Sunday, April 10, 2011

Just a reminder: 53' trailers are ILLEGAL in NYC


From NYSDOT:

Are 53-foot long trailers allowed to make pick-ups or deliveries in New York City?

Per Section 385 of the Vehicle & Traffic Law, a 53-foot trailer is allowed only limited travel through New York City to reach destinations on Long Island, using the following routes:

* I-95 - from Bronx/Westchester County line to I-295;
* I-295 - from I-95 to Throgs Neck Bridge to the Long Island Expressway (I-495)
* I-495 - from I-295 to Queens/Nassau County line

53-foot long trailers are not allowed to make pick ups or deliveries in any of the boroughs of New York City.

42 comments:

Anonymous said...

LMAO....We have these monster trucks pick up stuff all the time on 78st in middle village. They load them on the street at a no parking sign. Traffic cop never does anything.

Anonymous said...

A neighborhood that has and is surrounded by warehouses and industrial plants and they are complaining about truck traffic on the truck route? Come on.
As far as 53' trailers go, yes they are illegal on the local truck routes, I brought this up the other day, but to seriously enforce this ban would seriously hurt businesses in this city. Is that what we want? The 53' trailer is pretty much standard for most trucking companies. If we make them switch to 48' trailers (whoahhh, big difference) just for NYC deliveries, the increased costs to businesses will be significant. And what would be the result? Lots of 48' trailers barreling down the street to get to their destinations. IF you really want to live without truck traffic you have to move to an area that has so much industry nearby.
And as far as that truck route being changed from through to local, as long as you have a delivery in the borough you are in you are legal to be on the local truck routes. Even if you don't, all you need is a bill of lading with a local address, which is very easy to falsify.

Queens Crapper said...

"As far as 53' trailers go, yes they are illegal on the local truck routes, I brought this up the other day, but to seriously enforce this ban would seriously hurt businesses in this city."

So let me get this straight. Businesses opened up here knowing full well what the law stated, but they chose to break it anyway to cut costs.

Tough shit. If residents have to abide by laws so do businesses. If it gets to the point where the laws of this city put a financial burden on me, I will move. These businesses can do the same. Other businesses will take their place just as other residents would take mine.

Anonymous said...

And as far as that truck route being changed from through to local, as long as you have a delivery in the borough you are in you are legal to be on the local truck routes. Even if you don't, all you need is a bill of lading with a local address, which is very easy to falsify.

These trucks don't have a delivery in the borough. Most of them are heading to LI or Jersey. And if they are caught with a falsified bill of lading that's even more fines and possibly criminal charges. I say bring it on.

Anonymous said...

I'm all for this but, trying to get the empty suits in the 104 to get out of the RMP and write tickets to enforce this law is the trouble.

Anonymous said...

Then give it to highway, PBQN, etc.

Anonymous said...

So what? The recent wins in truck traffic in Maspeth and Elmhurst is a joke just as the 53' trailers are folks.

Unless there is enforcement folks, you will continue to see these trucks rumble down your street despite the laws, despite the signs that forbid them from traveling down your street. It means nothing unless the PD enforces traffic laws.

Anonymous said...

Most of these 53' trailers come from other places and deliver to these businesses. These trailers are generally owned by trucking companies that operate in bulk warehousing, none of which are based in NYC, and that conduct business around the country. I don't know of many businesses that operate their own 53 footers in NYC. These are generally not local businesses using these trailers to make their deliveries.
So once again, since you failed to address it, in all practicality, what is the difference between a bunch of 53' and a bunch of 48' trailers. Not much except your crotchety desire for strict adherence to every petty law. Stop being such a whiner that everyone has to follow every law to a T. It makes you sound like a hipster transplant.

Anonymous said...

Hipster transplants demand strict adherence to laws? That's a new one.

Not wanting huge trucks that have no business being on local roads is crotchety, eh?

You folks disappoint. I thought QC had a bunch of civic minded readers, but I can see that's not the case.

48' trailers are only allowed on local and thru truck routes IF they are delivering household goods, IF they meet weight requirements. Otherwise, they need to obtain a special permit which allows them to make a delivery up to 1 mile from the nearest highway exit.

Time to crack down and time for readers to educate themselves before spouting off stupidity.

CARMINE said...

We get 53' trialers as well as 48' trailers on 5th avenue in Whitestone all the time. The president of MGCA has met with the Community Affairs officer of the 109th. Bottom line still no enforcement.

Anonymous said...

I don't understand why people are upset that there is no police enforcement for these big rigs. Maspeth has been without police representation for at least two decades. When was the last time you saw a police car in Maspeth? If your car is stolen, they won't even come to your house. You have to go to Ridgewood and file a report at the 104 in person. You NEVER see police in Maspeth because all the cars are in Ridgewood. A better idea for enforcement for big rigs is to get the Brownies (meter maids) to enforce them. I see them giving out tickets on Grand Avenue all the time. Since they write the tickets for their quotas anyway, the answer would be to ask for more meter maids for enforcement. Inform Mayor Bloomberg's office about this situation. Just say the word REVENUE and we will get more meter maids to ticket the big rigs.

Anonymous said...

It's like shooting fish in a barrel. Instead of entrapping motorists at the munimeters, the traffic officers should be directed to ticket trucks operating where they aren't supposed to be. That would create revenue for the city AND improve quality of life.

Anonymous said...

"48' trailers are only allowed on local and thru truck routes IF they are delivering household goods, IF they meet weight requirements. Otherwise, they need to obtain a special permit which allows them to make a delivery up to 1 mile from the nearest highway exit."

If this is in the nyc traffic laws can you please point out where. I don't see any mention of that on the NYCDOT size and weight restriction webpage.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/motorist/sizewt.shtml

To expect the businesses in this city to operate using pup trailers and straight trucks, is pretty ridiculous, as it would add significant unnecessary costs and significantly increase the number of trucks on the road. Would you really want 2-3 straight trucks for every 53' trailer?

"Hipster transplants demand strict adherence to laws? That's a new one."
Yes, but only when it impacts them (see the similarity?) like when people block the bike lane, even for a moment.

If you are want to enforce every law to a T, how about strictly enforcing jaywalking. Then that guy's 90 year old father should have no problem crossing the street since he will have to walk down to the corner and wait for the walk signal before crossing.
What do you think crappy, should we strictly enforce jaywalking? I mean it IS a law (no matter how ridiculous it is in practice) and if you don't like it you can always move somewhere else.

Anonymous said...

Ticket agents can't pull people over or write moving violations.

Anonymous said...

They can if you're blocking a crosswalk. And these trucks get stuck all the time.

Queens Crapper said...

Here you go:

Commercial Vehicle permits

"To expect the businesses in this city to operate using pup trailers and straight trucks, is pretty ridiculous, as it would add significant unnecessary costs and significantly increase the number of trucks on the road. Would you really want 2-3 straight trucks for every 53' trailer?"

I would. And they are not "unnecessary costs". They are the cost of doing business in this city. Our local roads were not designed for 18-wheelers and I for one am sick of paying to have sewers and roads replaced all the time because owners of businesses are too cheap to follow the rules and tractor trailer drivers decide to take shortcuts and go where they aren't supposed to. As for jaywalking, it's not something that burdens taxpayers, pollutes or destroys quality of life. That is my major concern, not whether every law on the books is enforced.

Anonymous said...

OK, so maximum length for combination trucks is 55' which technically makes 48' trailers illegal, it seems odd that they are not specifically excluded like 53' trailers.
Either way, to actually ban these trucks would be completely impractical and would be a tremendous blow to the economy of this city. That might be why these laws are not enforced in the first place.

Queens Crapper said...

And, I might add, a follow up segment aired the day after this original report and it said the NYPD was implementing weigh stations, which will catch the ones that are overweight and inflict the most wear and tear on the roads.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for finding that crappy, never saw that before.

Trucks pollute, they are noisy, and they are necessary for the commerce in this city. Having greater numbers of smaller trucks and trailers really doesn't solve your problem, in fact it increases traffic and pollution with more vehicles and more engines (one tractor trailer is much more efficient than 2 or 3 straight trucks).

Do you think 80k lbs on 18 wheels is much worse on the roads than 33k lbs on 6 wheels?

Anonymous said...

The real offenders of the weight laws are the straight trucks. Companies are registering these trucks at under 26k lbs so that anyone with a regular license (and no training) can drive them, and then they overload the trucks.

Queens Crapper said...

You know what's more efficient and less polluting than trucks? Barges. We are a city surrounded by water, yet we drive goods around and clog up roads instead of sending it by water to Long Island or NJ. Maybe you should start lobbying for barging instead of 53' trucks. You'll sound more planet friendly.

P.S. Smaller trucks = hybrids = less polluting

Anonymous said...

Yes, barges are a great (and slow) way to get goods from one point of water to another. Unfortunately many of our goods come from somewhere inland, and trucking them to a port to barge them and then re-truck them to the destination is anything but efficient.
You know what is even more efficient and less polluting? Cargo bikes, but we don't use those to transport our goods because it would be completely impractical.
And those hybrid trucks don't save any fuel on the highway, where much of the distance our goods travel takes place.

Anonymous said...

Also more efficient than trucks, trains. But you know you don't want that because those trains would be going right to maspeth. If you think you have truck problems now...

Queens Crapper said...

Trains are not more efficient because they have to go up to Selkirk in order to cross the river. And that tunnel would not be efficient either, because the only real export we have is trash. And planes are more efficient than all of the above!

I don't think communities in Queens should be overburdened with trucks whose final destination is not Queens. Most rational people would agree with that.

