Truck weight compromise
Editorial

Truck weight compromise


If ocean waves can turn solid rock into grains of sand, maybe persistent requests can get the federal government to lift its truck weight restriction on I-95 in Maine. Or maybe if the request is made in a slightly different way, with conditions, the feds will listen.

Sen. Susan Collins has hit upon a fresh approach to the truck weight issue, and is asking her colleagues to support a one-year pilot project that would exempt Maine’s interstate highways from the law.

For far too long, trucks that weigh between 80,000 and 100,000 pounds are forced to leave the interstate north of Augusta and travel local highways, and even through downtown Bangor, for destination points east and north. The rule works just fine in protecting the hefty federal investment in the interstate highway system — less damage to the road surface. But it works far less well for Maine’s secondary and tertiary roads. Those heavy trucks trying to negotiate stop signs and right-angle turns is clearly a safety threat to pedestrians and drivers of passenger vehicles.

The one-year pilot program, proposed by Sen. Collins, could be used to generate some facts in the debate between Maine and federal officials. With a good study, some important questions could be answered, such as: How much damage is being done to I-95 by the big rigs? How does their absence from local roads affect the accident rates on those roads? And less quantifiable, but also important, do businesses benefit from having goods move to and from markets more quickly by using the interstate highway system?

The potential threat to the road surface of I-95 from bearing the weight of 100,000-pound trucks should not be dismissed as inconsequential. But other parts of the system, in Maine south of Augusta and in other states, do allow those trucks. If damage is significant from the heavy trucks using the highway north of Augusta, it will become apparent during the one-year pilot program. If there is no significant damage, that, too is vital information.

Twenty years from now, more freight may be moved by ship or railroad, and federal and state policy should reflect these modes as priorities. But for now, trucks are the primary means by which goods are carried to, from and through Maine, and I-95 is the conduit designed for them, not the two-lane country roads that radiate from Bangor.

Sen. Collins and others should continue to work to convince federal officials that safety and efficiency support this change.

Not registered? Click here
E-mail this
Print this
Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

Bangordailynews.com is pleased to offer a forum for readers to react to our stories, discuss them and provide additional information. We are reluctant to delete comments, but do reserve that right for those who abuse our forum. For more on using this site, please see our terms of service.

The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. What does that mean specifically? Here are some guidelines (see more):

Comments
10 comments on this item

If ocean waves can turn solid rock into grains of sand, then the weight of trucks can destroy roads. The DOT has eliminated 75% of its road repair projects.

The best remedy is to lower the truck weight limits on maine roads to 60,000 lbs gross.

The city of Bangor, through it's mouthpiece (The BDN) is being selfish myopic, and unreasonable with it's continuing demand that the State increase allowed weight limits on the Interstate.

Maine increased weight limits on it's roads above the Federal maximum, to accommodate the forest products industry, and I have a flash for the BDN, trucks are hauling their 100,000 pound loads where the interstate doesn't go. Rt 189 in front of my house is returning to it's gravel dirt state. Route 1 at the Edmonds Whiting line is dangerous, and the project slated to fix it has been canceled. Routes 192, and 191 are also in a very degraded state.

How about this for a "pilot project"; Reduce the weight limit on Maine's secondary roads to the Federal limit of 80,000 pounds for a year and see if there is less damage. My proposal seems more reasonable in light of the DOT's canceled repair projects.

We pay gas tax down here, lots of it, and we deserve passable roads just like the citizens of Bangor.

According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, Maine is 48th in standing among the 50 states in volume of state commerce that moves by rail. 48th? What is the deal here?? From what I understand, railroads are booming in this country. Why are we doing so poorly? And if you go through the website for the Maine Motor Transport Association, you will find the statistic that, " Trucks transport 94 percent of total manufactured tonnage in the state or 218,216 tons per day. 84 percent of communities depend exclusively on trucks to move their goods."

Don't get me wrong, we need a healthy and viable trucking industry. But why are we so heavily dependent on trucks?

