Regional Boards > Great Lakes and Ohio Valley

Indiana plans truck-only I-70 highway study

(1/5) > >>

CLEVELAND (AP) Indiana is among four states studying a proposal to create separate lanes for commercial trucks traveling along 800 miles of Interstate 70.

Officials from Ohio, Illinois and Missouri also have signed a development agreement that includes using $5 million in federal funds to study what would be the nation's first truck-only interstate corridor. Federal officials have designated the busy stretch of road as a "Corridor of the Future," making the states eligible for assistance.

Supporters say the plan originally submitted to U.S. transportation officials in 2007 would increase safety and decrease traffic congestion.

Truckers say they are wary that a multibillion-dollar project to create truck lanes could be funded through tolls.

Chances are that this project would have to be funded through tolls and I'm not sure if the truck drivers will be the only ones paying them :nod: :poke:

NO MORE TOLLS PLEASE!!! The economy is bad enough without having to pay out more money.

Bad plan in my opinion. A truck-only corridor is way more expensive than a regular widening, you need a whole extra set of overpasses, bridges, tunnels, ramps, etc. I believe the idea also showed up in Missouri along the I-70 corridor.

Revive 755:
Yes the idea showed up first in Missouri.  I wonder if the multi-state study will be as defective as the Missouri one, such as seemingly ignoring issues with trucks accessing weight stations and rest areas, and the safety issues with trucks weaving across the mixed use lanes to access them?  The Missouri I-70 study had the truck lanes costing at least half a billion more than six laning, with the cost very likely to further increase.  Truck lanes from Kansas City to Wheeling will have even bigger cost differences, since they will need a either a new Missouri River crossing at St. Charles - which is not otherwise needed at this time - and a new Mississippi River bridge - which if they use I-270, is already needed for all traffic.  Or are they going to screw over everyone else and take lanes away from car traffic?

Furthermore, I doubt they are going to seriously consider a rail alternative, which would be better for this length of project since I've read it is more feasible for 500 miles or greater, and somewhat less than 500 when diesel cost more.  I also think these lanes will be an excuse to ignore general traffic congestion, which is cheaper to solve with adding another conventional lane or two, by saying they are adding capacity for all, but are really only adding it for trucks.  At a certain point they will need more than two general purpose lanes, yet the space needed will be absent thanks to the truck lanes.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version