Talk:Interstate 696

Route description addition: Why the restrictions? Suggestion
The end of the first paragraph under "Route description" says, "East of this interchange, cargo restrictions have been enacted for the next 10-mile-long (16 km) segment of I-696; no commercial vehicles may carry flammable or explosive loads." No explanation is given. I suggest it be pointed out that the restrictions in this segment are due to the roadway being below surface level, and the expected increase in the amount of time and difficulty in accessing any vehicle involved in a fire or explosion in this segment. --Thomprod (talk) 16:41, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I found an obscure source with the reasoning, including a tidbit about a fire caused by vandalism under one of the park plazas during construction that concerned officials about the potential intensity of a fire under those plazas. (While the retaining walls are a concern, I think it's the plazas moreso that create the situation that leads to the restrictions.)  Imzadi 1979  →   16:18, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
 * While possible, note that the Lodge carries the same restrictions in the section that is below street level, but lacks the plazas that 696 has. Thomprod (talk) 15:59, 23 September 2020 (UTC)