profdant139 wrote:
To paraphrase Jack Kennedy, "There is always some son of a gun who doesn't get the word." (His actual expression was more colorful.) Simply posting a sign "no commercial traffic" is not good enough to alert RV drivers that they also should stay off of that road.
So if the bridges can't be modified (which sounds too expensive), there really should be some very clear signs: "No trucks, trailers, RVs, or buses."
Maybe they can add another sign: "We really mean it."
And another: "Pop-ups are ok, though." ;)
And by the way, what if you have bikes on a roof rack -- as you cheerfully enter the "autos only" roadway, how are you going to know that the bikes won't clear?
In the legal world, "failure to warn" is often an element in a suit against manufacturers who distribute hazardous devices. The same concept should apply in the design of roadways. Even if the responsible agency can invoke "design immunity," the failure to warn of a known hazard is a separate source of liability.
Perhaps the fear of big payouts to accident victims will prompt some remedial action.
I am not saying that we all have to be coddled by the "nanny state." But where a designer creates a foreseeable risk and then fails to take reasonable measures to mitigate the risk, there should be consequences.
Give it up, there are signs on every on ramp that say no commercial vehicles and give a maximum height restriction of something less then 8-feet (varies by area). Plus there are signs approaching every overpass telling you the height. There is no liability on any one but the bus company. And while your at it, you might want to google the definition of "Parkway".
