New York

[WNYroadgeek]

Meanwhile on I-390:

Early this afternoon, the New York state Department of Transportation reported that the contractor who installed the sign has fixed it. "An overlay has since been applied to the sign, at the contractor's expense, with the correction," DOT public information officer Jordan M. Guerrein said in a statement.

https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2018/04/05/letchworth-misspelled-letchwroth-highway-sign-390-replaced-rochester-mount-morris/488813002/

[Alps]

Here's a picture I took of work under NY-5 Skyway. There always seems to be work going on with this bridge. What are they doing here?

Probably routine bridge inspections.  Call NYSDOT and check with them.

They're drilling and stuff on the deck too though. I know they have a big project coming up.

Drilling +inspections = deck repairs with barrier pinned into the deck so it doesn't move.

[D-Dey65]

I posted this on the thruway thread by mistake, but another idiot brought a bus on the Southern State near Hempstead Lake State Park causing a serious accident.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/bus-strikes-long-island-overpass-injuring-high-school/story?id=54329727

This is why Sunrise Highway should've been converted into an expressway west of NY 109!

[SignBridge]

Yes! Sunrise Highway should have been converted to an expressway years ago when there was more room to do it. A real missed opportunity, like many in the New York Area.

However the bus driver who entered the restricted parkway near Kennedy Airport apparently ignored the posted signs. Also the commander of the State Police Troop said on the news that the driver was using a "non-commercial" type GPS which would not have indicated the parkway restriction. Common problem with truck and bus drivers coming to Long Island.

I've often thought that the signing is badly worded though. Instead of saying "No Commercial Vehicles" it might be clearer if it said "No Trucks or Busses". I think some of these drivers don't realize that "commercial vehicle" applies to them.

[PHLBOS]

However the bus driver who entered the restricted parkway near Kennedy Airport apparently ignored the posted signs. Also the commander of the State Police Troop said on the news that the driver was using a "non-commercial" type GPS which would not have indicated the parkway restriction. Common problem with truck and bus drivers coming to Long Island.

I've often thought that the signing is badly worded though. Instead of saying "No Commercial Vehicles" it might be clearer if it said "No Trucks or Busses". I think some of these drivers don't realize that "commercial vehicle" applies to them.

This incident is eerily familiar to the bus crash (also carrying high school students) that occurred on Soldiers Field Road in Allston/Boston, MA over five years ago.  The overhead signs on the entrance ramps there read DANGER - LOW CLEARANCE with the truck head-banging warning sign symbol on them.  It may have also had the lower-hanging CARS ONLY banners.  If a vehicle touches the latter; it will not clear the lowest of overpasses along the road.

As far as the type of GPS being used is concerned: sadly, such a problem is not just limited to Long Island.  Additionally, one has to wonder if drivers in these incidents are just using ones that are on their phones rather than a separate unit or the ones in their vehicles if so equipped.

*Devil's Advocate Mode On*
One signage-related solution could be to mark the commercial vehicle route.  I.e. direct them where they should go in addition to where they shouldn't go.  Not every bus nor truck driver is from nor familiar with the area.
*Devil's Advocate Mode Off*

[empirestate]

I've often thought that the signing is badly worded though. Instead of saying "No Commercial Vehicles" it might be clearer if it said "No Trucks or Busses". I think some of these drivers don't realize that "commercial vehicle" applies to them.

Problem is, that's not quite accurate, since there are commercial vehicles other than trucks and buses that are prohibited on the parkways.

[D-Dey65]

Yes! Sunrise Highway should have been converted to an expressway years ago when there was more room to do it. A real missed opportunity, like many in the New York Area.

However the bus driver who entered the restricted parkway near Kennedy Airport apparently ignored the posted signs. Also the commander of the State Police Troop said on the news that the driver was using a "non-commercial" type GPS which would not have indicated the parkway restriction. Common problem with truck and bus drivers coming to Long Island.

For people like this it certainly wouldn't prevent any truck or bus collisions with overpasses. But for people who know better and go there anyway thinking they can get away with it just because they don't want to put up with all the traffic lights on the current Sunrise Highway, it would certainly do some good. There were parts of Sunrise where room for improvements should've been set aside, but developers grabbed that land making sure that would never happen.

[cl94]

I've often thought that the signing is badly worded though. Instead of saying "No Commercial Vehicles" it might be clearer if it said "No Trucks or Busses". I think some of these drivers don't realize that "commercial vehicle" applies to them.

