheme is to be used to classify vehicles in order to determine whether they are subject to regulation under the ordinance. The following general vehicle classifications are proposed: . 2 or 3 Wheel Motorized Vehicles . Passenger Car Type Vehicles . Single-Unit Vehicles . Combination Vehicles The classification of 2 or 3 Wheel Motorized Vehicles is self-explanatory and includes such vehicles as motorcycles, mopeds, etc. The Passenger Car Type Vehicle classification includes all vehicles commonly recognized as passenger cars (e.g., private autos, rental cars, taxicabs, limousines, passenger vans, mini-vans, station wagons, etc). For vehicles larger than a passenger car, the classification is based on the chassis of the vehicle. This includes the front and rear axles, frame, powerplant and driver's compartment. The payload delivery device, which is normally attached to the frame, is excluded from the classification since it may take a great variety of forms (e.g., trailer box, tanker, dump body, flat bed, stake body, piece of machinery, carry-all, etc). The Single - Unit Vehicle category includes both passenger vehicles (transit buses, school buses, recreational vehicles, etc.) and non-passenger vehicles. The non-passenger sub- category includes the following: . 2 axle, 2 rear tire . 2 axle, 4 rear tire . 3 or more axles 39 The Combination Vehicles category includes all commercial vehicles commonly recognized as tractor-trailers, tractor-tandem trailers, maxi-cubes6 and other combinations. The Other Vehicles category includes a variety of vehicles which may be encountered on Hillsborough County roadways but which do not fit the Vehicle Classification Scheme. These will generally be in the form of a recreational vehicle pulling an automobile, a single-unit truck pulling a small trailer or piece of construction equipment, a passenger car pulling a recreational vehicle or boat trailer, etc. In general, the classification of such vehicles should be according to the vehicle that supplies power to the combination. Other examples may include surplus military equipment or specialized construction equipment which may be two-axle vehicles and should be subject to regulation on an as-needed basis. REGULATORY RATIONALE The preliminary rationale for the Hillsborough County Truck Route Plan is to develop a network of interconnected roadways which are suitable for use by trucks, from the perspective of both engineering and safety criteria and also sensitive land uses. Through trucks will be both encouraged and required to use these roadways. Use of other roadways by heavy trucks will be limited to local service. Table 7 summarizes the proposed Vehicle Classification Scheme for incorporation into the Hillsborough County Truck Route Plan ordinance. This table also identifies how the sub-categories are to be regulated under the ordinance. Appendix J contains recognition silhouettes to aid in classifying vehicles. 6 The term "maxi-cube" does not appear in any of the five vehicle classification schemes evaluated in the Technical Memorandum but does appear in the FDOT Trucking Manual (fourth Edition, 1993). A maxi-cube refers to a single-unit truck pulling a semi-trailer in a configuration such that the straight truck can be loaded and unloaded through the semi-trailer. 40 Table 7 Proposed Vehicle Classification Scheme Category of Vehicle/Use Subject to Regulation Recognition Under Ordinance? Silhouette Yes No Provided? . 2 or 3 Wheel Motorized X No Vehicles . Passenger Car Type Vehicles X No . Single-Unit Vehicles Passenger X No Non-Passenger 2 axle, 2 rear tire X No 2 axle, 4 rear tire X No 3 or more axles X Yes . Combination Vehicles Tractor-Trailers X Yes Tractor-Tandem Traile X Yes Maxi-Cube X Yes . Other Vehicles * * No * Two-axle vehicles (e.g., surplus military equipment, specialized construction or mechanical equipment, etc.) or other combinations which do not otherwise fit the standard categories listed in this table and which may be regulated on an as needed basis. 41 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter summarizes the findings of this Technical Memorandum and present recommendations to be incorporated into subsequent tasks. FINDINGS The findings of this Technical Memorandum are as follows: . Although truck traffic may be objectionable to some in the community, the trucking industry provides an essential service within Hillsborough County. . There are numerous governmental jurisdictions (e.g., State, County, City) and agency functions (e.g., law enforcement, public works/highway department, engineering, planning, etc.) which have responsibility for truck traffic on roads in Hillsborough County. . The City of Tampa is the only community in Hillsborough County to have adopted a Truck Route Plan. Among neighboring communities, only Pinellas County has an adopted Truck Route Plan. . Citizen complaints are a major source of data pertaining to truck problems. Records of complaints and their disposition are kept but additional background and follow-up data is not always available. . In the absence of regulations to the contrary, truckers will generally seek the fastest, most direct route to their destinations. . Most complaints of truck problems logged by the county are received from the northwest and southeast portions of the county. Complaints in northwest Hillsborough center around dirt haulers using local roads for access to Veterans Expressway construction sites. Complaints in southeast Hillsborough focus on phosphate and agricultural trucks using local roads to gain access to I-4 and I-75. Thus, the nature of complaints differs throughout the county. 42 . Truck accidents are not concentrated at particular locations in the county but are spread out throughout the traffic stream. However, when they occur, truck accidents are generally more severe than non-truck accidents and, thus, may be perceived as occurring more frequently. . The trucking industry's perspective is based largely on its operating environment, including the truck terminals, roadways and vehicles. Truckers are also greatly influenced by the requirements of shippers and receivers. . Many existing roads and bridges in Hillsborough County are not suitable for repeated use by large heavily-loaded, fast-moving trucks. This is due to limitations of geometry and/or structural adequacy. Repeated truck use may accelerate the deterioration of these roads and bridges. . Particularly in sparsely-developed areas of the county, trucks are often forced to use local roads if there is a lack of convenient alternatives. Some truckers may divert to local roads in order to avoid congestion on major roads. . There are many areas of the county which may be sensitive to the presence of trucks and the attendant problems of noise, vibration, spillage, etc. These sensitive areas include residential neighborhoods, schools, churches, etc. . Many trucks encountered on local roads are there for the legitimate purpose of local pickups and deliveries and are using local roads for access to nearby destinations. This is as opposed to "through" trucks whose destinations are not nearby. . Many trucking problems particularly those related to major construction are of temporary duration and will diminish when the construction is completed. However, in a rapidly-developing area such as Hillsborough County, there are numerous construction projects ongoing at any given time and each of these may generate some degree of truck traffic. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the studies and analyses leading up to Technical Memorandum Number 1, the following recommendations are made for incorporation into succeeding tasks: 43 . The planning process should give increased emphasis to both the needs of the trucking industry and also to the needs of residences. This is consistent with the emphases contained in the ISTEA legislation. . The Truck Route Planning process should provide for increased cooperation and, where appropriate, consolidation among the numerous governmental jurisdictions and agency functions which have responsibility for truck traffic on roads within Hillsborough County. . Public involvement, including residential interests, trucking interests, law enforcement and the business community, should be emphasized throughout the development of the Hillsborough County Truck Route Plan. . Existing planning mechanisms for accommodations truck traffic should be strengthened and upgraded so that freight movements can be considered early in the planning process. . For example, the county's land development regulations should include provisions for truck access to planned developments. Also, construction documents for major land development and infrastructure construction projects should include provisions for truck access to construction sites. . The county should move ahead with- intermodal projects that will relieve truck traffic on local roads. The county's Truck Route Plan should consist of a network of interconnected roadways which are suitable for use by heavy trucks. These roadways will generally include state highways and major county or city roadways. The Truck Route Plan should not identify roadways where truck traffic is prohibited but should, instead, emphasize directing truck traffic to routes which have been identified as being suitable for their use. . The county's Truck Route Plan should be adopted by ordinance. The ordinance should, to the extent possible, be legally defensible and free of loopholes. The ordinance should grant clear and sufficient authority for enforcement. 44 . Hillsborough County's Truck Route Plan should be coordinated with those in Tampa and Pinellas County. . The Truck Route Plan should incorporate a process for receiving and dealing with public complaints and problems which may arise in the future. 45 APPENDIX A HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA ORDINANCE NO. 85-1 "NO THRU TRUCKS OVER 1-TON CAPACITY" SCHEDULE OF PROHIBITIONS TABLE 1 HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA ORDINANCE NO.85-1 NO THRU TRUCKS OVER 1-TON CAPAClTY SCHEDULE OF PROHIBITIONS Road From To 10th Ave 48th St US 41 12th Ave Maydell Dr 58th St 16th Ave US 41 Maydell Dr 21st Ave SE 24th St SE 33rd St SE 31st Ave Maydell Dr 64th St 43rd St CR 581 Skipper Rd 48th St 10th Ave Palm River Rd 48th St Idlewild Dead End 50th St Sligh Ave Puritan Rd 51st St Fowler Ave 122nd St 52nd St Fowler Ave Fletcher Ave 53rd St Fowler Ave Fletcher Ave 56th St Buffalo Ave Chelsea St 58th St Causeway Blvd Palm River Rd 58th St Court 12th Ave 58th Ave 63rd St Causeway Blvd 31st St 64th St Causeway Blvd 31st St 66th St Palm River Rd Causeway Blvd 86th St Causeway Blvd Tidewater Trail 119th Ave Florida Ave Central Ave 122nd Ave 50th St 56th St 127th Ave 50th St 56th St 142nd Ave Nebraska Ave 22nd St 143rd Ave Florida Ave Central Ave 144th Ave Florida Ave Central Ave 145th Ave Florida Ave Central Ave 148th Ave Bearss Ave Livingston Ave Alambra Ave US 301 Dead End Angel Lane Lutz Lake Fern Rd County Line Rd Arrawana Ave Mabry St Busch Blvd Bandy Dr Wheeler Rd MaryEllen Lane Barry Rd Benjamin Rd Hanley Rd Beechwood Blvd Buffalo Ave Cul-de-Sac Berger Rd Crenshaw Lake Rd Dale Mabry Hwy Road From To Big Bend Rd US 301 Balm-Riverview Rd Blackjack Rd Dead End Bethlehem Rd Bogdonoff Dr Clay Pit Rd Old Hillsborough Ave Boy Scout Blvd Race Track Rd Tarpon Springs Rd Branchton Church Rd Morris Bridge Rd Dead End Brandon Trace Ave Lakewood Dr Sarah Louise Dr Broad St Manhattan Ave Dale Mabry Hwy Brown Rd North Mobley Rd Van Dyke Rd Burke St Manhattan Ave Occident St Burrington Dr Ehrlich Rd West Village Dr Calle St Alambra Ave Ventura Ave Carrollwood Village Fletcher Ave Old Orchard Dr Casey Rd South Village Dr Gunn Highway Chastain Rd SR 574 Old Hillsborough Ave Cherry Ave Clay Pit Rd Old Hillsborough Ave Church Ave Pinecrest Manor Henry Ave Blvd Claire Dr Parsons Ave Elsie Marie Dr Clemons Rd Taylor Rd Parsons Ave Clifton St 48th St 50th St Clifton St Manhattan Ave Occident St Colson Rd SR 60 Horton Rd Comanche Ave Orient Rd Lenox Dr Copeland Rd US Highway 301 Morris Bridge Rd County Line Rd Nichols Rd Allen Rd Craven Dr Field Lane Nita Drive Crawley Rd Boy Scout Rd Tarpon Springs Rd Crenshaw Lake Rd Van Dyke Rd Simmons Rd Danny Bryan Blvd Myrica St Buffalo Ave Davis Rd Temple Terrace Hwy Morris Bridge Rd Deleuil Ave Orient Rd Lenox Dr Dovefield Place Williams Rd Lakewood Dr Dover Rd SR 574 Rex Avenue Draper Place Orient Rd Kingsbury Circle Elm St Renellie Dr Manhattan Ave Elsie Marie Dr Kingsway Rd Claire Dr Equestrian Trail Van Dyke Farms Mobley Rd N Blvd Estates Del Sol Dr US 301 Dead End Esthel Rd Harney Rd Morris Bridge Rd Eureka Springs Rd Wilkins Rd Sligh Ave Fern St Manhattan Ave Occident St Field Lane Craven Dr Kingsway Rd Floyd Rd Dale MabryHwy Hudson Lane Road From To Four Oaks Rd Gunn Hwy Lowell Rd Gallagher Rd CR 580 Gore Rd Gay Rd Heidi Rd Rooks Rd Glen Harwell Rd Fritzke Rd Forbes Rd Gore Rd Gallagher Rd McIntosh Rd Hamilton Ave Dale Mabry Hwy Manhattan Ave Hampton Park Blvd Gunn Hwy Lowell Rd Hanna Ave Manhattan Ave Occident St Haven Bend Rome Ave Bearss Ave Hayes Rd Florida Ave Nebraska Ave Heidi Rd US 92 Dead End Henry Ave Manhattan Ave Occident St Henry Ave Trail Dr Mobile Dr Hesperides St Sligh Ave Hillsborough Ave Hiawatha Street Manhattan Ave Occident St Hixon Rd Paglen Rd Gunn Hwy Hoover Blvd Hillsborough Ave Idlewild Horse Pond Rd Peterson Rd Frontier Lane Horton Rd SR 60 Colson Rd Hudson Lane Dale Mabry Hwy Gunn Hwy Idlewild Ave Manhattan Ave Occident St Idlewild Ave Anderson Rd Hoover Blvd Jaudon Rd Sydney Rd McIntosh Rd Jean St Manhattan Ave Occident St Jefferson Rd Harney Rd US Hwy 301 Jefferson Rd US Hwy 301 Fowler Ave Jersey Ave Taylor Rd Parsons Ave Jim Johnson Rd 3200 S of Park Rd Clemons Rd Keystone Blvd Tarpon Springs Rd Crawley Rd Knight St US 92 Dead End Knollwood St Manhattan Ave Occident St Knollwood St Minnehaha St Armenia Ave Knox St Manhattan Ave Occident St Krycul Ave Riverview Dr US 301 Lake Ellen Dr Armenia Ave Lake Ridge Rd Lake Ellen Lane Armenia Ave Paddock St Lambright St Manhattan Ave Occident St Langston Dr Maydell Dr 58th St Lark Lane Lakewood Dr Debra Dr Larsen Lane 78th St Rideout Rd Lemon Ave Clay Pit Rd Old Hillsborough Ave Road From To Lenox Dr Deleuil Ave Hillsborough Ave Lightfoot Rd Timberlee Rd US Hwy 301 Lightfoot Rd I-75 Lone Palm Dr Lime Ave Clay Pit Rd Old Hillsborough Ave Lindsey St SR 574 Blackjack Rd Linebaugh Avenue Dale Mabry Hwy Lenfesty Rd Little Rd Crenshaw Lake Rd Dale Mabry Hwy Little Rd Bloomingdale Ave Durant Rd Lowell Rd Casey Rd Hampton Park Blvd Mabry St Arrawana Ave Orange Grove Rd Maple Lane US Hwy 92 US Hwy 301 Maydell Dr 58th St 12th Ave McDonald Rd SR 39 Colson Rd McIntosh Rd Gore Rd US 301 McIntosh Rd SR 574 Jaudon Rd McLane Dr SR 574A Six Mile Creek Dr McMullen Loop Boyette Rd Valerie Lane McRae Rd Morris Bridge Rd Davis Rd Meadow Lane Lumsden Rd John Moore Rd Melodie Dr Lakewood Dr Debra Dr Michigan Ave Lutz Lake Fern Rd Pasco County Line Michigan St Pine St Orange Ave Middlesex Dr Old Memorial Hwy Sussex Dr Minnehaha St. Manhattan Ave Occident St Minnehaha St. Habana Ave Knollwood St Mobile Dr Old Hillsborough US 301 Ave N. Mobly Rd Gunn Hwy Crawley Rd Mohawk Ave Orient Rd Staley Dr. Montclair Ave SR 60 Morgan St Morgan St Parsons Ave Kingsway Ave Myrica St Tampa Bay Blvd Danny Bryan Blvd Navajo Ave Morris Bridge Rd Davis Rd Nature s Way Blvd Culbroth Rd Springvale Neal Dr 56th St Dead End E of 5Sth Newberger Rd US 41 Livingston Ave Nita Dr Craven Dr Claire Dr North St Manhattan Ave Occident St Oakridge Ave Gibsonton Dr Rivercrest Dr Ohio St Pine St Orange St Old Orchard Rd Casey Rd Golf Crest Circle Old US 41 Lavender Dr US 41 Road From To Orange Ave Clay Pit Rd Old Hillsborough Ave Orange Grove Dr Busch Blvd Moran Rd Orient Rd Hillsborough Ave Sligh Ave Paddock St Fletcher Ave Lake Ellen Dr Paglen Rd Sheldon Rd Hixon Rd Palm River Rd US 41 48th St Palmwood Lane Fletcher Ave Carrollwood Village Paris St Manhattan Ave Occident St Park Rd Boyette Rd McMullen Loop Parrish Place 78th St Larsen Lane Pat Blvd Waters Ave Woodbridge Blvd Peach Ave Clay Pit Rd Old Hillsborough Ave Pennington Rd Ehrlich Rd Hutchinson Rd Peterson Rd Gunn Hwy Horse Pond Rd Pine St Clay Pit Rd Michigan St Pine Lake Dr Armenia Ave Rome Ave Pine Ridge Ave Gibsonton Dr Rivercrest Dr Pinewood Ave SR 60 Morgan St Plum Avenue Clay Pit Rd Old Hillsborough Ave Providence Rd Bloomingdale Av Riverview Dr Puritan Rd 56th St 50th St Puritan Rd 56th St 58th St Race Track Rd Hillsborough Ave S. Mobley Rd. Redbraes Dr Woodlake Shop. Woodlake Blvd Ctr. Renellie Dr Sligh Ave Hiawatha St Ridein Rd 78th St Tidewater Trail Rideout Rd 78th St Windsor Way Rivercrest Dr US 301 Dead End Riverview Dr US 301 Dead End Robin Lane Lakewood Dr Debra Dr Rome Ave City Limits Fletcher Ave Rooks Rd Gay Rd Shangri La Dr Rosier Rd Taylor Rd Parsons Ave Running Horse Rd Hillsborough Ave Sportsman Park Dr Rustic Dr Waters Ave Twelve Oaks Blvd Sarah Louise Dr Williams Rd Brandon Trace Rd Shadow Run Blvd McMullen Rd Boyette Rd Shady Shores Dr Fletcher Ave Magdalen Dr Shangri La Dr Rooks Rd US 92 Sierra Pine Rd Lutz Lake Fern Rd Pasco County Line Sinclair Hills Rd Nebraska Ave Livingston Ave Sligh Ave Williams Rd Eureka Springs Rd Road From To Smith Ryals Rd SR 39 Colson Rd Sportsman Park Dr Running Horse Rd Rooks Rd Staley Dr Deleuil Ave Hillsborough Ave Stall Rd Dale Mabry Hwy Carrollwood Village Sussex Dr Hillsborough Ave Cul-de-Sac Taylor Rd Windhorst Rd Jersey Ave Thrasher Dr Orient Rd Travis Blvd Tidewater Trail 78th St 86th St Timberlane Dr Old Memorial Hwy Paces Ferry Dr Timberlane West Dr Old Memorial Hwy Timberlane Dr Tobacco Rd Hutchinson Rd Van Dyke Rd Townsend Lane Cedar Lake Dr Dead End n/o Cedar Trail Dr Old Hillsborough Henry St Ave Travis Blvd Walton Rd Kingsbury Circle Twelve Oaks Blvd Hanley Rd Waters Ave Valrico Rd SR 574 SR 60 Valroy Rd US Hwy 41 I-75 Van Dyke Farms Blvd Van Dyke Rd Equestrian Trail Ventura Ave Causeway Blvd Calle St Vern St Gibsonton Rd Nundy Ave N. Village Dr S. Village Dr Dale Mabry Hwy S. Village Dr Armenia Ave Rome Ave Walker Rd US 301 Fowler Ave Walton Way Harney Rd US 92 Waring Dr SR 574A Six Mile Creek Dr Washington St Pine St Orange Ave Water Oaks Lake Casey Rd Carrollwood Village Williams Rd CR 574 Old Sawmill Rd Windhorst Rd Lakewood Dr WindhorstRd Woodhaven Dr Lakewood Dr Burning Tree Lane Woodlake Blvd Sheldon Rd Attenbury Dr Woodleigh Ave N Village Dr Pine Lake Dr APPENDIX B TRUCK TRAFFIC COMPLAINTS HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY & PLANT CITY NO SIGNS POSTED TABLE 1 TRUCK TRAFFIC COMPLAINTS HILLSBOROUGH COUNIY & PLANT CITY NO SIGNS POSTED ROAD FROM TO Balm Rd (CR 672) US 301 CR 39 Balm-Riverview Rd US 301 Balm Rd Bloomingdale Ave US 301 Lithia-Pinecrest Rd Bryan Rd Lithia-Pinecrest Bloomingdale Ave (Plant City) Rd Calhoun St Wheeler St N Park Rd Country Hills Dr Pennington Rd Summerwind Dr Dale Mabry Hwy (US 92) Kennedy Blvd Gandy Blvd Gunn Hwy (CR 587) Pasco County Dale Mabry Hwy Harney Rd Hillsborough Ave 56th St Hatton/Wilcox Rd Hutchenson Rd Lakeshore Dr Hutchenson Rd Mobley Rd N Ehrlich Rd John Moore Rd Lumsden Rd Bloomingdale Ave Keysville Rd (CR 676) CR 39 Lithia Rd Kings Ave SR 60 Bloomingdale Ave Kirby St Himes Ave Habana Ave Lakeshore Dr Van Dyke Rd Wilcox Rd Lakewood Rd MLK Blvd Providence Rd Lithia-Pinecrest Rd SR 60 CR 39 (CR 640) Lumsden Rd US 301 Lithia-Pinecrest Rd Lutz Lake Fern Rd Gunn Hwy Dale Mabry Hwy Lynn Turner Rd Ehrlich Rd Gunn Hwy Madison Ave (CR 676A) US 41 I-75 Maydell Dr SR 60 Causeway Blvd Medulla Rd (CR 574A) Coronet Rd Polk County Mobley Rd N Gunn Hwy Hutchenson Rd Mobley Rd S Race Track Rd Gunn Hwy Parsons Ave US 92 Lumsden Rd Patterson Rd Tarpon Springs Rd Race Track Rd Providence Rd Lakewood Dr Bloomingdale Ave Race Track Rd Gunn Hwy Hillsborough Ave Sun City Center Blvd I-75 US 301 (SR 674) Tarpon Springs Lake Pinellas County Gunn Hwy Fern Rd Wheeler Rd Highview Rd Valrico Rd 78th St (CR 573) SR 60 Madison Ave APPENDIX C PINELLAS COUNTY TRUCK ROUTE PLAN Click HERE for graphic. Click HERE for graphic. APPENDIX D CITY OF TAMPA TRUCK ROUTE PLAN Click HERE for graphic. CITY OF TAMPA TRUCK ROUTE INFORMATION 25-182 Truck routes established; hazardous materials routing established; observance required. A. Truck routes shall includes: 1. All streets under the jurisdiction of the Florida Department of transportation (State roads). 2. All streets in the Central Business area bounded on the east by Ybor Channel , an the west by the Hillsborough River, and on the north by a line running along Scott Street east to Orange Avenue, south to Cass Street, east to the CSX Railroad, northeast to Adamo Drive, except Florida Avenue from the Crosstown Expressway off-ramp to Scott Street, which 1s prohibited for use of trucks carrying hazardous materials. Trucks carrying hazardous materials on the Crosstown Bxpressway are prohibited from exiting onto Florida Avenue or Morgan Street and shall use the Crosstown Expressway to 22nd Street north, thence north along 22nd Street to the Interstate 4 on-ramps, thence eastward or westward along Interstate 4 to Interstate 275 or points east. 3. Any other streets so designated by any ordinance of thin city. The transportation manager shall place and maintain at major intersections or other reasonable intervals, signs on such other streets indicating their permissible use as truck routes. 4. Cypress Street from Dale Mabry Highway to North Boulevard. B. All trucks within the City shall be operated only over and along the truck routes established in (A) above. C. Notwithstanding (B) above, this section shall not prohibits: 1. Operation On street of destination. The operation of a truck upon any street where necessary to the conduct of business, construction, or maintenance operations at a destination point, if streets upon which truck traffic is permitted are used until reaching the intersection nearest the destination point. 2. Authorized emergency vehicles. The operation of an authorized emergency vehicle upon-any street in the City. 3. Detoured trucks. The operation of an truck upon-any officially established detour in any case. where each truck could lawfully be operated upon the street for which the detour is established. Sec. 25-183 Truck route use. Every truck shall proceed only over established truck routes, and shall deviate only at the intersection nearest to its first destination point. Upon leaving its first destination point, a truck shall proceed to other destination points only over truck routes possible, using that routing, which minimizes the distance traveled over non-truck routes. Upon leaving its last destination point, a truck shall return to a truck by the shortest possible route. 