BILL NUMBER:S1316

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:
2009-10: S.5175B/A.9823 - Passed Senate

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.

EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately.