Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you go to the website it explains it. Raising the bridge would mean changing like a mile of track in downtown Durham and it can't be dug under due to a decades old sewer line that would require a large area of downtown to be dug up if it's even possible. It might be done one day but it's expensive and with the various groups involved it's not easy.
It has multiple signs leading up to it and people choose to ignore them while driving vehicles you should be paying attention in.
I know the drivers should be more careful but if it happens several times a day/week then like the previous poster said, the fix is not working. I don't know how NC can consider itself progressive when a bridge in a major city looks like it got stuck in time with crappy signage.
It seemed in the video like a lot of the trucks were rental trucks. The idea of any municipality or the train company putting funds toward raising it seems wrong to me ... plenty of warning about height that people are missing. They're going to increase the warning system somehow; I'm curious about what would work.
I would be totally opposed to any of my tax money going to raise it because some people can't follow directions! Also what about the poor guy with the webcam? :-D
The bridge was built long before there were any height standards. The website and associated videos of trucks running into it have been available for years. This isn't exactly news.
It has multiple signs leading up to it and people choose to ignore them while driving vehicles you should be paying attention in.
I don't doubt the portion of the blame that rests with drivers. But some of these people are renting trucks or driving RVs, they are not experienced or trained in driving, and most people are not at the top of their driving game when driving a vehicle they are unfamiliar with, much less driving a larger vehicle that they're not accustomed to. Combine that with a road in a city they may not be familiar with and it's a recipe for disaster.
It's kind of like if there's a big crack in the sidewalk people keep falling on and breaking bones. You can put a sign on it all day long, and people should watch where they are going instead of burying their face in their phones texting and so forth, but once you realize humans aren't perfect, and that the problem is going to continue until the hazard is fixed, then most reasonable people would conclude it needs to be fixed.
I don't doubt the portion of the blame that rests with drivers. But some of these people are renting trucks or driving RVs, they are not experienced or trained in driving, and most people are not at the top of their driving game when driving a vehicle they are unfamiliar with, much less driving a larger vehicle that they're not accustomed to. Combine that with a road in a city they may not be familiar with and it's a recipe for disaster.
It's kind of like if there's a big crack in the sidewalk people keep falling on and breaking bones. You can put a sign on it all day long, and people should watch where they are going instead of burying their face in their phones texting and so forth, but once you realize humans aren't perfect, and that the problem is going to continue until the hazard is fixed, then most reasonable people would conclude it needs to be fixed.
I don't think that's a relatable comparison. You're driving a multi-ton vehicle, pay some attention to where you're going. This isn't a game, take responsibility for your actions. The bridge situation is more purposeful ignorance on the part of the driver, hence them being responsible.
Yeah, I get tired of people defending stupidity, and suggesting we "fix" stupidity with multi-million dollar tax burdens.
I'm not defending stupidity, I simply proved the stupidity rests on both sides. If as has been suggested the train company owns the bridge, and the state, city and insurance companies are simply absorbing the cost of recurring accidents, then the cost is being passed onto you one way or another.
But the costs of signage and maintaining the crash beam in front of the bridge is pretty insignificant compared to the tens of millions to fix it, so the taxpayer burden is pretty light. When you drive anything, it's 100% on you at all times to operate safely. Period.
The bridge can't be raised (economically) due to the long length of rail bed that would have to be modified,
The road under can't be lowered (within a reasonable budget) due to a sewer line below, that's also connected to a long pipe that can't be re-sloped without spending a huge amount of (taxpayer?) money.
So the real question is how to stop the trucks, and the current signage doesn't work. ..... How about:
a waterfall sign: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILNQN7fniDE
You could probably even re-use the water.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
