Delaware
Delaware Found A Genius Way To Stop Trucks From Hitting Low Bridges By Dangling Boat Fenders From Poles – The Autopian
One of the most hilarious auto-related Internet sensations is watching a big truck attempting to fit under a low bridge. It always ends poorly for the truck, usually with a large chunk munched off the top by the bridge. While it’s fun to watch, trucks crashing into low rail bridges is a serious problem, as not only do the trucks get damaged, but traffic has to halt on the road and on the rails as the accident is cleared up and the bridge is inspected. Ideally, these crashes just wouldn’t happen at all, but too many drivers keep messing up. For the past few years, the state of Delaware might have found the best solution yet by placing giant plastic balls before a bridge. Here’s how so-called “Clanker Balls” have saved both trucks and bridges from hits.
America’s roads are full of bridges that offer varying levels of clearance underneath. If you’re driving down the Interstate Highway System, you can usually expect 16 feet of clearance between the pavement and a bridge. This number reduces to about 14 feet in some urban areas. These clearances generally work because the typical tractor-trailer sits at 13 feet, six inches high.
However, the bridges found on local roads may vary. Many of the old rail bridges peppering America’s secondary roads offer far less than 14 feet of clearance because they were built before modern standards. The most infamous bridge is the Norfolk Southern–Gregson Street Overpass in Durham, North Carolina, which is also known as the “11-foot-8+8 Bridge” or the “Can Opener Bridge.” This bridge, which isn’t even the lowest that you’d find in America, attained its infamy because an office worker near the bridge pointed some cameras at the bridge for all to watch. Take a look!
When Old Infrastructure Meets Modern Traffic
These many low bridges across America cause headaches for trucks on the road because their drivers have to route around them, hopefully not causing any other problems in the process. If the drivers ignore warnings or don’t realize how tall their trucks are, they may end up clogging both road traffic and rail traffic after slamming into a bridge. These bridges sometimes need to be repaired after a hit from a truck. One crash can cause a ripple effect on a particularly busy rail line as trains have to stop.
In a perfect world, these accidents wouldn’t happen. The approaches for these bridges have yellow signs that clearly call out their low height. A trucker should also always know how tall their vehicle is. However, signs are only effective if drivers look at them. Likewise, the signs aren’t any help if the driver doesn’t realize how tall their vehicle is, as might be the case for someone driving a rental truck or someone towing a fifth-wheel camper.
Sadly, the solution isn’t as simple as you’d think. These bridges often cannot be raised easily, and roadbeds sometimes cannot be lowered easily. Raising a rail bridge would require a reconfiguration of the rail grade approaching and departing the bridge. The bridge would then be rebuilt, causing delays or full stops on the rail line for potentially months. Of course, this would cost the bridge’s owner, usually the railroad, millions of dollars.
Lowering the roadbed might be difficult due to any infrastructure that may be under the road. Of course, this would also take time and cost a town a ton of cash. Even when the infamous Can Opener Bridge was raised, it was increased only eight inches to 12 feet, four inches, so it still messes up trucks.
Convincing Big Trucks To Stop

The alternative is to develop a solution to stop trucks from slamming into the bridge in the first place. At the Can Opener Bridge, for example, a sensor placed a half-block from the bridge detects when a truck is too tall, and then triggers an LED board to flash in an attempt to warn the driver. The traffic light in the intersection before the bridge also automatically turns to red. In theory, a driver approaching the bridge has 50 seconds to react before hitting the bridge, and there are warnings all over during the approach.
Yet, drivers still ignore all of the warnings, run the red light, and let the Can Opener Bridge slice their trucks open. Since drivers still can’t get the message, the North Carolina Railroad Company has a heavy steel crash beam that munches up the trucks so the bridge doesn’t get damaged.
The state of Delaware has taken a different approach. There is an infamous train trestle in Newark, Delaware, along Casho Mill Road.
This bridge, which has been around since the late 19th century, originally offered 11 feet, one inch of clearance. In the modern era, the bridge offers only eight feet, seven inches of clearance. This bridge makes the Can Opener Bridge seem roomy in comparison. The Casho Mill Road bridge is so short that it can easily trim off the tops of camper vans and lifted SUVs, forget about any sort of commercial vehicle.
As such, this bridge, which is just one of many short bridges in Delaware, has been beaten up by tall trucks throughout its long life. Mark Luszcz, the Delaware Department of Transportation’s Deputy Director for Operations & Support, published a presentation where he even found a news report from the 1970s about the bridge eating a truck.