8/7.39 Appendix E - Summary of FHWA Vehicle Classification Scheme This classification scheme was developed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and is used primarily for calculating design loadings for the design of roadway pavements and bridges. This scheme is separated into categories depending whether the vehicle carries passengers or commodities. Non-passenger vehicles are further subdivided by the number of axles and the number of units, including both the power unit and trailer units. The FHWA vehicle classification scheme consists of the following categories of vehicles: 1. Motorcycles 2. Passenger car 3. Other two-axle, four tire, single-unit vehicles 4. Buses (includes two-axle/six-tire vehicles and vehicles with three or more axles) 5. Two-axle, six-tire, single-unit trucks 6. Three-axle, single-unit trucks 7. Four-or more axle, single-unit trucks 8. Four-or less axle, single trailer trucks 9. Five-axle, single trailer trucks 10. Six-or more axle, single trailer trucks 11. Five-or less axle, multi-trailer trucks 12. Six-axle multi-trailer trucks 13. Seven-or more axle multi-trailer trucks 14. Other In this system, Categories 1 through 4 generally describe passenger vehicles. Although some light commodities may also be carried, vehicles in these categories generally are not heavy enough to influence the design of roadway pavements and bridges. Categories 5 through 7 are for single-unit trucks. Categories 8 through 10 are for combination vehicles consisting of a power unit and a single trailer. Categories 11 through 13 are for combination vehicles consisting of a power unit and two or more trailers. Category 14 - "Other" - has been added since there are automatic traffic recording (ATR) devices which are programmed to recognize and record standard vehicles in categories 1 through 13 by their number of axles and axle spacing. However, some non-standard combinations are not recognizable by the ATR's (e.g., recreational vehicle pulling an automobile, truck pulling a piece of construction equipment, etc.) and, hence, are classified as "Other" vehicles for data collection purposes. Appendix F - Summary of AASHTO Vehicle Classification Scheme This classification scheme was developed by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and is used primarily for calculating design dimensions for the geometric design of roadways, intersections and interchanges. The AASHTO system relates primarily to the dimensions and turning characteristics of vehicles and consists of the following vehicle types: 1. Passenger car 2. Single-unit truck 3. Single-unit bus 4. Articulated bus 5. Semi-trailer intermediate 6. Semi-trailer combination large 7. Semi-trailer, full-trailer combination 8. Motor home 9. Passenger car with travel trailer 10. Passenger car with boat and trailer 11. Interstate semi-trailer 12. Interstate semi-trailer 13. Triple semi-trailer 14. Turnpike double semi-trailer 15. Motor home and boat trailer In this system, Categories 1, 3, 4, 8, 9,10 and 15 generally describe passenger vehicles. Category 2 is the only category which describes single-unit trucks. Categories 5, 6,11 and 12 describe combination vehicles consisting of a power unit and a single trailer. Categories 7, 13 and 14 describe combination vehicles consisting of a power unit and two or more trailers. Appendix G - Summary of Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Vehicle Classification Scheme This classification scheme was developed in conjunction with the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) and is used primarily for calculating the effect of various categories of vehicles on the