Can a New York village (or town) write a local law letting cars park closer to a crosswalk or stop sign than state law allows, to free up downtown parking?

Plain-English summary

The Village of Williamsville faced a familiar small-town problem: not enough on-street parking for the businesses on Main Street. State law (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1202) generally bans parking within 20 feet of a crosswalk and within 30 feet of a stop sign, yield sign, flashing signal, or traffic-control signal. The village wanted to know if it could shrink those buffer zones by local law and recover a few parking spaces near each intersection. The Village Attorney asked the Attorney General whether VTL § 1202 left that option open.

Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's office said yes. VTL § 1202(a)(2)(b) and (c) allow a "different distance" to be "indicated by official signs, markings or parking meters." The statute does not say who sets that different distance, but villages, cities, and towns have a separate, express delegation under VTL § 1640(a)(6) and VTL § 1660 to prohibit, restrict, or limit the standing and parking of vehicles. Reading those two pieces together, the AG concluded that the "official signs" in § 1202 are the signs the local government posts under its delegated parking-regulation authority. The legislative history made the same point: a 1958 Department of Taxation and Finance memorandum described the amendment as identifying which provisions could be "altered or nullified by local authorities."

The harder question was whether "different" meant "greater" only, or could mean "lesser." The Legislature picked the broad word "different," not the restrictive word "greater," so a village can post a shorter minimum distance if that is what local conditions call for. The opinion did add a cautionary note: a municipality has only qualified immunity from liability arising out of traffic planning decisions, and a court can find the municipality liable if its study of the issue was "plainly inadequate" or there was "no reasonable basis" for the plan. So shortening the no-parking buffer is allowed, but the village board should do a real traffic-safety study before doing it, especially at intersections with sight-distance issues or heavy pedestrian use.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2005. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

The structural delegation under VTL §§ 1640 and 1660 has been amended several times since 2005, and the New York Department of Transportation's Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices has its own current standards for sign placement. A village considering a local ordinance now should check the current statutes and the MUTCD before acting.

Common questions

Q: What are the default no-parking buffers in New York State?
A: Under VTL § 1202(a)(2), at the time of this opinion you could not park within 20 feet of a crosswalk at an intersection, and you could not park within 30 feet of a flashing signal, stop sign, yield sign, or traffic-control signal located at the side of the roadway. The statute set those as defaults that can be modified by "official signs, markings or parking meters."

Q: Can a town or village really let cars park closer to a stop sign than state law would normally allow?
A: At the time of this 2005 opinion, the AG concluded that local governments with parking authority could indeed set a shorter distance. The reasoning was that VTL § 1202 says only "a different distance" may be set, and the Legislature did not choose the more restrictive word "greater."

Q: Does the village board need anything more than a vote to shorten the buffer?
A: Procedurally the AG opinion only addressed authority, not procedure. But the AG flagged a separate concern: under cases like Galligan v. Long Island Railroad Co. and Friedman v. State, a municipality is only entitled to "qualified immunity" from traffic-planning liability. If the municipality has not done a reasonable study and an accident later results, the municipality can be sued. So a careful board commissions an engineering study before allowing parking closer to intersections.

Q: What does this opinion say to a city or town, not just a village?
A: VTL § 1640(a)(6) delegates parking authority to cities and villages; VTL § 1660 does the same for towns. The AG's reasoning applies to any of these municipalities with delegated parking authority. The "official signs" language in § 1202 covers signs posted under any of those delegations.

Q: Can the local government post a longer buffer than state law?
A: Yes. The same statutory language, "different distance," includes greater distances. A municipality could push parking further from an intersection (for example, 50 feet rather than 30) if local conditions justified it.

Q: What if the local sign says one distance and the curb is painted a different distance?
A: Section 1202(a)(2) refers to "official signs, markings or parking meters." Each of those can establish a different distance. If a municipality is using both signs and markings, they should be consistent; conflicting signage is exactly the kind of ambiguity that triggers liability questions.

Background and statutory framework

The Vehicle and Traffic Law is, as the opinion notes, applicable and uniform throughout New York State. Under VTL § 1600, no local law, ordinance, rule, or regulation can conflict with the VTL unless a state statute expressly authorizes the deviation. People v. Grant, 306 N.Y. 258 (1954), is the standard citation for that preemption principle.

VTL § 1202 supplies the statewide rules of stopping, standing, and parking. The 1958 amendment, Law 1958, ch. 853, designated which of those rules could be "altered or nullified by local authorities" through official signs, markings, or parking meters. The Department of Taxation and Finance memorandum quoted in the bill jacket made the local-authority point explicit.

VTL § 1640(a)(6) and VTL § 1660(9) delegate parking-regulation authority to cities, villages, and towns: each may "[p]rohibit, restrict or limit the stopping, standing or parking of vehicles." The companion provisions, VTL § 1640(a)(9) and § 1660(9), authorize parking meters. Because parking meters can establish a different distance under § 1202, and only certain local governments can install parking meters, the structure of the statute implies that those same local governments can establish a different distance through any other official sign or marking.

The legislative history of section 1202 traces back to the 1957 adoption of a version of the Uniform Vehicle Code (Law 1957, ch. 698). The Joint Legislative Committee on Motor Vehicle Problems noted that New York's version differed from the Uniform Vehicle Code by allowing official signs, markings, or parking meters to modify the parking-near-intersection rules. The 1958 follow-up amendment clarified which rules were subject to that local override.