Between 2005 and 2022, the Delaware Department of Transportation says, 78 vehicles crashed into the bridge. Eight of those crashes happened in 2021 alone, with another six crashes occurring in 2022.
The state has been trying to curb the crashes, with most methods being unsuccessful. In 2003, the state installed a set of lights that flash and are accompanied by a sign that says “Vehicle Exceeds Tunnel Height When Flashing”. Drivers ignored both. In 2017, the sign next to the lights was updated to say “TRUCKS – Too High When Flashing – Use Turnout”. Another sign was added to the bridge height marker that said: “Your Truck WILL NOT FIT”. Again, drivers ignored the lights and signs, just like they do with the bridge in North Carolina.
Delaware’s Big Orange Balls

In 2018, CSX Transportation had become tired of trucks running into its bridge. So, it petitioned the Delaware Department of Transportation to close the under-grade crossing and then to fill the hole in so that no vehicle may ever crash into the rail bridge again. This lit a fire under Newark and Delaware state officials to try to fix the issue.
In 2019, the Delaware General Assembly proposed a solution. What if Delaware started using an over-height vehicle warning system? Such systems were already in place at the NYC Port Authority and parts of Pennsylvania and New Jersey. These systems were simple, too, utilizing a set of metal cans dangling from an overhead beam. If an over-height truck approached a low bridge, it would slam into the metal cans long before hitting the bridge, and its drivers would be alerted, alarmed, and come to a stop.
In 2021, the State of Delaware, DelDOT, and the City of Newark penned an agreement to install so-called “clankers” at the Casho Mill Road bridge.
Delaware’s interpretation was a bit different than what engineers found at the NYC Port Authority and elsewhere. Engineers had found that the metal cans of those over height vehicle vehicle warning systems weren’t very loud. They also didn’t look particularly appealing. The solution? They grabbed a bunch of Taylor Made Tuff End vinyl boat fenders.
Apparently, the sound created from hitting a bunch of boat fenders sounds more like a loud boom than a clank, but the nickname “clankers” stuck, anyway. The existing signage and lights were retained as well.
Whitman, Requardt & Associates, LLP, the engineers behind the project, added an additional sign that’s not only so huge that you basically can’t miss it, but also says in bold letters that if you don’t stop, your truck will go “kaboom”.
Add it all up, and there’s a lot of drama when a truck hits the clankers. The boat fenders make a loud boom and bounce all over the place while connected to their chains. Usually, the driver of the truck is snapped out of whatever daze or distraction they’re in and slams on the brakes. Then they see the sign warning of impending doom and decide not to press forward.
DelDOT admits that the signage and hanging boat fenders are not Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices-compliant. However, the state, the city, and residents do not care because the clankers have been super effective. In 2023, there were zero reported crashes at the bridge; the first time such has been recorded since 2005.

The state, city, and locals have also had some great fun with the clankers. People have decorated their homes with clanker replicas during the holidays, fire departments have hung clankers from their trucks during parades, and there’s even a satirical Facebook page that publishes funny posts around the clankers. Weirdly, these boat fenders hanging from a metal bar have become a bit of an in-joke in Delaware.
As NBC10 Philadelphia reports, other clankers have been installed in Milford, Newport, near Delaware Park, and on Chapel Street. DelDOT says that while the clankers have been amazingly effective, they haven’t been perfect. In more recent times, DelDOT has discovered that some trucks hit the clankers, come to a stop, but then continue forward, hitting the bridge. The state believes that the majority of these few remaining incidents may be college students driving rental moving trucks and not understanding what the clankers mean.
Still, the clankers have been so good at their jobs that officials in California, Ohio, and other states have been reaching out to DelDOT to see if they can rig up their own version of the system.
So, if you happen to drive through one of these states and see what looks like a bunch of plastic balls hanging down from a traffic light, now you know why. Those are just simple boat fenders, and they’re there to stop truckers from blowing up their load onto a train bridge. If you’re driving a truck of some kind and you hear a loud boom just before going under a bridge, it’ll probably be wise to turn around. If you don’t, you might just turn your rig into a convertible.
Topshot graphic image: WRA, LLP
Delaware
50 boys outdoor track and field athletes to watch in Delaware in 2026
Tatnall’s Gavin Leffler wins 3,200 at indoor state meet
With a 28-second last lap, Tatnall’s Gavin Leffler won the boys 3,200 at the Delaware indoor track and field state meet in 9:28.10.