Problem is, that's not quite accurate, since there are commercial vehicles other than trucks and buses that are prohibited on the parkways.

All of the parkways have the 7'10" clearance indicated clearly, as well as signs before any bridge under 10 feet. So the "no commercial vehicles" signs aren't an excuse here.

[signalman]

I loved hearing about this last night on the evening news.  I immediately dismissed the driver's claim of unfamiliarity as that's no excuse to not read signage and heed its warning.  I also particularly liked media's claim that the passengers didn't have a chance to warn the driver not to use the parkway.  It's not like it takes very long to say "Dude, stop! You can't use this road, exit immediately"

[Mergingtraffic]

I loved hearing about this last night on the evening news.  I immediately dismissed the driver's claim of unfamiliarity as that's no excuse to not read signage and heed its warning.  I also particularly liked media's claim that the passengers didn't have a chance to warn the driver not to use the parkway.  It's not like it takes very long to say "Dude, stop! You can't use this road, exit immediately"

Some councilman was on the news blaming the DOT because of lack of signs saying "the truck sign with the red line through it doesn't speak to bus drivers."  OK soooo what is the best way to word it?  "Passenger Cars Only?"  Oh gee I drive an SUV I guess I can't use the road then. 

[cl94]

I loved hearing about this last night on the evening news.  I immediately dismissed the driver's claim of unfamiliarity as that's no excuse to not read signage and heed its warning.  I also particularly liked media's claim that the passengers didn't have a chance to warn the driver not to use the parkway.  It's not like it takes very long to say "Dude, stop! You can't use this road, exit immediately"

Some councilman was on the news blaming the DOT because of lack of signs saying "the truck sign with the red line through it doesn't speak to bus drivers."  OK soooo what is the best way to word it?  "Passenger Cars Only?"  Oh gee I drive an SUV I guess I can't use the road then.

Funny thing is that just about every "no trucks" sign has "passenger cars only" next to it.

[SignBridge]

Yes, I should have specified, that No Commercial Vehicles was the older way to sign parkway entrances and that newer signing often says Passenger Cars Only which is better I think. Maybe the bus driver thought a passenger bus was the same as a passenger car.  LOL

BTW, MergingTraffic, SUV's are passenger cars as long as they're not being used for commercial purposes or registered with commerical plates. 

[kkt]

How much would it cost to equip all vehicles over 8' tall with commercial type GPSs?

[PHLBOS]

How much would it cost to equip all vehicles over 8' tall with commercial type GPSs?

Such won't help if the driver's using the GPS on his/her smart-phone.

[kalvado]

How much would it cost to equip all vehicles over 8' tall with commercial type GPSs?

Such won't help if the driver's using the GPS on his/her smart-phone.

I'm a bit surprised, though, that some GPS software guys wouldn't offer vehicle type option - possibly as a paid option.
Actually a remember Waze asking people on their forum if there is an interest in that - and there were quite a few suggestions. For now, they have "taxi", "electric" and "motorcycle" options - I am not sure how different are obtained directions. But looks like basic elements to add commercial vehicle option are there.

[cl94]

How much would it cost to equip all vehicles over 8' tall with commercial type GPSs?

Such won't help if the driver's using the GPS on his/her smart-phone.

I'm a bit surprised, though, that some GPS software guys wouldn't offer vehicle type option - possibly as a paid option.
Actually a remember Waze asking people on their forum if there is an interest in that - and there were quite a few suggestions. For now, they have "taxi", "electric" and "motorcycle" options - I am not sure how different are obtained directions. But looks like basic elements to add commercial vehicle option are there.

I wouldn't be surprised if Waze adds a commercial option. They added an E-ZPass option recently and that's quite nice.

[kalvado]

How much would it cost to equip all vehicles over 8' tall with commercial type GPSs?

Such won't help if the driver's using the GPS on his/her smart-phone.

I'm a bit surprised, though, that some GPS software guys wouldn't offer vehicle type option - possibly as a paid option.
Actually a remember Waze asking people on their forum if there is an interest in that - and there were quite a few suggestions. For now, they have "taxi", "electric" and "motorcycle" options - I am not sure how different are obtained directions. But looks like basic elements to add commercial vehicle option are there.

I wouldn't be surprised if Waze adds a commercial option. They added an E-ZPass option recently and that's quite nice.

It has to be an involved set  of options, ni\ot a single one, though - 53 vs 48 vs tandem or triple; hazmat, height.. But it is definitely doable..