Why no railraods? If I recall the dems supported by the BDN just loved tearing up and converting railbeds into 'trails' for the elite! ;=}

YES! MAKE THEM TAKE THE PIKE. MAKE ALL OF THEM TAKE THE PIKE!!

Big trucks are a big problem, including far under 100,000 lbs. In Saco, which is along Route One where I live there isn't a logging truck in sight and our roads are still turning to shreds and people are getting killed. Huge trucks of every variety are given our local routes making it very uncomfortable to walk down the street, causing congestion and pollution, shaking our houses to the foundation. You can see the damage to the roads and brick chimneys buckling. In my home, the windows crack, and break in the corners from the constant vibrations. Biddeford is the same.

We also have a regional incinerator to deal with, the infamous MERC (Maine Energy Recovery, haha) owned by Casella. They want 50 million dollars to give back our town, which was stolen through a spot zoning loophole that became the whole new law. Imagine, enormous commercial garbage trucks from a whole region on top of the usual 14 and 18 wheelers shaking your house every day.

People in The County are used to driving on roads with wheel track ruts that collect water during rain storms and make for some interesting hydroplane driving. Those wheel ruts and hydroplaning would be more of a problem at higher interstate speeds. I'm not so sure if those ruts would turn up in one year on the interstate or if they actually take longer to develop. If they do develop, they will cause accidents at 65-70 mph. Everything in life is a trade-off.

It is time the people of Maine wake up. The feds are not allowing trucks in excess of 80,000# on their highways because: 1) They are unsafe or at the least less safe 2) They do increased damage to surfaces. Lowering their limit to 80,000# on secondary roads instead of increasing the limit on I-95 will result in 1) more jobs being created for Maine truck drivers 2)all roads being made safer 3) Wear and tear of roads being lowered. To put this tempest into its rightful perspective shows the extent that our politicians are beholden, not to the people, but to the corporate wheeler dealers both from this state and away. Senator Collins knows this. Do you?

In response to coopah. If the weight limit was reduced to 60,000 pounds you wouldnt be able to afford to buy anything. Since the average truck weighs between 35,000 and 40,000 pounds and the truck gets paid by the ton that would only be about 10 ton of product on the truck. The trucking rates would have to go up to compensate the difference to the truckers. In return your cost would have to go up to compensate that. For example a log truck hauls about 30 tons of wood to the mill. If you reduce that to 10 ton that would be a loss of about $3000.00 for the truck for that load of wood. In some cases it would be even more of a loss. How would you as a consumer like to pay that. Think about that for a minute.

In response to HarryHSnyderIII. Read my response to Coopah first. Second think about this. We truckers also have to pay a heavy highway use tax and in return we cant use the highway at all. How fair is that. We also pay high fuel taxes everytime we fuel up which is more often than you do since we only get about 4mpg with a truck. Its not the trucks fault that when the state fixes roads they dont do it right. They just paint new hot top over the old hot top and dont fix any thing under the hot top. That is how most of the roads down there are fixed they are just painted with hot top. As far as keeping them out of Bangor its more than just roads. Its also safety to people. We have pedestrians walking out infront of us because the state has convinced them that they have the right of way which they shouldnt. Its easier to stop walking than stop a moving vehicle. There is also the traffic that is in the way. Most of the right turn we make is from the left lane cause there is not enough room to turn from the right lane. When we go into the left lane to turn right cars pass us on the right where we cant see them. You should come along for a ride with a trucker someday and see what its all about. Your not seeing the whole picture from your front porch on Rt 189. Let me know when you want to learn the whole deal and you can go with me for a day and see what its all about.

In response to Steamship. Everything here is spread out over the whole state. Nothing is centralized. Rail travel is expensive and slow. But how do you get the goods from the rail to the stores. I havent seen many walmarts with rail road tracks through the parking lots.

You must be logged in to post a comment. click here to log in.

Powered by: Creative Circle Advertising Solutions, Inc.