Since the start of 2025, Delaware boys track and field athletes have set 11 state records between the indoor and outdoor seasons.
After a winter season in which 17 performances reached the top five on the state all-time list, Delaware appears poised for another strong spring.
Our list of track and field athletes to watch (presented alphabetically) features athletes from 24 schools who compete in sprints, distance races, throws and jumps. They are the athletes we expect to be among the state’s leaders at the DIAA Championships at Dover High on May 15-16 although many new names could emerge by then.
After defending its indoor track and field state title, Middletown is in search of its second straight Division I championship. Saint Mark’s enters the season as the Division II winner in three of the past four seasons.
2026 Delaware boys track and field athletes to watch
Elijah Annan, sr., Dover
Jason Baker, sr., Cape Henlopen
Derick Belle, sr., Odessa
Suhayl Benson, jr., Howard
Shaun Bosman, sr., Christiana
Elijah Burke, sr., Saint Mark’s
Khalid Burton, sr., Laurel
Isaiah Charles, jr., Caravel
Chukwuma Chukwuocha, jr., Wilmington Friends
Timothy Claessens, jr., Newark Charter
Rodney Coker, so., Odessa
Jaheim Cole, sr., Dover
Josh Cox, sr., Archmere
Calvin Davis, fr., A.I. du Pont
James Dempsey, jr., Salesianum
Will DiPaolo, sr., Cape Henlopen
Logan Elmore, jr., Middletown
Dahani Everett, sr., Caesar Rodney
Jayden Feaster, sr., Middletown
Gabe Harris, sr., Caesar Rodney
Phoenix Henriquez, sr., Smyrna
Christian Jenerette, sr., Odessa
Brandon Jervey, jr., Middletown
Mekhi Jimperson, sr., Caesar Rodney
Benjamin Johnson, jr., Dickinson
Michka Johnson, sr., Hodgson
Trey Johnson, sr., Cape Henlopen
Amir Jones-Branch, sr., Middletown
Alec Jurgaitis, sr., Saint Mark’s
Gavin Leffler, sr., Tatnall
Elijah MacFarlane, sr., Caesar Rodney
Max Martire, sr., Tatnall
Dylan McCarthy, sr., Tatnall
Chase Mellen, so., Salesianum
Zamir Miller, sr., Middletown
Ryan Moody, sr., Sussex Academy
Wayne Roberts, jr., Appoquinimink
Elijah Tackett, sr., Dover
Kai Thornton, sr., Sussex Central
Marc Patterson, sr., Dover
Charles Prosser, so., Salesianum
Riley Robinson, fr., Middletown
Roan Samuels, sr., Salesianum
Douglas Simpson, jr., Cape Henlopen
Jessie Standard, jr., Middletown
Riley Stazzone, sr., Cape Henlopen
Jamar Taylor, jr., Salesianum
Jordan Welch, sr., Sussex Tech
Brandon Williams, sr., Charter of Wilmington
Xzavier Yarborough, jr., Dover
Brandon Holveck reports on high school sports for The News Journal. Contact him at bholveck@delawareonline.com.
Delaware
DNREC’s decision to prohibit data center upheld by state board
What is a data center? Here’s what you should know
Data centers have been popping up all over Arizona. The massive sites have drawn economic praise and resident criticism. Here’s what you need to know.
Project Washington’s prospects in Delaware appear murkier after a board stood on the state environmental agency’s decision to prohibit the data center proposal.
The public hearings with the Coastal Zone Industrial Control Board kicked off in Dover on March 24 at the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control’s Auditorium near Legislative Hall. It finished on March 26 after days of testimony from witnesses supporting and opposing the DNREC decision on the data center, which would be the largest in the state.
Project Washington was prohibited by DNREC in February because the agency said it violated the Coastal Zone Act, which was signed in 1971. Project Washington’s developer, Starwood Digital Ventures, filed an appeal of that decision soon after.
A little more than 30 people attended the meeting on March 24. It was modeled more like a court hearing than a public government meeting. The next two days included testimony from witnesses from both Starwood Digital Ventures’ and DNREC’s attorneys.
The Coastal Zone board consists of nine members, five of which are appointed by the governor and approved by the state Senate. Four other members are the state director of the Division of Small Business and Tourism and the chairs of the planning commissions of each county.
It’s the first time this assembly of the board has been called to action. Board members said they are making decisions on a fact and law basis, and are trying to cut out the noise this project has caused on social media and in other public meetings.
Witnesses and experts explained a ton of technical definitions for generators and got into the nitty-gritty of emissions and infrastructure. It was up to the board to take those facts in stride and make their decision.
“What we have to do is come back to the purpose of the appeal,” said Willie Scott, a member of the board during a break between sessions on March 24.
They voted unanimously to uphold the DNREC decision to prohibit the project based on the Coastal Zone Act.
Courtroom-like arguments for and against the data center
The hearing on March 24 began with opening arguments. Attorneys for Starwood Digital Ventures, Project Washington’s developer, argued that Project Washington’s purpose and infrastructure fall outside of the Coastal Zone Act’s regulations, and that DNREC’s definitions of smokestacks and tank farms are flawed.
“It fails every element of the statutory definition, as interpreted by the Delaware Supreme Court and the Delaware Superior Court,” said Jeff Moyer, an attorney representing Starwood. “Its limited diesel infrastructure is not a tank farm within any reasonable meaning of that term, and each of the core three functions of Project Washington – data storage, electrical infrastructure and backup power – are all expressly not regulated.”
DNREC’s attorneys argued the data center campuses fall under heavy industry in a modern context, and it is the kind of project the act is intended to kill. They also argued it has a potential to pollute when backup generators are working if the power fails.
“The law requires that it be prohibited, not recharacterized, not broken into pieces and minimized, but prohibited,” said Michael Hoffman, attorney representing DNREC. “Over the course of the next few days, we will show that Starwood’s proposed hyperscale data center is one such project.”
Closing arguments on March 26 reiterated arguments from both sides, and the board voted to stand with DNREC.
How Project Washington and DNREC got here
The Coastal Zone Act prevents heavy industrial projects from developing along the Delaware River and Bay, Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, Atlantic Ocean, Indian River Bay and other Sussex County bays. The 14 projects that have been grandfathered include the Delaware City Refinery and the Port of Wilmington.
Project Washington’s proposed site falls within the defined coastal zone, which extends west to Dupont Highway in that specific spot. In February, DNREC said the massive data center is prohibited, stifling the project while it worked through state and county permits.
It would be 11 two-story data center buildings surrounded by electrical fields on two large land parcels north of Delaware City accessible by Hamburg Road, Governor Lea Road and River Road.
DNREC’s beef with the project is in the backup generators and their accompanying diesel tanks. The data center is proposed to run 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. If power goes out, it needs to use the backup generators to keep running. DNREC’s decision says the project includes some 516 double-walled diesel fuel belly tanks, each capable of storing some 5,020 gallons of fuel. That’s about five acres of tank farm.
There would be 516 backup generators with 516 smokestacks, which DNREC said in its original decision is the exact type of infrastructure the Coastal Zone Act targets by prohibiting “heavy industrial” projects.
Starwood Digital Ventures, appealed the decision, mentioning countervailing factors including avoiding wetlands, no direct surface water discharges and projected economic benefits.
Their appeal said the original DNREC decision “solely focuses on alleged environmental risk and worst-case emissions, and does not fairly weigh or explain these countervailing factors in light of regulating criteria.”
Jim Lamb, who is handling media communication for the project, said the backup generators would only run 37 to 45 minutes per month just to test if they are operational. Project Washington will also use a closed-loop cooling system, limiting its water intake.
The appeal required a hearing, which is the first time the board made a decision since 2021.
The developer of the project did not immediately respond to Delaware Online/The News Journal’s request for comment. New Castle County officials did not immediately respond to either.
Shane Brennan covers Wilmington and other Delaware issues. Reach out with ideas, tips or feedback at slbrennan@delawareonline.com.
Delaware
GGE of Delaware Jumps on the Rally Sponsor Train!
-
Detroit, MI1 week agoDrummer Brian Pastoria, longtime Detroit music advocate, dies at 68
-
Science1 week agoHow a Melting Glacier in Antarctica Could Affect Tens of Millions Around the Globe
-
Movie Reviews1 week ago‘Youth’ Twitter review: Ken Karunaas impresses audiences; Suraj Venjaramoodu adds charm; music wins praise | – The Times of India
-
Sports6 days agoIOC addresses execution of 19-year-old Iranian wrestler Saleh Mohammadi
-
New Mexico5 days agoClovis shooting leaves one dead, four injured
-
Business1 week agoDisney’s new CEO says his focus is on storytelling and creativity
-
Technology5 days agoYouTube job scam text: How to spot it fast
-
Tennessee4 days agoTennessee Police Investigating Alleged Assault Involving ‘Reacher’ Star Alan Ritchson





