HomeMy WebLinkAboutMnDOT- Trucks in the Stillwater Area August, 1990 1
r
1
r _
r
r
r
TRUCKS IN THE STILLWATER AREA
1
August, 1990
1
Minnesota Department of Transportation
1
1
1
1
I-
1
I
I
1
1
CONTENTS
SUMMARY
II . HEAVY COMMERCIAL VOLUMES IN DOWNTOWN STILLWATER
III . TRUCK DIVERSION
' IV. SAFETY
V. TRUCK INSPECTIONS
1
LIST OF TABLES
1 . HEAVY COMMERCIAL VEHICLES ON THE STILLWATER BRIDGE
' 2. HEAVY COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IN THE STILLWATER AREA: TH 36 AND
TH 95 NORTH OF JUNCTION
3. HEAVY COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IN THE STILLWATER AREA: TH 36,
WEST OF JUNCTION WITH OSGOOD
i
1
1
I
SUMMARY
1 An important concern expressed during the draft EIS comment period
was the role of trucks in contributing to the congestion in
downtown Stillwater. In particular, some observers felt that
1 trucks were using the Stillwater Bridge as a means to avoid the St.
Croix Weight Scales, located on west-bound I-94, across the river
from Hudson.
' Several themes emerge from the data available on trucks in the
Stillwater area. First, while the number of heavy commercial
vehicles crossing the Stillwater-Houston bridge more than doubled
between 1982 and 1990, they remain a small percentage of overall
traffic, lower than on comparable roads elsewhere in Minnesota.*
While the contribution of large trucks to the Stillwater congestion
is disproportionate to their numbers, their overall impact on the
traffic problem is relatively minor. During counts taken in both
1982 and in 1990, semis comprised less than 1 percent of average
daily traffic (ADT) on the drawbridge. Removing semis from the
bridge and downtown Stillwater is not a principal , long-term
solution to the area's congestion problems.
' There is little doubt that some trucks are using Stillwater-
Houlton and other crossings to avoid the I-94 weight scales.
According to a study done after the scales opened in 1987,
' avoidance was greatest immediately after the facility opened,
after which truck volumes on westbound I-94 began to recover.
Because the relative number of large trucks using the Stillwater-
Houlton bridge is so low to begin with, the addition of trucks
diverting from 1-94 has a minimal impact on congestion.
There is reason for concern that trucks which are avoiding the
scales are doing so because of inadequate equipment, or other
deficiencies. In addition, semis rumbling through the center of
Stillwater detract from its historical ambiance. It is probable
that large trucks in downtown Stillwater are more of a safety and
aesthetic issue than a major congestion factor.
HEAVY COMMERCIAL VOLUMES IN DOWNTOWN STILLWATER
According to the recently completed 1990 16 hour weekday count,
heavy commercial vehicles account for 3.4 percent of the total
traffic counted crossing the Stillwater bridge (see table 1) .
Data from the two other TH 36 survey sites listed in tables 2 and
' 3 indicates the percentage of heavy commercial vehicles has held
steady at slightly more than 4 percent of total traffic volume in
recent years.
* The term "heavy commercial" includes buses, and trucks with at
least. 2 axles and 6 tires; semis constitute one category of heavy
commercial vehicles. Pickups and panel trucks are not included.
' 1
1
TABLE 1
' HEAVY COMMERCIAL VEHICLES ON THE STILLWATER BRIDGE *
(Data From Actual Weekday Counts and ADT Calculations)
DATA TYPE 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990
Weekday Truck Counts
(7 of Total Vehicles) 2.9% 3.4%
Weekday Counts
(# of Trucks) 273 565
' Trucks as % of ADT 2.61 ---
I
ADT (Trucks) 322 ---
Weekday Semi Counts
' (% of Total Vehicles) .97. .9%
Weekday Counts
(# of Semis) 87 158
Semis as 7. of ADT .87. ---
ADT (Semis) 103 ---
Weekday Counts
(Total Vehicles) 9500 16800
ADT
(Total Vehicles) 12200 16100
* As used here, "truck" refers to all heavy commercial vehicles,
not just semis.
All numbers include vehicle flow in both directions. The weekday
figures are based on 16 hour counts done from 6 A.M. to 10 P.M.
The average daily traffic (ADT) figures are calculated on the raw
weekday count data, assuming an average 24 hour traffic flow for
' the entire week , with adjustments made for seasonal variations.
