Well, now. Looks bad, yes, but is it? Long ago, Minnesota redefined "truck" and now issues licenses to all sorts of vehicles you and I would swear are trucks, but the license is a passenger vehicle, not a truck, license, which is configured quite differently. Down the parkways and residential streets they run with impunity.
Have SUV's been technically out of compliance with city ordinances? Have muffler-less motorcycles? Have blue-smoke-burning junk heaps? Is it soup yet? Enforcement? Of these laws/ordinances? Please. If the car corporations can destroy urban mass transit along with urban air breatheability with nary an official shackle raised as they've done over the past 60 years, be very sure no SUV will be pushed off residential streets or parkways or anywhere else in this state in our lifetime. Andy Driscoll Saint Paul -- on 8/5/04 8:33 AM, David Brauer wrote: > On Aug 5, 2004, at 8:13 AM, Charles Gimon wrote > >> My question is: does this mean that SUVs have been illegal to drive on >> Minneapolis residential streets all along? Is this ordinance in effect, or >> does Slate have it wrong? If the ordinance is valid, how has enforcement of >> this been approached, if at all? >> > Here's the ordinance. Looks bad for SUV-ers, but you tell me. (Note: one > pertinent section is between asterisks. Let's hope it's the longest run-on > sentence in city code, but probably not.) > > 474.790. Definition. As used in this article, the word "truck" shall include > trucks, trailers and semitrailers. (Code 1960, As Amend., � 441.010) > [snip] > 474.820. Duty to use routes. ***When any such truck route has been > established and identified, any person driving a truck having a gross weight > of three (3) tons or more shall drive such truck on such route or routes and > none other, except when it is impracticable to do so or where necessary to > traverse another street or streets to a destination for the purpose of > loading or unloading commodities or for the purpose of towing a disabled or > damaged motor vehicle to or from public or private property, and then only > by such deviation from the nearest truck route as is reasonably > necessary.*** A truck arriving at the end of any designated truck route may > be driven over the most direct course to the nearest truck route which > extends in the same general direction. (Code 1960, As Amend., � 414.020) REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