capacity of roadways, intersections and interchanges. The HCM scheme differentiates between passenger cars and trucks and further subdivides trucks into light trucks (i.e., powerful trucks, as determined by the ratio of weight to horsepower) standard trucks (i.e., trucks "typically" found on freeways) and heavy trucks (i.e., less powerful trucks as determined by the ratio of weight to horsepower). Vehicles in the heavy truck category generally have more than four tires touching the ground in normal operation. The HCM Scheme further subdivides the heavy trucks category into trucks, recreational vehicles and buses. Thus, the HCM Scheme consists of the following six categories: 1. Passenger cars 2. Light trucks 3. Standard trucks 4. Heavy trucks (more than four tires) 5. Recreational vehicles (more than four tires) 6. Buses (more than four tires) The HCM uses these categories to calculate the "passenger car equivalents" of the five categories of truck-type vehicles. Appendix H - Summary of DHSMV Vehicle Classification Scheme This classification scheme is incorporated into the traffic accident reports which are filled out by traffic enforcement personnel at the crash site and transmitted to the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV). This classification system is used primarily in the calculation and analysis of traffic safety statistics. The DHSMV Scheme is based on the vehicle type, vehicle use and trailer type (if any). Vehicle type is subdivided into 14 categories as follows: 1. Automobile 2. Passenger van 3. Pickup/light truck (2 rear tires) 4. Medium truck (4 rear tires) 5. Heavy truck (2 or more rear axles) 6. Truck tractor (cab) 7. Motor home (RV) 8. Bus 9. Bicycle 10. Motorcycle 11. Moped 12. All Terrain vehicle 13. Train 14. Other The DHSMV Scheme subdivides vehicle use into 12 categories as follows: 1. Private transportation 2. Commercial passengers 3. Commercial cargo 4. Public transportation 5. Public school bus 6. Private school bus 7. Ambulance 8. Law enforcement 9. Fire/rescue 10. Military 11. Other government 12. Other If a trailer is involved, the DHSMV Scheme provides 10 trailer types: 1. Single semi-trailer 2. Tandem semi-trailer 3. Tank trailer 4. Saddle mount/flatbed 5. Boat trailer 6. Utility trailer 7. House trailer 8. Pole trailer 9. Towed vehicle 10. Other Appendix I- Summary FDOT FSUTMS/RTA Vehicle Classification Scheme This classification is incorporated into the Florida standard Urban Transportation Modeling Structure (FSUTMS) which FDOT uses to prepare long range traffic projections on a county- wide basis and also the Regional Transportation Analysis (RTA), a FSUTMS-based regional model which FDOT is developing to perform long range traffic projections for multi-county area. The FSUMTS/RTA Scheme uses only two classifications of trucks as follows: . Light trucks-primarily single-unit trucks, mostly engaged in local deliveries and service/repair activities. . Heavy trucks-primarily tractor-trailer combinations, mostly engaged in long-haul transport activities This is a recent refinement to the FSUTMS/RTA model. Earlier versions included all trucks in a single category, together with taxicabs. Appendix J-Recognition Silhouettes This appendix contains graphic silhouttes to aid in recognizing the various types vehicles which are proposed to be regulated under the ordinance. The recognition silhouettes take the form of box type trailers, as is commonly done on standard signs depicting bridge weight limits. However, it should be noted that the regulation is based on the truck chassis (i.e., front and rear axles, frame, powerplant and driver’s compartment). The payload carrying device may take a variety of other forms (e.g., tanker, dump body, flat bed, piece of equipment, etc.)
