Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ElDub73 t1_jea1it0 wrote

Put a bend in the road prior to the climb that a tractor trailer wouldn’t be able to negotiate so they get stuck at the bottom not the middle and in a controlled environment.

Basically a pre-filter.

You could also have an actual gate with a person to monitor each truck that comes by.

Again - money.

The problem is easy to solve, just takes a little money which probably no one wants to spend.

So it’s really no “confounding” anyone - they just don’t want to spend the money to solve the issue.

17

VelvitHippo t1_jea90x3 wrote

What about a gate tp let car through that's too small to let semis pass? Like just an arch they'd have to drive through to get there. No person needed to be sitting there and you'd only need one on each side, signs would become obsolete.

5

ElDub73 t1_jea9yb3 wrote

You could do that but that wouldn’t filter out long vehicles that could pass under it.

But it would probably work since the problem is with semis not short long vehicles.

But again - it’s money.

2

huskers2468 t1_jeacjah wrote

Frankly, I liked the idea that proposed a fine to the GPS companies that the truck is utilizing.

One of the main reasons the trucks continue past the signage is that they trust the GPS. Forcing the hand of the GPS companies for trucks is a great way to tackle that issue without spending money.

2

ElDub73 t1_jeah32t wrote

The GPS companies have no liability and I’m sure you agree to not hold them liable every time you use their product.

1

huskers2468 t1_jeai5hm wrote

If the GPS systems are trucks only and not the standard ones the public uses, then they could hold liability for refusing to change the road designation.

1

ElDub73 t1_jeak7px wrote

Eh I don’t fundamentally disagree with the spirit of what you’re saying, but I just don’t see it happening.

1

huskers2468 t1_jeamf7n wrote

I completely understand. I did not think it was possible, but it was brought up as a topic in that last meeting.

2