News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

I-35E in St. Paul: Legal grounding for truck restrictions?

Started by Revive 755, April 28, 2010, 02:10:51 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Revive 755

I'm looking for information on how I-35E in St. Paul is allowed to have trucks restricted, but is yet allowed to remain in the interstate system.  Main purpose I have is to theoretically look at banning trucks from the I-55 ramps to and from the Poplar Street Bridge in St. Louis.  So far it seems that this ban is the result of a court settlement, but I haven't found much more than this.  Any info is greatly appreciated.


TheStranger

The one comparable that comes to mind out here is I-580 along the MacArthur Freeway which has had a truck ban for some time - but this dates back to when the route was just US 50 and as such, was grandfathered in (with 880/238 as the suggested truck route instead).
Chris Sampang

74/171FAN

I-66 has a truck ban in VA inside the Beltway but that was due to a settlement with Arlington County who didn't want the road built.
I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

Alps

I-278 has a truck restriction in NYC where it had to use Grand Central Parkway.  I imagine that truck restrictions are just considered a substandard design element like every other exception.

froggie

QuoteI'm looking for information on how I-35E in St. Paul is allowed to have trucks restricted, but is yet allowed to remain in the interstate system.  Main purpose I have is to theoretically look at banning trucks from the I-55 ramps to and from the Poplar Street Bridge in St. Louis.  So far it seems that this ban is the result of a court settlement, but I haven't found much more than this.  Any info is greatly appreciated.

That's exactly what it was.  A court settlement.  I don't have the nitty-gritty details (MnDOT would), but in a nutshell, the settlement allowed MnDOT to build the road in return for narrowing it to 4 lanes (the original plan was 6 lanes) and both the truck restrictions and the requirement for a 45 MPH speed limit.

J N Winkler

An interesting question is whether granting of a truck ban has to be linked to the availability of a bypass route on the same system which can handle trucks (similar to the requirements governing exceptions to minimum Interstate bridge clearances).
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.