Data is not available for every year.
' Heavy commercial data from the 1990 counts has not yet been
converted into ADT figures. The 1990 weekday total vehicle count
is higher than ADT because count was done during summer, when
traffic is heavier.
2
I
1
I
TABLE 2
HEAVY COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IN THE STILLWATER AREA:
TH 36 AND TH 95 NORTH OF JUNCTION
DATA TYPE 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990
' Weekday Truck Counts
(% of Total Vehicles) 4.5% 4.3%
' Weekday Counts
(# of Trucks) 487 668
' Trucks as 7 of ADT 4.4% 4.3%
ADT (Trucks) 698 469
t
TABLE 3
HEAVY COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IN THE STILLWATER AREA:
TH 36, WEST OF JUNCTION WITH OSGOOD *
' DATA TYPE 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990
Weekday Truck Counts
(7 of Total ) 4.5% 4.3%
Weekday Counts
' (# of Trucks) 770 968
Trucks as % of ADT 4.2%
' ADT (Trucks) 606 ---
* Data From Actual Weekday Counts and ADT Calculations.
Information given at bottom of table 1 also applies here.
3
1
1
For comparison purposes, the 1988 state-wide heavy commercial
II percentage of total Average Daily Traffic (ADT) was 10.5 percent
for rural principal arterials which are not part of the
interstate highway system. The 1988 figure for comparable urban
routes (which is the most closely analogous to Stillwater) was
II 5.7 percent of ADT.
In spite of the relatively low percentage of heavy commercial
1 traffic in the Stillwater area, the number of heavy commercial
vehicles counted crossing the bridge rose from 273 to 565 a day
between 1982 and 1990, an increase of 107 percent. By
1 comparison, ADT over the bridge increased by 32 percent during
the same period, an average annual increase of 4 percent a year.
While these numbers are not directly comparable because one is
based on raw count numbers and the other on adjusted ADT, they do
II suggest that heavy commercial traffic has increased significantly
faster than traffic as a whole.
I The types of heavy commercial vehicles which have increased most
rapidly , however, are not those which have the greatest potential
for adverse impacts on traffic congestion. The number of semis
1 passing over the bridge during the 1982 to 1990 counts, for
example, increased by 82 percent. By contrast, busses increased
by 318 percent during the study period, 3 axle trucks increased
by 217 percent, and 2 axle/6 tire trucks increased by 101
IIpercent.
In 1982, semis constituted 32 percent of the total heavy
I commercial vehicles crossing the river, a figure which had
declined to 28 percent by 1990. The share of the total weekday
traffic volume occupied by semis increased slightly between 1982
and 1990, but they remained less than 1 percent of all vehicles
1 crossing the bridge. These numbers suggest that semi diversion
caused by the opening of the I-94 weigh station in 1987 has not
played a major role in increasing congestion in downtown
II Stillwater.
According to the 1990 16 hour traffic count, truck activity on
II the bridge remains relatively constant between 6 A.M. and 6 P.M. ,
when use begins to taper off. According to the most recent
count, peak volumes occurred between 10 A.M. and 2 P.M. , when a
total of 196 heavy commercial vehicles passed over the bridge,
1 including 60 semis (an average of 15 semis per hour) . The most
common type of semi during the peak period--and throughout the
day--is the 5 axle variety. During the 1982 count, the peak
1 truck period occurred during the same late morning and early
afternoon hours as in 1990. One difference between the two
periods is that in 1990, the heavy truck period began earlier in
II the morning and extended later into the afternoon than
previously.
1 4
11
i
In downtown Stillwater, the comparatively low percentage of heavy
commercial traffic in general , and semis in particular, is
partially offset by geometric problems, particularly at the
Chestnut and Main intersection. Large trucks have trouble making
the turns, slowing traffic. Semis occasionally jump the curb,
and sometimes even hit buildings. In addition, truck noise and
exhaust has an aesthetic impact on downtown, making the area less
pleasant for pedestrians and merchants. It is possible that the
flow of large trucks through downtown Stillwater is also having
an adverse effect on the City 's historical buildings due to
vibrations and air pollution.
Removing semis from the bridge would provide a measure of relief
to the transportation difficulties experienced in Stillwater, and
furnish safety and aesthetic benefits. Temporary restrictions on
semi traffic could serve to slow the deterioration of the
Stillwater traffic situation until a new crossing can be
constructed. However a semi ban or restrictions would not make a
major, long-term contribution toward relieving the total
congestion problem, as semis remain a very low percentage of
total traffic. Because semis are so readily seen and heard in
11 the crowded downtown area, it is probable that they are often
perceived to be a more significant contributor to the congestion
problem than they really are.
In terms of congestion-producing potential , the effects of a
complete ban on semis from the bridge would be quickly negated by
annual increases of other types of vehicles. Assuming for this
analysis that each semi produces the same congestion as four
cars, on-going traffic increases would push congestion back to
current levels in less than two years.
An additional consideration is that both TH 36 and STH 35/64 are
designated truck routes in Minnesota and Wisconsin. Mn/DOT
classifies TH 36 as part of its Market Artery System, which is a
network of high priority truck routes. In Wisconsin, STH 64 is
designated as a multi-lane connector under Wisc/DOT's Corridors
2020 Highway Economic Development Plan. One of the principal
reasons Congress authorized construction of the existing bridge
in 1929 was to "facilitate interstate commerce. "
The permanent removal of semis from these roads would have
important economic impacts, and is not a long-term transportation
option. For businesses in Wisconsin towns such as Somerset and
New Richmond, the Stillwater-Houlton crossing is an important
' conduit of economic activity. According to a 1988 report
published by the West Central Regional Planning Association (The
Need For STH 35/64 Highway Improvement) , "the economic
1 development efforts of the communities along STH 35/64 have been
hurt by the current conditions on the roadway. "
11 5
t
1
I
Stillwater also relies heavily on trucks to ship goods in and out
I of the City . In the event of a ban on semis which do not have
local business, it would be difficult to differentiate between
trucks with destinations in Stillwater, and those which are
IIpassing through.
TRUCK DIVERSION
IIt is widely believed that some trucks are using the Stillwater
bridge as a means for avoiding the weight scales on the Minnesota
II side of the I-94 crossing. In a 1988 Mn/DOT report (entitled
Traffic Impacts of establishing Permanent Weigh Stations) , truck
data was collected for a 19 month period, beginning 7 months
prior to the opening of the weigh station. .
IIn the five month period following the opening of the weigh
station in July , 1987, it is estimated that approximately 300
I westbound 5 axle semis per day were avoiding the scales. This
means that numbers were down approximately 20 to 25 percent from
previous volumes. During the last month of the study period
I (June, 1988) , 5 axle semi volumes on westbound I-94 had recovered
to the point where they were down about 15 percent.
The data for all trucks other than 5 axle semis also showed a
I drop in volume after the weigh station opened, but not as great.
Initially, volumes were down 10 to 15 percent (about 100 trucks
per day ) . Again, there was a recovery at the end of the study
I period, and after the scales had been open nearly a year, volumes
had actually climbed above pre-station levels.
II The recovery in truck numbers toward the end of the study period
suggests that the opening of the weigh station acted as an
incentive for many truck owners who used I-94 to get their
vehicles and documents up to compliance standards. Trucks which
II use the I-94 corridor regularly likely have an economic incentive
to ensure that their documents and vehicles meet regulations,
rather than continue diverting to another crossing. It probably
I does not make sense for most frequent, long-term operators to
continually waste time and gas to avoid the scales.
I' Because of pre-existing data collection scales about 3 miles west
of the new St. Croix Weigh Station, the effect of the station's
opening on truck weights could also be analyzed. Truck weights
were more erratic than volumes, but they also showed a drop after
IIthe station opened, in some cases up to 25 percent.
While the St. Croix Weigh Station is inconvenient to by-pass,
II truckers do have a number of options. For most trucks traveling
along I-94 from west-central Wisconsin to the Twin Cities,
Stillwater-Houlton would be the most obvious alternative
11 6
1
I
crossing. The detour north on STH 35 from Hudson to Houlton is
Iapproximately eight miles.
There is another bridge about 15 miles south of I-94 at Prescott,
but weight restrictions are in effect until the new crossing is
I completed. Further downstream on the Mississippi , the crossing
at Red Wing could be an alternative for some trucks. Some
vehicles coming from the Chicago or Milwaukee area likely divert
Ion I-90 across western Wisconsin, crossing into southeastern
Minnesota, and proceeding northwest into the Twin Cities on TH
52. According to the I-94 truck diversion report, it is probably
II large 5 axle semis that utilize the I-90 detour, as smaller
trucks generally do not travel such long distances.
Delays caused by the St. Croix Weigh Station are not the primary
II cause of truck diversions. The weigh station can quickly screen
vehicles, directing them to bypass the station, to proceed to the
scales, or go to the inspection area. Furthermore, the fear of
I being caught over weight is also probably not a major motivating
factor for avoiding the weight scales. According to the Mn/DOT
1-94 diversion report,
I it is the impression of some members of the State
Patrol that it is generally trucks with safety
violations on the equipment which are avoiding the
I scales. They do not feel that it is an overweight
issue.
Truck violation data collected by the State Patrol along TH 36 in
Washington County generally supports this viewpoint. According
to violation records collected from 1980 through April of 1990,
the most frequently encountered type of truck violation is
I driving without Minnesota registration, or with expired
registration. During this period, the Patrol recorded 287
instances of this type of registration violation. Out of state
I motor carriers can not legally operate in Minnesota without
making arrangements that typically involve registering their
vehicles and Interstate Commerce Commission authorization with
the state. They must also purchase a road use tax license.
I/ After registration, the next most frequently listed violation
type was illegal use of plates, which was cited 32 times. This
I was followed by an inadequate daily driver log (24 violations)
and, in fourth place, weight infractions for over 34,000 pounds
on a tandem axle (23 violations) . Citations for no cab card
IIranked fifth among violation types (19 violations) .
During the summer of 1990, the Minnesota State Patrol performed
an intensive two-day truck inspection in the Stillwater area
I along TH 36. According to aerial surveillance which was done
during the inspections, some trucks were seen suspiciously
detouring north off of I-94 on the Wisconsin side of the river in
II 7
I
1
II
order to cross at Stillwater. All drivers stopped were
I questioned about their departure point and destination. The
Patrol estimates that 7 percent of the 614 trucks which were
stopped appeared to be avoiding the I-94 scales, according to the
information provided by the drivers and inferences made by the
II inspectors. Even if half of all semis using the bridge were
diverting from the I-94 scales--which is highly unlikely--they
would still constitute less than half of one percent of total
IItraffic over the bridge.
To summarize, the new weight scales on I-94 do provide an
I incentive for some trucks to detour around them. As one of
several possible alternatives, the Stillwater bridge receives
some of this additional traffic, although it is an extremely
II small percentage of the total traffic. While trucks diverting
through Stillwater from I-94 contribute to the traffic problem,
the overall effects on congestion are very minor. It is likely
that truck diversion through Stillwater is more of a safety issue
Ithan a congestion concern.
SAFETY
From 1984 to 1989, there were a total of 27 accidents involving
trucks on TH 36 in Washington County. Of this total , 21
II accidents involved property damage, and 6 caused injuries. There
were no fatalities.
11 In the period from 1976 to 1983, there were 71 accidents on the
same stretch of TH 36. Of these, 55 resulted in property damage,
16 in injuries, with no fatalities.
INot included in these study periods was a widely publicized
accident caused by a truck which ran a red light on TH 36 in
February, 1990. The accident resulted in 4 fatalities near the
I intersection with Oasis Avenue. The truck had recently been
cited for numerous safety violations.
II Safety problems created by trucks are particularly acute in
downtown Stillwater. According to a report completed on
pedestrian safety by the Minnesota Department of Public Safety in
II the early 1980s, the City of Stillwater has half of its
pedestrian accidents in the downtown area. Some pedestrians have
been killed attempting to cross crowded downtown streets. The
presence of large trucks in the downtown area amplifies the
11 already serious conflict between vehicles and pedestrians. In
addition to safety issues, the passage of large commercial
vehicles through Stillwater makes the city a generally less
II inviting place for pedestrians, a factor which could have an
adverse impact on Stillwater"s tourist industry .
1 8
II
I
II
Truck safety issues have recently been addressed at both the
II state and Federal levels of government; standards are getting
tighter. In 1990, the Minnesota Legislature passed a law which
creates a commercial vehicle inspection program. By April 1,
1991, all vehicles in the affected vehicle classes must display a
I decal proving that a certified inspection was performed. In
addition, all drivers must perform a daily pre-trip inspection,
and keep records of the condition of safety equipment on the
11 vehicle. The previous year, the Minnesota Legislature passed
commercial driver license legislation, which brought the state
into compliance with the Federal Commercial Vehicle Act of 1986.
