Thursday, January 3, 2008

Study doesn't support truck ban

The New Year brings cold weather back to the Cincinnati area with a vengeance. As local residents begin to head back to work and school, the news is primarily focused on the Presidential hopefuls in general and the Iowa caucus specifically. In the midst of all of this, a critical issue in the local area has already become a footnote. The Ohio Indiana Kentucky (OKI) Regional Council of Governments released its study on banning trucks from the Brent Spence (I-75) bridge. The Brent Spence bridge had come under scrutiny after the bridge collapsed in Minnesota back in August. Many learned for the first time that while federal law requires regular inspections of bridges, there are no laws requiring states to repair bridges. The cumulative effects of road traffic, weather and time eroded the I-35W bridge to the point where it finally collapsed killing 13 people. "The problem is there, year after year after year. And they don't let you do anything about it," said Bart Andersen, a Minnesota Department of Transportation bridge inspector who took a leave of absence earlier this year to act as a union representative.

As I’ve written about before, the Brent Spence bridge is part of the I-75 system which runs from Detroit, MI to Miami, FL. According to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) estimates, I-75 is one of the busiest trucking routes in North America with truck traffic approaching six billion miles annually. In addition, more than 250 freight trains per day pass through or have destinations within the I-75 corridor. The interstate portions of this transportation system are nearly 50 years old and significant safety and capacity problems exist.

According to the OKI analysis, 5,200 fewer trucks would be traversing the Brent Spence Bridge during peak periods if the truck ban was implemented. The primary alternate route for northbound trucks would be I-275 east to I-471 north which 60 percent of the banned trucks would follow.

Most significantly, OKI’s research showed the safety impact of a truck ban would be minimal. On the Brent Spence Bridge, only one less severe crash (resulting in injuries or fatalities) would occur per year. For the entire study area, only two fewer severe crashes would occur annually, reducing the total from 528 to 526.

The communities around the Brent Spence bridge on both sides of the river applaud this decision as most agree a truck ban was only a partial solution to a much larger problem. What is desperately needed is a new bridge to accommodate the huge traffic the flows daily over the Brent Spence. The life expectancy for the Brent Spence is about 10-15 more years at which time local planners hope to have a new bridge funded and under construction.

What the Brent Spence situation shows us is how long it takes to solve a impending problem that we know of but lack the funding and ability to correct in the short-term. While the OKI study makes the case that diverting truck traffic would not effect the number of severe accidents on the bridge, as many are already saying it only takes one accident if you are in it! The problem of course is there is no way to tell how severe that one accident will be, it could be the one that completely demolishes a section of the bridge. The accident could happen during a snow storm with a huge multiple care pile-up. For those unfamiliar with the bridge, the lanes are extremely narrow with traffic flowing one-way on two different road decks. North bound traffic is routed along the lower road deck which is akin to driving through a tunnel. There is no room to swerve to avoid a collision without immediately crossing into other traffic and hence compounding the magnitude of the accident.

Obviously there is no quick solution to any infrastructure problem but motorists traveling the Brent Spence bridge need to exercise extreme caution. Too often people speed or drive erratically (especially under the influence of drugs or alcohol) which drastically increases the likelihood of an accident. Hopefully the OKI study will be used to increase the design and construction of a replacement bridge for the Brent Spence and not seen as an excuse to delay a desperately needed solution to a critical infrastructure challenge.

No comments: