Hey, there! Log in / Register
Another day, another big-rig Storrow fail
By adamg on Wed, 09/04/2013 - 11:29am
At least he didn't get far enough on the road to hit anything, right? Matt Hrono took the photo.
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
How much culpability does the
How much culpability does the State deserve in these daily occurrences? Instead of deeming these driver's as idiots shouldn't we be asking questions of Mass DOT to do better with markings and signage.
It doesn't work
Signs, flashing lights, and alarms do not stop idiots from driving along into things.
Not in Boston, not in Sydney, not in Durham, NC, not in Montreal.
Perhaps the licensing requirements for truck drivers are the problem? Or, maybe, smart people don't drive trucks anymore.
Question for you
What percentage of trucks coming off the Pike and out of Cambridge, etc., actually blunder onto Storrow and Memorial Drives?
And how many more trucks would blunder onto these roads if we adopted your "well, signs obviously don't work, so why bother" attitude? Try defending that policy in court after a gasoline tank truck rips open going under the Western Avenue overpass (which I personally hope will never happen).
Yes, I acknowledge that , in such incidents, the driver bears most of the responsibility, and that even the best signing won't catch 100% of the idiots who end up on the river roads. And the current signing leaves much to be desired (as I've noted in other threads about this issue).
However, the cost of installing proper signs isn't a legitimate excuse for not doing so. Signing represents, at most, about one percent of total highway costs. And the cost difference between poor signing and good signing is extremely minimal.
Lastly, truck drivers - like all human beings - come with different levels of intelligence. Remember that, at the end of the day, the principal goal of a trucker is to deliver on time. Unless the hazards and/or prohibitions on a particular highway are specifically spelled out, are posted well in advance of where the driver needs to turn to enter said highway, and the postings are clear and easy for a driver to immediately recognize (i.e. standard sizes, colors, and text), there will always be a percentage of drivers who will take risks. It's the goal of the agency in charge of the road to minimize the chances for drivers to say "I'm running behind, I'll take the risk."
Look right above him
The sign is DOT compliant and has a bright yellow banner with the exact height, none of the Allston/Back Bay/Beacon Hill "cars only" DCR namby pamby crap.
He still took the wrong lane.
I'm telling you, a solid beam at the maximum height located at all entrances is the only way to go. The whiny neighborhoods that don't want more ugly signs and warnings can dress them up with tressles and crap.
%&#$ GPS!
Professional drivers should know better than to rely on GPS units.
It's been the rise of these little bastards that are causing so many more truckers to end up on Storrow. This didn't used to happen to "Professional" drivers, at least not nearly as often!
or you know, there weren't
or you know, there weren't blogs, cell phone cameras and other means to document it every single time it happened. This isn't exactly something a newspaper would write about.
Ideally, GPS systems should
Ideally, GPS systems should force you to enter your vehicle height before you begin your route. The map/system data should also have clearance data on dangerously low bridges and reroute if the clearance is too low for your vehicle.
At the very least, roads like Memorial and Storrow Drive should have bold warnings in the route directions (like the "This is a toll road." warnings) saying "LOW CLEARANCE. NO TRUCKS." both written and read aloud.
I've heard that the problem
I've heard that the problem is that many drivers don't use specific GPS programs for trucks. They're available, but probably more expensive than the GPS you buy for your car.
Seems like the best GPS bet for truckers
Rand McNally 7" Truck GPS
IntelliRoute® TND 720™ with free lifetime maps
Normally around $400 (but can be found on sale for $349)
Seems like a reasonable expenditure -- in order to avoid trashing your truck.
Stupid State Route Markings Are To Blame
This is a perfect example why marking state Route numbers on all streets within the city is a bad idea.
To reach this location, the truck must have been traveling northbound in the O'Neil Tunnel. I'm guessing he was headed towards Nashua, New Hampshire and followed the Storrow Drive exit because it's prominently labeled as Route 3 North (in addition to the useless Route 28 South). The "No Truck" signage is minuscule by comparison.
It's fortunate the alert driver noticed the clearance warning before entering the tunnel, but I can't blame him too much for being led astray by the stupid State route signage.
93 to 495 9or 128) and then
93 to 495 9or 128) and then route 3 is the best route that any GPS would have found.
Under normal circumstances, you would be
right. However, given yesterday's problems that led to the Woburn interchange becoming a complete cluster, it is not totally inconceiveable that a GPS would have told the driver "I found a faster route."
There has been much said about non-standard signs
There has been much complaining about "non-standard" signage at many entrances to Storrow Drive.
Are these signs non-standard (i.e., do they not comply with federal standards)? Either you or Roadman will undoubtedly be able answer this, but I would be very surprised to learn that this is a non-standard sign that does not comply with the federal standards, since it on a portion of roadway that was constructed as part of the Big Dig.
Also, perhaps more to your point, is it uncommon for state route designations to appear as they do on this sign? In my experience, this is how it is all over at least the northeast U.S. (whether in cities or in rural areas).
These signs are generally in conformance
with Federal signing standards (and they are better than the ones on the DCR portion of Storrow). Technically, the destination legends should be larger, but the Big Dig project was granted an exemption allowing for the smaller texts - if this weren't done, then providing signing in the tunnels would have been next to impossible due to the limited height.
That having been said, I agree that the "No Trucks" banners appear to have been an afterthought, given their exceptionally small size.
Ironically, the height limitations in the Big Dig tunnels are the reason that the approach and exit signs in the O'Neill northbound for Storrow Drive cannot be more explicit regarding the truck and clearance restrictions.
Magic marker on a paper bag
Magic marker on a paper bag would be better than most DCR signage.