(Lombard/St. Louis/ Ivanhoe) Intersection No. 2 (Philadelphia/ Ivanhoe) Intersection No. 3 (Columbia/Portland/ Columbia Way) Intersection No. 4 (Burgard and Lombard from Columbia to Terminal Road) Signalization, Curbs and Sidewalks, Median, and Paving
Signalization, Curbs and Sidewalks, Median, and Paving
Signalization, Curbs and Sidewalks, Median, and Paving
Signalization, Curbs and Sidewalks, and Paving
$ 978,947.68
$ 106,904.25
$ 703,000.86
RECOMMENDATIONS
CHAPTER4
Load Limit
No action is recommended, at this time. Not enough information is available to fully understand the consequences of such an action.
A city-wide18,000 lbs. GVW limitation on local deliveries has been recommended as one way to reduce the adverse impacts of trucks on neighborhoods or other sensitive areas. In effect, heavy trucks and some medium sized trucks would not be allowed for local deliveries. Non-local trucks would continue to be regulated as they are now, and would be directed to regional truck routes.
A reduction in the size of vehicles for local deliveries would significantly reduce the impacts of trucks, inasmuch as those impacts are related to size. Less road wear on the local street system would occur and some reduction in noise could occur, on a per truck basis. The intimidation factor of trucks, which can be very much larger than passenger vehicles and even more disproportionate relative to pedestrians, would also be reduced.
There is also a potential for negative impacts from such a limitation. The full scope of which would require further study to fully identify. More deliveries, using more medium and light trucks would be just one of the results of a weight limit on local deliveries. An unknown number of local service providers would be directly affected in the way they do business. Trucks in excess of 18,000 lbs. GVW are now in daily use to make fuel deliveries to gas stations, heating oil deliveries, garbage collection, most deliveries to retailers, and UPS deliveries. Trucks in excess of 18,000 lbs. GVW may also dominate other common local deliveries, as yet unidentified.
TABLE 3
The Gross Vehicle Weight of Some Potentially affected Vehicles, for Comparison Purposes Only
UPS Delivery (single axle) Home Heating Oil Delivery Tri-Met Bus (40-foot, single axle)
Garbage Collection (compactor equipped)
Garbage Collection (dual wheeled, single axle pickup)
10,000 to 18,000 lbs. * 36,000 to 52,000 lbs. * 37,972 lbs.
50,000 lbs. (32,000 lbs. empty) 8,6000 lbs.
* A range of GVW is given to include the variety of trucks performing this service. The range given may not include every truck used for these purposes, it is given only to indicate the typical weight range of that category of truck.
CHAPTER4
What would be the result of using smaller trucks? Gasoline delivery to service stations can be used as a very general example. A heavy truck with two trailers is the typical method of delivery of gasoline to service stations. Such trucks weigh in at up to 105,000 lbs. GVW and carry 11,000 gallons of gasoline. However, if trucks in excess of 18,000 lbs. are prohibited a service station will need to receive more deliveries, keeping in mind that in each truck load a significant percent of the weight is the truck itself. Smaller trucks also have a higher truck to load total weight ratio. Delivery with smaller trucks comes with the following concerns:
• Increased exposure to unloading activities at the delivery site (noise, light, smell, safety), the impacts will occur over a greater number of events.
• Increased vehicle miles of travel, although trucks are exempt from regional and state requirements to reduce VMT there would still be an increase in the number of trucks, the number of truck trips and the vehicle miles of travel.
• Increased fuel, labor and transshipment costs.
• Similar changes would happen at virtually all service stations and in every other situation (more or less) that would limit trucks to 18,000 lbs. GVW for local deliveries where a larger truck is now being used.
There would be substantial costs to be incurred by many private trucking firms, such as the purchase of new trucks, redistribution of loads from out-of-area heavy trucks to lighter trucks, and not least, more drivers and load handlers. Intermodal facilities would need more land and/or
expanded truck facilities, and additional land would be needed for the transfer and redistribution of goods from truck-to-truck for Portland deliveries. The full economic impact to local firms and to Portland’s distribution economy is unknown.
Lastly, an attempt by the State of New Jersey to relegate all heavy and non- local trucks to regional truck routes has resulted in litigation by representatives of the trucking industry. The Federal Highway Administration believes that the State of New Jersey will be unsuccessful and have their recent regulation overturned in court. (See: Appendix C)
Hazardous Materials Study
No action is recommended; the City does not regulate the movement of hazardous materials.
One Advisory Committee recommendation was for a review and analysis of the methods of handling, sizing and routing hazardous materials. However, the City does not control the movement of hazardous materials. Hazardous materials are defined and regulated by the federal government (CFR 49-100 to CFR 49-177). The federal government also controls the movement of, and regulates the packaging and labeling of hazardous materials. Regulations are applied based on the nature and quantity of hazardous materials.
Other regulations for the movement of hazardous materials are applied by the State of Oregon, including prohibition of access in specific situations presenting a hazard to essential roadways, such as the I-26 (Sunset) Tunnel, and the railroad crossing near NW Balboa and US 30.