Relates to the presence of official full or partial lane markings on roadway

2 Co-sponsors

• Ruben Diaz
• Ruth Hassell-Thompson

Title of bill

An act to amend the vehicle and traffic law, in relation to roadway lane markings

Purpose or general idea of bill

To amend the vehicle and traffic law by clarifying which roadway official traffic control devices prohibit the changing of travel lanes in the same direction.

Summary of specific provisions

Section 1 of the bill amends subdivision d of section 1128 of chapter 206 of vehicle and traffic law by changing the language "markings are in place indicating those portions of any roadway where crossing such markings would be especially hazardous, no driver of a vehicle proceeding along such highway shall at any time drive across such markings" to read, "traffic control devices are in installed on roadways prohibiting the changing of lanes, drivers of vehicles shall obey the direction of every such device." Additionally it adds the wording "For the purpose of this subdivision, official traffic control devices are designated by a two solid white line pavement marking or a sign. Section 2 provides that this act shall take effect immediately.

Justification

As the current vehicle and traffic law 1128 (d) is written, official highway markings are those that shall not at any time be crossed by a driver. The law's original intent was as a "no lane change" provision to the vehicle and traffic law. However, the current law is vague and allows police officers to issue a ticket in violation of section 1128 (d) to anyone whom the officer deems has, in a-hazardous manner crossed a marking such as the edge line, which could include your own driveway entrance. The Appellate Term, of the Second Department found in the People v Shulman that the white edgeline along the side of the road does not constitute an "official marking" under VAT 1128 (d) . This court ruled in favor of Mr. Shulman, finding from his research that the original intent of section 11 28 (d) was in specific reference to crossing barrier markings. The white edge line along the road, for instance, does not represent a barrier marking and thus is not an official roadway marking under section 1128(d).

The presence barrier markings already indicates those portions of the roadway where the NYDOT has determined that crossing such markings would be especially hazardous and thus that changing lanes is prohibited.

Further, the extra wording "where crossing such markings would be especially hazardous" can be misconstrued as an additional criterion (to the presence of barrier markings) required being in violation of this law.

In the proposed amendment, the use of the phase "where changing lanes is prohibited", brings NYS VAT1128 (d) closer to the corresponding terminology in the Uniform Vehicle Code 11-309(d). Further, to update and clarify Section 1128(d), language from the current Federal MUTCD description, "a two solid White line pavement marking", has been added.

Prior legislative history

2007-08: Remained in committee

Fiscal implications

None known.

Effective date

This act shall take effect immediately.