Hey, there! Log in / Register
Beulah, peel me another truck
By adamg on Tue, 06/18/2013 - 5:22pm
Boston Ward 4 Dems snapped the latest BU Bridge/Grand Junction casualty: A truck whose driver apparently and rather suddenly lost the ability to read, right in the middle of the evening rush hour today. On the eastbound side, at least.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
So who pays for the damages
So who pays for the damages these bridges undergo? Surely all these collisions cut off ten years of life?
Same Question
In other cities with low bridges and frequent crashes they install an I-Beam before the bridge so it takes the impact and can be replaced at a far less cost then a new bridge.
However, in Boston, the
However, in Boston, the typical solution is to add a other low bridge to absorb the impact. Why do you think we have so many of them? We only started with the one.
Yeah, so?
That doesn't answer what is done in Massachusetts!
It's not related to the site
It's not related to the site of this crash, but I recently decided to look for "no trucks" signs on the Storrow exit from 93 North.
http://goo.gl/maps/knNHw -- none here. Though one sub-ramp allows trucks, but not Storrow.
That's all the Google Street View coverage for the exit, so you'll have to trust me on the rest. The "Storrow Drive Right Lane" sign in the exit tunnel says nothing about trucks. Only when you actually get to the Storrow/North Station split is there a small "No Trucks" banner under the Storrow sign -- nothing in advance, and no graphical sign.
I'm surprised more trucks don't crash into the westbound Leverett Circle underpass.
At least there's some signage before the Longfellow: http://goo.gl/maps/fCkJ1
It's confusing for *everyone* which lane goes where, so it's not clear which lanes the "cars only" banner applies to. And the graphical "no trucks" icon's red paint has faded to white. But at least they tried.
There is this sign as a last line of defense: http://goo.gl/maps/DxIy7 . A truck would have to hit that one, though there's no escape at that point. and the "no trucks or buses" sign on the left post is ambiguous which roadway it refers to, and also has faded red paint.
The sign says "Cars Only" but
The sign says "Cars Only" but the meaning is "NO TRUCKS".
This type of backward communication is part of local culture.
Some problems
I think one of the problems with these accidents is the whole "No Trucks" thing is overdone. DCR roads don't allow trucks, usually for no good reason. There's no reason a truck can't navigate the wide Lynn Fells in Malden or Melrose or Saugus. This is just one example. Trucks shouldn't be banned for the simple pleasures of the DCR or NIMBY residents. If every "No Truck" sign was because of size limitations, maybe drivers wouldn't break the rule. But instead, they see it as a "We Don't Want Your Kind Here, That's All." Now everyones going to say "Well, the drivers shouldn't break the rule to begin with, so they need to own up." Yes, yes, true, true. But we should also look at how the owner of a commercial vehicle (company) receives the fines and tickets. It should be the operator who gets the pinch, and maybe they'd wise up.
The driver of the truck is cited
not the owner of the truck. Which means a black mark against the driver's CDL, and a black mark on the driver's permanent accident record.
Both of which can affect the driver's chances of getting employment with a trucking company. And the chances are good that, after severely damaging one of the company's trucks, the driver will be looking for other work.
no, I'm not a trucker - but I have friends who are
Weight
The roadbed needs to be able to withstand the impact of truck weight. This usually implies more expensive construction and maintenance costs. The old AASHTO road test established an approximate "fourth power rule" to estimate damage from trucks, by axle weight. I don't know what condition the other DCR roads are in, but since it's DCR, I assume it's crappy.
You're right that there should be a more sensible and comprehensive system about truck restrictions though. We do it for bridges to some extent, but roads should also be rated for various weights and axle configurations of trucks. Then that information compiled along with dimensional restrictions, and integrated with GPS/mapping software for convenience.
Also, why does DCR still control any kind of transportation infrastructure?
Roads do have specs
There are no shortage of specifications on roads and trucks. The weight limit on Interstate highways is 80,000 lbs. Maine for example has many state roads built for 100,000 lb. GVW, mainly for logging trucks. I think at one point, part of Interstate 95 in Maine allowed 100,000 lb trucks. Interstates also have minimum bridge and tunnel clearances, but exceptions are allowed...
that makes no sense
You really think that if the "no trucks" signs came down on Lynn Fells Parkway, that people driving U-Hauls would stop crashing into bridges on Storrow?
I'm glad you're not my traffic engineer.
With respect,
you clearly know very little about traffic engineering. BostonUrbanEx's point about regulations that have been posted soley for political convenience is a major issue.
Suppose your community decided to post stop signs at every intersection in town, even at places they were clearly not justified. Do you really believe that, over time, all drivers in town would continue to stop at every one of those signs?
It's enough of a problem getting drivers to obey the signs and signals at locations where there is a legitimate need for them. Putting up needless truck restrictions to appease crybaby residents who can't seem to realize that trucks are a necessary part of life only serves to excerbate this problem.
You can make all the
You can make all the analogies you want.
But that doesn't change the fact that nobody driving a truck is going to behave any differently at a Storrow entrance based on the presence of signs on a road in Melrose.
Trucks on DCR parkways? Please no.
There are plenty of DCR park roads that don't have low underpasses, but still would be greatly degraded by heavy truck traffic. Would you really want to see trucks on the Fenway, Riverway, Jamaicaway, or any of the roads in and around the Blue Hills Reservation or the Middlesex Fells?