[RobbieL2415]

Commercial vehicles means ALL vehicles registered with commercial plates.  Has nothing to do with height.

[kalvado]

Commercial vehicles means ALL vehicles registered with commercial plates.  Has nothing to do with height.

Sure, no maintenance vehicles should be able to go on that road!

[froggie]

^ Maintenance vehicles are typically government vehicles, not registered as commercial.  If it happens to be a case where a private firm is contracted out for the maintenance, I'm sure accommodations are made for their vehicle access.

[kalvado]

^ Maintenance vehicles are typically government vehicles, not registered as commercial.  If it happens to be a case where a private firm is contracted out for the maintenance, I'm sure accommodations are made for their vehicle access.

I am not sure that "no commercial vehicles" regulation makes sense. As far as I understand, this is one of Robert Moses' creations - and it is far from fair, some go as far as calling it racist.
And of course height limit due to road design is there (for better or worse) - and enforcing that limit is an obvious and logical thing. Same with weight limit.
Enforcing registration type, as it seems to me, creates confusion (13 types of vehicles not allowed on parkways) and does not really serve a good purpose - other than original Moses' idea of keeping undesirables who cannot afford a car away from relaxing middle class.
My impression is that relaxing regulations to height and weight limit on highway-worthy vehicles wouldn't change traffic pattern too much - but may reduce confusion and prevent situations like above.

[Beltway]

^ Maintenance vehicles are typically government vehicles, not registered as commercial.  If it happens to be a case where a private firm is contracted out for the maintenance, I'm sure accommodations are made for their vehicle access.

Even the Virginia Capital Trail appears built to handle occasional light truck usage, for maintenance vehicles and emergency vehicles.  I have gone under a few of the bridges and while they have timber beams they are large enough and close enough that I would surmise that the bridge could handle an occasional 10 ton truck.  Decks are also about 16 feet wide.  The land trail is asphalt surfaced, I am not sure how deep but probably at least 4 inches and likewise able to handle occasional light truck usage.

The Virginia Capital Trail is a bicycle and pedestrian trail between Williamsburg, Jamestown and Richmond in Virginia.  It is 55 miles in length and largely parallels a highway, Virginia Route 5, a Virginia Scenic Byway.

[empirestate]

Commercial vehicles means ALL vehicles registered with commercial plates.  Has nothing to do with height.

Actually, it doesn't quite mean that. NYSDOT has this definition for "commercial vehicle" (which doesn't address registration type):

(8) Commercial vehicle. Every type of motor-driven vehicle used for commercial purposes on the highways, such as the transportation of goods, wares and merchandise and motor coaches carrying passengers; including trailers and semitrailers and tractors when used in combination with trailers and semitrailers, and excepting such vehicles as are run only upon rails or tracks...

Note, interestingly, that trains are not prohibited on the NYS parkways...

^ Maintenance vehicles are typically government vehicles, not registered as commercial.  If it happens to be a case where a private firm is contracted out for the maintenance, I'm sure accommodations are made for their vehicle access.

Yes, and the DOT is authorized by law to make such accommodations (emphasis added):

§ 182.31 Restricted vehicles.

The following type vehicles, including those elsewhere defined in this Part, are not permitted
on the parkways within the parkway system, unless authorized under an agreement with the
department:

And of course, government-owned vehicles are exempt from restriction in the first place.

Finally, besides commercial vehicles, it is also unlawful to drive a vehicle with a name, logo, or sign displayed on it, except for taxis and government vehicles. (A name can be displayed for identification purposes only–i.e., not advertising–in letters no more than two inches tall.)

[Alps]

Are hire vehicles prohibited then? Is anyone measuring the sign size on Uber and Lyft? Is anyone pulling over pizza delivery cars?

[empirestate]

Are hire vehicles prohibited then?

Not apparently; taxicabs, which are not prohibited, are defined thus:

A motor vehicle having a seating capacity for passengers of not more than seven persons, in addition to the driver, and used in the business of transporting passengers for compensation.

Is anyone measuring the sign size on Uber and Lyft?

I don't think so; they don't customarily display signs, do they? In any case, since taxicabs (as defined above) are exempt from the prohibition against displaying logos, there'd be no reason to check the size of their signs.

Is anyone pulling over pizza delivery cars?

Unquestionably, yes. Whether for the purpose of enforcing the rules against commercial vehicles, however, I wouldn't know.