II As of December 21 , 1990, minimum Federal anti-drug standards will
be in effect for interstate motor carriers, including the testing
of drivers for the use of controlled substances.
TRUCK INSPECTIONS
II According to Mn/DOT's Office of Motor Carrier Safety and
Compliance, 15-20 percent of trucks stopped and examined during
Mn/DOT's surprise inspections around the state (trucks are
II screened before being inspected) have safety defects serious
enough to warrant taking the vehicle off the road. According to
information from Mn/DOT inspections, the percentage of seriously
deficient vehicles on TH 36 in Stillwater appears to be similar
11 to the statewide average.
An important caveat, however, is that inspection data is
difficult to compare, as conditions can not be controlled very
easily. Because of good communications, violators are often able
to learn about inspections quickly, and take alternative routes
11 to avoid detection. Furthermore, there can be significant
variations in manpower and conditions between inspections. Data
between agencies can vary considerably as well . The Minnesota
State Patrol , for example, typically puts a higher percentage of
1 vehicles out of service during its checks than Mn/DOT inspectors.
In November, 1989, Mn/DOT sharply increased its truck inspection
II program, one result of a new emphasis on highway safety within
the Department. Since then, Mn/DOT has inspected 4,000 vehicles,
double the number from the previous year. Periodic surprise
checks are performed in the Stillwater area. Mn/DOT's Program
II Management Division recently hired six new people to help with
truck inspections. In addition to recent cooperative efforts
with Wisconsin, Mn/DOT has discussed joint inspection efforts
Iwith DOT representatives in Iowa and North Dakota.
On June 5th and 6th, 1990, Mn/DOT and the State Highway Patrol
1 conducted a joint surprise inspection on both sides of TH 36,
near County Road 5. During the inspections, Mn/DOT officials
inspected 99 trucks; 197 warnings and 37 citations were issued,
some vehicles and drivers receiving more than one. Of the
II 9
I
I/
vehicles inspected, 16 (17 percent) had violations which were
serious enough to remove them from service, a figure which is
consistent with Mn/DOT' s state-wide average. One driver had an
out of service violation.
rIt is worth noting that the State Highway Patrol had a much
higher out of service ratio during these inspections; nearly 56
percent of the 59 trucks the State Patrol inspected during the
two day effort were put out of service. When inspection reports
from Mn/DOT and the State Patrol were combined, the percentage of
inspected vehicles which received out of service violations came
to 30 percent
On June 7th, 1990, there was a major spot inspection program
along both sides of the Minnesota-Wisconsin border. This was a
two-state endeavor, with personnel from the DOTs, state patrol
officers, and county sheriff offices. Inspection locations
included the Stillwater area (WI side) , Prescott (WI side) , Red
' Wing (MN and WI sides) , St. Croix Falls (WI side) , Osceola (MN
side) , and the Hudson area (WI ) . The percentage of inspected
trucks with violations serious enough to warrant taking them out
of service was slightly lower than the combined numbers from TH
36 in Stillwater. Out of 283 inspection reports received from
Wisc/DOT, Mn/DOT, and the MN Department of Public Safety, 72
vehicles (25 percent) had out of service violations. A total of
7 drivers had out of service violations.
Another series of surprise checks occurred on July 31 and August
1, 1990, when the Minnesota State Patrol performed an extensive
truck inspection along TH 36 in the Stillwater area. Of the 321
trucks which were inspected, 27 percent were putout of service,
11 similar to the results of the Minnesota-Wisconsin multiple border
crossing inspection.
Even with the additional attention being paid to truck diversion,
catching violators will remain a cat and mouse game. The bulk of
Minnesota's truck inspection resources in the Lower St. Croix
Valley are located at the I-94 station. The Minnesota State
Patrol operates two mobile inspection teams in the Metro Area,
and occasionally diverts personnel from the I-94 station to other
locations such as Stillwater. Unfortunately, there are
' insufficient resources to permanently cover all potential routes
which trucks can use to avoid inspection.
Trucks which are out of compliance with safety regulations will
continue to use Stillwater and other crossings unless trucks are
banned or permanent inspections stations are constructed.
Neither of these is a viable option along many routes currently
being used by trucks to avoid scales. As stated earlier, the
number of trucks diverting from I-94 is too small to
significantly add to the congestion problem in the area. Truck
diversion is mainly a safety issue at Stillwater.
10
1