Parking restrictions will be based on gross vehicle weight rating
By Ashley M. Casey
Staff Writer
The town of Clay is hoping to streamline the section of its code that deals with parking commercial vehicles outdoors in residential areas. Code Enforcement Officer Joseph Grispino explained the proposed changes during a public hearing at the March 19 Clay Town Board meeting.
Currently, the ordinance reads, “No commercial or business vehicle with a maximum gross unladen vehicle weight in excess of 10,000 pounds and no racing or stock cars shall be parked outdoors in any residential district.”
Grispino said the revised ordinance will replace the ambiguous term “maximum gross unladen vehicle weight” with “maximum gross vehicle weight rating” (GVWR) and increase the limit to 14,000 pounds.
“An analogy I like to use to show why that’s ambiguous is it’s like saying, ‘What’s your gross net paycheck?’” Grispino said. “So we replaced it with ‘maximum gross vehicle weight rating.’ That is an industry term and it is placed on the driver’s side of [the] vehicle … by the manufacturer of that vehicle.”
New York state law defines GVWR as the “weight of a vehicle consisting of the unladen weight and the maximum carrying capacity recommended by the manufacturer of such vehicle.” This includes the truck itself, fuel, cargo and passengers. There are eight GVWR classes.
“GVWR classes have nothing to do with what parts the truck is fitted with, how beefy the suspension is or what the truck looks like. They are solely based on weight,” reads a 2014 article on the auto industry website Jalopnik. “These classes exist for safety regulation, commercial designation and registration purposes.”
Clay’s proposed amendment allows vehicles in GVWR classes 1, 2 and 3 to be parked in residential areas. Examples of these vehicles include:
• Class 1, GVWR up to 6,000 pounds: Passenger cars, minivans, and small SUVs, pickup trucks and cargo vans
• Class 2A, GVWR 6,001 to 8,500 pounds: Ford F-150, Chevrolet Silverado 1500, Dodge Ram 1500, Toyota Tundra
• Class 2B, GVWR 8,501 to 10,000 pounds: Chevrolet Silverado 2500, Dodge Ram 2500, Ford F-250
• Class 3, GVWR 10,001 to 14,000 pounds: Dodge Ram 3500, Chevrolet Silverado 3500, Ford F-350, Ford F-450
Grispino said the town of Salina has a similar ordinance, but Salina’s ordinance restricts residential parking to vehicles that have a gross vehicle weight — not GVWR — or curbside weight of 7,000 pounds.
Several residents questioned the proposed changes. Resident Joe August said he parks his service truck in his driveway because he is often on call overnight to service heavy equipment.
Grispino said the ordinance only applies to outdoor parking and came about because residents complain about the sound and sight of large trucks with flashing lights or backup alarms. He suggested that residents park their large vehicles in a garage or use smaller vehicles.
“That sounds good, build a garage. Well, I can’t because my lot’s not big enough,” August said. “It’s legal to drive on the road. … Why can’t it be legal to park in my driveway?”
Resident Dennis Capria said the town highway department’s “jake braking” is more disruptive than the residents who drive heavier vehicles.
“We don’t hurt anything. We don’t sit there and let them idle forever in our driveway,” he said. “You know it’s going to upset some people, so you just don’t do it. You use a little bit of common sense.”
Resident Jay Tracy said trucks “get stronger and better” each year, so while a truck with a GVWR of 14,000 pounds might suffice for now, a driver might need a heavier truck in the future and would be out of compliance.
“That’s why we moved this from 10,000 to 14,000 [pounds],” Supervisor Damian Ulatowski said. “At some point, we’ll probably have to lift it again. Right now we think we’ve lifted it to a level that makes sense to respect those people who own pickup trucks of all three sizes, in [classes] 1, 2 and 3, and also respect the other part of the population … that live in those residential neighborhoods.”
Ulatowski said the town is making changes to the proposed amendment, and the town board will vote on the issue at a later date.
