Steps In this report, ODOT established a conservative, accurate methodology to assess the impact of permitted vehicles on highways and bridges, illustrated damage impacts on a permit basis, and examined impacts of permit fees on Ohio businesses. The time constraint of completing the report by February 1, 2009, and the data collection limitations, restricted the ability to better assess the impact of the use of continuous permits on the highway system. In total, the report provides ODOT and policy makers with a solid foundation to understand the impact of permitted vehicles and to explore important policy questions.
To this end, ODOT thinks it is prudent to continue to examine and analyze the impacts of permitted vehicles and the best way to regulate the use of these vehicles on our highway system. ODOT recommends the following:
1. Continuation of permit data collection and analysis, particularly in the area of continuous permits, until ODOT has sufficient understanding on the use of these permits;
2. Exploration of how technology can improve data collection and analysis capabilities; 3. Improvement of enforcement practices to protect against violation of law;
4. Determination of how to improve accident data collection involving permitted vehicles;
5. Review fee assessment alternatives to best cover the impacts of permitted vehicles and encourage optimal equipment configuration;
6. Completion of a highway cost analysis study to fully assess vehicle cost responsibility; and 7. Further engagement of transportation stakeholders to improve customer service.
34 Exhibits
EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1
Exhibit 1 Charts from Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study Phase one Synthesis Documentation of Truck Size and Weight Regulations
38 Exhibits
Exhibit 3
40 Exhibits
Exhibit 5
44 Appendices
APPENDICES
Appendix 1:
Ohio’s Highway System has countless uses and impacts. Routine uses include trips to the grocery store, pharmacy, doctor visits, transporting children to school, field trips to experience Ohio’s rich history, or caravans going to cheer on their favorite sports teams. The economic impacts include moving products to markets, providing the means to accommodate just-in-time deliveries and assuring rapid response to life threatening situations. Regardless of the reason that the highway system is being relied upon, there are two expectations every user has: Access and Availability. To meet the access and availability expectations, the State of Ohio has invested nearly $21.3 billion9 in a world class highway system. This investment coupled with over $1.5 Billon10
The second issue of Public Roads magazine published in 1918 focused on the problems State highway departments were encountering as the result of truck traffic. The lead article, “The Highways of the Country and the Burden They Must Carry,” summarized the issues of that era, many of which are still familiar today
in annual maintenance costs, assures that the highway system’s access and availability are sustained. To aid in the planning, design, preservation and safety of the highway system, truck size and weight
(TS&W) limits were established.
Beyond infrastructure preservation, TS&W limits have a significant impact on other transportation modes. Any allowable gross vehicle weight (GVW) increase on trucks will lower truck operating costs per pound of product. With decreased operating cost, trucks can reduce their rates which will lead to a shift from railroad and water transportation modes. TS&W Regulations also provide trucking companies a fair and balanced system to compete for shipments.
Safety is another important aspect of TS&W limits. Highway geometric design standards take into account the maximum legal length, width and height of vehicles. This allows ample lane widths, intersection turning radius and clearance for overhead structures and appurtenances. Vehicle weights have a significant impact on speed, braking and grades.
History
11
Apparently the point has been reached where the demands of traffic have exceeded the strength of the average road to meet them. Highways designed to withstand the pounding of ordinary loads that have stood up under imposts they were intended to sustain, no longer
:
9 GAS-B 34 Report Infrastructure Capital Asset for State Fiscal Year 2008 10 ODOT expenditures for SFY 2008
appear to be adequate to meet the present-day conditions. Widespread failure is
demonstrative of the fact the roads can not carry unlimited loadings. Their capacity is limited. The first states to initiate TS&W limits were Maine, Washington, DC, Massachusetts and Maryland who established laws to protect their infrastructure from early deterioration. Other states followed so that by 1933 every state had its own weight, length, height and width regulations.
Although the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO)12
• Maximum Width of 102 inches
had developed policy statements regarding uniform TS&W laws beginning in 1932, regulations largely were diverse and very state specific. Then In1956, with the passage of the Federal-Aid Highway Act (FAHA), the Federal Government took the first steps toward uniformity of TS&W regulations. The act directed the Secretary of Commerce to research and report back to Congress on what should be the maximum vehicle dimensions and weight. The report introduced standards which reflected the AASHO policy adopted in 1946. The 1956 FAHA introduced the following limits:
• Single axle weight of 18,000 pounds. • Tandem axle weight of 32,000 pounds
• Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 73,280 Pounds
The report that the Secretary of Commerce submitted also addressed “grandfathering,” stating it should not be eliminated, but should be phased out. This allowed states to continue to impose their regulations.
The 1956 TS&W limits stayed in effect until the 1974 Federal Aid Highway Amendment Act. This act raised the legal GVW to 80,000 pounds, increased the maximum axle loads and tandem axle loads to 20,000 pounds and 34,000 pounds respectfully. It was considered a trade-off for the imposition of lower speed limits (55 MPH). The act also granted states the ability to use weight tables or axle spacing formulas not meeting the Federal Bridge Formula.
In 1982 Congress passed the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA). This act increased the Federal regulation and authority over TS&W negating the varied TS&W regulations imposed by many states: thereby instituting a minimum and maximum standard for weight, width and minimum allowable lengths on the Interstate Highway System. The STAA also imposed the dimensional limits on the National Network of Highways13
The last major Federal change to TS&W regulation came in 1991 with Passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). Longer Combination Vehicles (LCV’S) were
. Lastly, the STAA addressed the issue of States’
Grandfather Rights on issuing permits. The STAA allows states to issue permits to vehicles which could be lawfully operated under the state permit authority in 1956.
12 AASHO the predecessor of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 13 NNH is composed of the Federal Aid Primary Highway System.
46 Appendices
restricted to only those states that allowed their operation prior to ISTEA Enactment. Additionally, ISTEA required states to develop an annual enforcement plan and certify their plan each year14
1423 USC 127 & 315; 49 USC 31111, 31112 and 31114; 23 CFR 658.
. Ohio’s TS&W regulations date back to Sections 7246 to 7250 (inclusive) of the General Code which were incorporated into 5577.01 to 5577.99 (inclusive) of the Revised Code in the early 1950’s. These sections, though amended over the years, have been in harmony with the efforts of AASHTO and the Federal Highway Administrations (FHWA) to have national uniformity.
Current Regulations
The legal maximum weights for vehicles traveling on Ohio public roads are as follows:
The weight of vehicle and load imposed upon a road surface that is part of the interstate system by vehicles with pneumatic tires shall not exceed any of the following weight limitations:
(1) On any one axle, twenty thousand pounds;
(2) On any tandem axle, thirty-four thousand pounds;
(3) On any two or more consecutive axles, the maximum weight as determined by application of the Federal Bridge Formula.
The maximum gross weight on any two or more consecutive axles shall be determined by application of the following formula:
W = 500((LN/N-1) + 12N + 36).
In this formula, W equals the overall gross weight on any group of two or more consecutive axles to the nearest five hundred pounds, L equals the distance in rounded whole feet between the extreme of any group of two or more consecutive axles, and N equals the number of axles in the group under consideration. However, two consecutive sets of tandem axles may carry a gross load of thirty-four thousand pounds each, provided the overall distance between the first and last axles of such consecutive sets of tandem axles is thirty-six feet or more.
The weight of vehicle and load imposed upon a road surface that is not part of the interstate system by vehicles with pneumatic tires shall not exceed any of the following weight limitations:
(1) On any one axle, twenty thousand pounds;
(3) On any three successive load-bearing axles designed to equalize the load between such axles and spaced so that each such axle of the three-axle group is more than four feet from the next axle in the three-axle group and so that the spacing between the first axle and the third axle of the three-axle group is no more than nine feet, and with such load-bearing three- axle group weighed simultaneously as a unit:
Forty-eight thousand pounds, with the total weight of vehicle and load not exceeding thirty- eight thousand pounds plus an additional nine hundred pounds for each foot of spacing between the front axle and the rearmost axle of the vehicle;
As an alternative, forty-two thousand five hundred pounds, if part of a six-axle vehicle combination with at least twenty feet of spacing between the front axle and rearmost axle, with the total weight of vehicle and load not exceeding fifty-four thousand pounds plus an additional six hundred pounds for each foot of spacing between the front axle and the rearmost axle of the vehicle.
(4) The total weight of vehicle and load utilizing any combination of axles, other than as provided for three-axle groups shall not exceed thirty-eight thousand pounds plus an
additional nine hundred pounds for each foot of spacing between the front axle and rearmost axle of the vehicle.
The maximum overall gross weight of vehicle and load imposed upon the road surface shall not exceed eighty thousand pounds.
Ohio’s weight law is a two tiered system utilizing the FHWA mandated Federal Bridge Formula (FBF) on all roadways in Ohio, or the Ohio Alternative Vehicle Weight Formula on roadways not a part of the Interstate Highway System. The Ohio alternative was removed from the RC in 1993, as Ohio adopted the FBF as the only determinant formula for maximum vehicle weight. In 2001,
legislation was passed re-introducing the Ohio Alternative into the RC (legislation which ODOT went on record as opposing). Included in 5577.042 RC are several “tolerances” granted to specific vehicle types. These tolerances are contrary to the Federal Weight requirements, but as long as these weight tolerances are not applied to the Interstate Highway System, FHWA does not have jurisdiction and therefore cannot sanction the state.
The maximum allowable dimensions for vehicles traveling on roadways in Ohio and is as follows: No vehicle shall have a width in excess of:
(1) One hundred four inches for passenger bus type vehicles operated exclusively within municipal corporations;
(2) One hundred two inches, excluding such safety devices as are required by law, for passenger bus type vehicles operated over freeways, and such other state roads with minimum pavement widths of twenty-two feet, except those roads or portions thereof over which operation of one hundred two-inch buses is prohibited by order of the director of transportation;
48 Appendices
(3) One hundred thirty-two inches for traction engines;
(4) One hundred two inches for recreational vehicles, excluding safety devices and retracted awnings and other appurtenances of six inches or less in width and except that the director may prohibit the operation of one hundred two inch recreational vehicles on designated state highways or portions of highways;
(5) One hundred two inches, including load, for all other vehicles, except that the director may prohibit the operation of one hundred two-inch vehicles on such state highways or portions thereof as the director designates.
No vehicle shall have a length in excess of:
(1) Sixty-six feet for passenger bus type vehicles and articulated passenger bus type vehicles operated by a regional transit authority.
(2) Forty-five feet for all other passenger bus type vehicles;
(3) Fifty-three feet for any semitrailer when operated in a commercial tractor-semitrailer combination, with or without load, except that the director may prohibit the operation of any such commercial tractor-semitrailer combination on such state highways or portions thereof as the director designates.
(4) Twenty-eight and one-half feet for any semitrailer or trailer when operated in a commercial tractor-semitrailer-trailer or commercial tractor-semitrailer-semitrailer combination, except that the director may prohibit the operation of any such commercial tractor-semitrailer-trailer or commercial tractor-semitrailer-semitrailer combination on such state highways or portions thereof as the director designates;
(5)Ninety-seven feet for drive-away saddlemount vehicle transporter combinations and drive- away saddlemount with fullmount vehicle transporter combinations when operated on any interstate, United States route, or state route, including reasonable access travel on all other roadways for a distance not to exceed one road mile from any interstate, United States route, or state route, not to exceed three saddlemounted vehicles, but which may include one
fullmount. Seventy-five feet for drive-away saddlemount vehicle transporter combinations and drive-away saddlemount with fullmount vehicle transporter combinations, when operated on any roadway not designated as an interstate, United States route, or state route, not to exceed three saddlemounted vehicles, but which may include one fullmount;
(6) Sixty-five feet for any other combination of vehicles coupled together, with or without load, (7) Forty-five feet for recreational vehicles;
(8) Forty feet long for all other vehicles except trailers and semitrailers, with or without a load. No vehicle shall have a height in excess of thirteen feet six inches, with or without load.
The Ohio dimension laws do not apply to fire engines, fire trucks, or other vehicles or apparatus belonging to any municipal corporation or to the volunteer fire department of any municipal corporation or used by such department in the discharge of its functions.
Additionally, the dimension laws do not apply to vehicles and pole trailers used in the transportation of wooden and metal poles, or to the transportation of pipes or well-drilling equipment, nor to farm machinery and equipment.
Further, Section 5577.15 specifically exempts certain tow truck movements from the weight and dimension laws.
Since Ohio laws are compliant with the Federal Regulations, they are in harmony with other states’ TS&W laws (Exhibit 1). The only exception is Michigan whose laws are grandfathered from the Federal regulations. Michigan Vehicle Code, Section 257.722, is based on axle loadings as follows: Maximum loads shall not exceed the number of pounds in the following provisions15
• 18,000 pounds on an axle with at least 9 feet of spacing from any other axle :
• 13,000 pounds per axle when axle spacing is less than 9 feet between two axles but more than 3.5 feet.
• Axles less than 3.5 feet apart shall not exceed 9,000 lbs. per axle.
15
50 Appendices
Appendix 2:
O
HIO
T
RANSPORTATION
T
ASK
F
ORCE
I
NTRODUCTIONAs we look to the not-so-distant future of the year 2020, when nearly 1.4 billion tons of freight, worth more than $2.8 trillion, is expected to be transported into, out of, within and through Ohio, there is a great need to address Ohio’s transportation system.
As a result, the Ohio Transportation Task Force set out to examine and evaluate the state’s ability to provide for the safe and efficient movement of freight within Ohio during the next two decades.
The Task Force consisted of 26 members jointly appointed by the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House. The Task Force held its first meeting September 19, 2007 and its last meeting December 12, 2007. Task Force members provided hours of testimony incorporating numerous recommendations for further study by the general assembly and Ohio Department of Transportation.
Within this report are recommendations submitted to the Task Force for future legislative initiatives and actions. While there are many topics and suggestions discussed by the Task Force throughout the following pages, the information found therein is not comprehensive, but merely an attempt to begin a much larger and needed discussion about Ohio’s transportation system within the framework identified by the Task Force.
The report is divided into topic areas. Under each topic, you will find a common theme or concern identified by the Task Force in need of additional study and consideration by members of the general assembly and ODOT.
O
VERVIEW OFO
HIO’
ST
RANSPORTATIONS
YSTEMOhio not only boasts America’s first traffic light, the first city to use police cars, and the first full-time automobile service station, but also includes one of the largest networks of highways and bridges in the nation.
The movement of freight and the anticipated increasing flow of freight will play a key role in Ohio’s economic engine. More than 950 million tons of freight, valued at more than $1.8 trillion, is already transported into, out of, within, and through Ohio. Sixty percent of this freight, as measured by weight, moves by truck. Rail accounts for 28 percent and water accounts for the remaining 12 to 13 percent.
Ohio ranks fourth in rail miles (5,354), and its rail industry ranks 4th in economic output ($1.3 billion). By weight, the leading commodities originating in Ohio and traveling by rail are metal products, coal, metallic ores, and farm products.
Three-fourths of the value of shipments originating from Ohio and nearly three-fourths of all shipments on a tonnage basis travel by truck. Ohio’s trucking industry ranks fourth among the fifty states based on total economic output of $5.2 billion.
Additionally, Ohio has the largest private and public air cargo facilities in the world, – DHL/Airborne Express and Rickenbacker in central Ohio. Moreover, with 700 miles of navigable waterways leading to the Gulf of Mexico and the St. Lawrence Seaway, the state ranks fifth in domestic tonnage.
52 Appendices
By weight, Ohio imports more freight than it exports (234 million tons versus 179 million tons), but by value, Ohio exports are greater than its imports ($409 billion in exports versus $336 billion in imports).
With this in mind, this Task Force has attempted to provide a comprehensive set of recommendations suggested by the various interested parties that appeared before the Task Force.
– Information provided by the Ohio Department of Transportation and Ohio Department of Development
I
NFRASTRUCTUREOhio has a transportation infrastructure that was built in the 1950s. The road system of yester day cannot handle the