Anonymous said...

Planes are more efficient than trains and barges for transporting cargo? Sorry I highly doubt that, could you provide some evidence of that?

"As for jaywalking, it's not something that burdens taxpayers, pollutes or destroys quality of life."
Neither does store signs in Korean but you seem to be all for enforcing that law.

Anonymous said...

Actually, they do destroy quality of life for people who don't speak Korean. They also present a safety problem.

Anonymous said...

Planes are bigger and can hold more cargo. They use more fuel, but get to their destination the fastest, which is important for a lot of cargo. Depends what kind of "efficiency" you're talking about.

Anonymous said...

I forgot about the "safety problem". Because we all know emergency services look for a business name rather than the address. I guess we all have this same safety problems in our homes if an address isn't good enough.

If you are so intolerant of other cultures that non English signs destroy your quality of life, NYC might not be the right place for you.

Are you saying planes are bigger and can hold more cargo than trains or barges? By barges I assumed we meant watercraft including ships, although I'm pretty sure even a barge has a higher cargo capacity than a plane. What are you smoking, and where can I get some?

Queens Crapper said...

Perhaps you folks should stick to the topic of oversized trucks on local streets and save the other B.S. for posts about those topics.

Anonymous said...

Sorry about the tangent crappy, I thought we were talking about a 53' trailer full of illegals, but no one knew it because the lettering was in Korean.
=P

Back to the topic, look at the benefit. With all those large trucks, you probably don't have a problem with speeding cars on Grand Ave.

Anonymous said...

Having a sign that describes the type of business that is being run helps firefighters and police officers overcome public safety issues. For example, if a printing press was on fire, it has many chemicals that are dangerous and flammable. In that situation, by having descriptive signs of the business would be beneficial and potentially life saving for the firefighters who enter into those types of situations.

Oh but forget about that, since according to you who knows everything, they just look for the address...

Anonymous said...

For example, if a printing press was on fire, it has many chemicals that are dangerous and flammable.

LOL I wonder how long Avella had to think to come up with that one. Perhaps those businesses should require placards like TRUCKS (to keep on topic).

Anonymous said...

For example, if a printing press was on fire, it has many chemicals that are dangerous and flammable.

BTW, this IS a valid point, but it has nothing to do with why people don't like signs in asian languages.

Anonymous said...

If it's a valid point, then why does it matter why people want the signs? Just enforce the regulation so we don't end up with an inferno in Flushing one day.

Anonymous said...

They can if you're blocking a crosswalk. And these trucks get stuck all the time.
----------------------------------
Writing such summonses will not do anything to address this problem. There needs to be actual enforcement on the VTL rules being violated from the NYPD or some other authorized agency.

Anonymous said...

What do you really expect the two or three cars the 104 precinct turns out per tour to do? If you put one car on Flushing and Grand all day, that leaves only one or two cars responding to ploice emergencies. The NYPD is short staffed and overburdened with too many various responsibilities as it is. We have to think of something else besides running to the police and expecting them to solve all our problems.

Anonymous said...

I wish they would show the cross street that this video was taken on. 64th street/Grand is where I am at. Its a VERY NARROW street with these 53' trailers coming through everyday. And half the time these guys can't make the turn from PERRY to 64th to get to Grand or Flushing.

Monica, come down a half block and set up here!

MyTruth said...

a 53' truck on a 50' street is problematic... Queens, like Staten Island (and Brooklyn, before the Trust Bunnies took over) has whacko zoning configurations that put wharehouses next to 1&2-family homes. Those houses are generally occupied by the poor, illiegals, and maybe a smattering of retirees - a demographic generally ignored by politicos. No wonder there's no enforcement!

Another point: since these mega trucks are generally registered out of state, do they contribute anything to maintain the roads they're responsible for tearing up? Heavily traveled streets used by trucks often have wheel-ruts that remind me of dirt roads in the country...

Anonymous said...

Do they put warehouses next to 1&2 family homes, or do they put 1&2 family homes next to warehouses? There is an important distinction there.

Anonymous said...

Out of state trucks are supposed to have apportioned registration, meaning it is registered in multiple states.

MyTruth said...

In most cases the warehouses came AFTER the homes - when Zoning laws were enacted in the 60's many of the areas with pre-WW2 working-class housing were handed over to heavy commercial ("M")uses.

And, thanks for the info re multi-state registration!

Anonymous said...

48' or 53', it doesnt matter, if you need food, gas, clothes, anything, its coming in by truck and not all stores are on truck routes. If you live in the city, its something you gotta put up with. I haul roofing shingles in from jersey with a 48' trailer.16 pallets per load and I am LEGAL on my weight for each axle and gross. It would take 4 straight trucks to do that. Coming in to the city is not fun for us but it has to be done. If im passing thru to ct or long island, i stay on the expressways but when its a local run, we gotta do what we gotta do to get in, unload and leave.