3 ms·

So is it obvious that the bridge is out? Did the incident occur at night, and was visibility poor? As much as I hate Google, I find it hard to believe they sh

So is it obvious that the bridge is out? Did the incident occur at night, and was visibility poor? As much as I hate Google, I find it hard to believe they should be held accountable before whoever owns the road with a bridge to nowhere that isn't marked or blocked off.

in_cahoots 3y ago
The article states that the accident occurred at 11pm, and there were no barriers to the bridge. A concrete barrier was put up by local residents after the accident. It sounds like nobody wanted to put up any warnings, because they might then assume some responsibility for the bridge itself. Tragic.
- cwmma 3y ago
  there where barricades but they had been taken down due to "vandalism"
Merad 3y ago
The road is pretty steep on either side of the bridge and it's a small one lane (IIRC) bridge. At night I definitely think it could be difficult to see that the bridge was out until it was too late. Edit: According to articles linked elsewhere in the comments the bridge was privately owned and the owners are being sued along with Google. As far as ownership, I am no expert but I think the land under the road would be government owned (not sure if state, county, or city) because there's a public right-of-way to ensure houses in the subdivision have access to public roads. However in the absence of a HOA the property owners within the subdivision are collectively responsible for road maintenance. It's part of the paperwork when you buy a house. But I don't know if they're required to maintain it to a specific standard... And in this particular case the neighborhood in question is pretty middle class (middle class in a LCOL area). I'm guessing a bridge repair isn't cheap, so it's very plausible that the neighborhood literally couldn't afford it. This definitely seems like a thorny topic, not something where it's easy to lay the blame at the feet one individual or entity.

in_cahoots 3y ago

The article states that the accident occurred at 11pm, and there were no barriers to the bridge. A concrete barrier was put up by local residents after the accident. It sounds like nobody wanted to put up any warnings, because they might then assume some responsibility for the bridge itself. Tragic.

cwmma 3y ago
there where barricades but they had been taken down due to "vandalism"

Merad 3y ago

The road is pretty steep on either side of the bridge and it's a small one lane (IIRC) bridge. At night I definitely think it could be difficult to see that the bridge was out until it was too late. Edit: According to articles linked elsewhere in the comments the bridge was privately owned and the owners are being sued along with Google. As far as ownership, I am no expert but I think the land under the road would be government owned (not sure if state, county, or city) because there's a public right-of-way to ensure houses in the subdivision have access to public roads. However in the absence of a HOA the property owners within the subdivision are collectively responsible for road maintenance. It's part of the paperwork when you buy a house. But I don't know if they're required to maintain it to a specific standard... And in this particular case the neighborhood in question is pretty middle class (middle class in a LCOL area). I'm guessing a bridge repair isn't cheap, so it's very plausible that the neighborhood literally couldn't afford it. This definitely seems like a thorny topic, not something where it's easy to lay the blame at the feet one individual or entity.