The qualified-immunity caveat draws on a broader body of municipal-liability law. Friedman v. State, 67 N.Y.2d 271 (1986), holds that a municipality enjoys qualified immunity from liability arising out of a highway planning decision, but it can be held liable when its study is plainly inadequate or its plan has no reasonable basis. Galligan v. Long Island Railroad Co., 198 A.D.2d 399 (2d Dep't 1993), applied that rule directly to a municipal parking regulation.

Citations and references

Statutes:

• Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1202(a) (compliance not required when avoiding conflicts with other traffic or following police direction)
• Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1202(a)(2) (rules for stopping near crosswalks and signals)
• Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1202(a)(2)(b) (20-foot crosswalk buffer)
• Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1202(a)(2)(c) (30-foot signal/sign buffer)
• Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1600 (no conflict with VTL absent express state authority)
• Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1640(a)(6) (cities and villages may prohibit, restrict, or limit parking)
• Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1640(a)(9) (cities and villages may install parking meters)
• Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1660 (towns)
• Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1660(9) (towns may install parking meters)
• L. 1957, ch. 698 (original rules-of-the-road codification)
• L. 1958, ch. 853 (1958 amendment clarifying local override)

Cases:

• People v. Grant, 306 N.Y. 258 (1954)
• Galligan v. Long Island Railroad Co., 198 A.D.2d 399 (2d Dep't 1993)
• Friedman v. State, 67 N.Y.2d 271 (1986)

Prior AG opinions:

• Op. Att'y Gen. (Inf.) No. 2003-9
• Op. Att'y Gen. (Inf.) No. 85-4

Source

• Landing page: https://ag.ny.gov/libraries-documents/opinions/opinions-year
• Original PDF: https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/I_2005-3_pw.pdf

Original opinion text

VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW §§ 1202, 1640, 1660; L. 1958, CH. 853; L. 1957, CH. 698.

Local governments with authority to regulate parking may permit parking closer to intersections than otherwise permitted under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1202(a)(2)(b), (c).

February 3, 2005

J. Michael Hayes, Esq.
Village Attorney
Village of Williamsville
5565 Main Street
Williamsville, NY 14221

Informal Opinion
No. 2005-3

Dear Mr. Hayes:

You have asked whether the Village of Williamsville may enact a local law establishing a minimum distance that a vehicle may park from an intersection that is less than the minimum distance required by Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1202. You have indicated that there is a shortage of parking for businesses in the Village and that the Village is interested in making more parking available on the approaches to crosswalks and intersections. We conclude that state law authorizes local governments to establish minimum distances that differ from the permissible distances otherwise applicable under section 1202, and does not preclude a local government from permitting parking closer to intersections than otherwise permitted under the state law.

Statutory Background

As you recognize, the Vehicle and Traffic Law ("VTL") is applicable and uniform throughout the State. Local governments may not enact any local law, ordinance, rule or regulation that conflicts with the Vehicle and Traffic Law unless expressly authorized by statute. VTL § 1600; see generally People v. Grant, 306 N.Y. 258, 260 (1954); Op. Att'y Gen. (Inf.) No. 2003-9; Op. Att'y Gen. (Inf.) No. 85-4. State rules governing the stopping, standing and parking of vehicles are set forth in VTL § 1202. That provision generally prohibits the standing and parking of vehicles within 20 feet of a crosswalk at an intersection and within 30 feet upon the approach to a flashing signal, stop or yield sign, or traffic-control signal located at the side of the roadway. VTL § 1202(a)(2)(b),(c). These minimum distances apply "unless a different distance is indicated by official signs, markings or parking meters." Id. Your question is whether the state statute permits a municipality to establish a different distance, and if so, whether the "different distance" may be less than that permitted by state law.

Analysis

We are not aware of any case interpreting the relevant language in VTL § 1202. We thus begin with the statute's plain language and its legislative history.

Section 1202 states that a different distance may be indicated by "official" signs, markings or parking meters. VTL § 1202(a)(2)(b),(c). It does not define "official" or otherwise indicate who may establish the different distance. Thus, nothing in the plain terms of section 1202 precludes a local government from establishing a different distance.

Relevant here is the fact that local governments, including villages, have been delegated authority to regulate the stopping, standing and parking of vehicles on highways in their jurisdictions. See VTL § 1640(a)(6) (cities and villages); id. § 1660 (towns). Villages are authorized to "[p]rohibit, restrict or limit the stopping, standing or parking of vehicles." VTL § 1640(a)(6). Thus, inasmuch as a village may regulate the standing and parking of vehicles, section 1202's authorization for the setting of different official distances can reasonably be interpreted as encompassing village parking rules.

The legislative context in which section 1202 was enacted further supports this conclusion. The statute implies that a different distance may be established by the location of parking meters. Villages and other specified local governments have express authority to provide for the installation and operation of parking meters on highways within their jurisdictions. VTL § 1640(a)(9) (cities and villages); id. § 1660(9) (towns). The authorization for local parking meters existed before the enactment of section 1202, see former VTL § 54 (McKinney's 1952), and was continued in the legislation that included section 1202, see Law 1957, ch. 698. The possibility that parking meters can establish a different distance suggests that the Legislature intended to authorize local governments to regulate parking in this way.

The legislative history of section 1202 also provides support for this interpretation of the statute. The parking regulations in VTL § 1202 were enacted in 1957 as part of a major revision of the VTL provisions covering the rules of the road. See Law 1957, ch. 698. At that time, New York adopted a version of the Uniform Vehicle Code proposed by the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances. A report of the Joint Legislative Committee on Motor Vehicle Problems, which drafted the proposed New York law, notes that the proposed state parking provision would differ from the Uniform Vehicle Code provision in that the distances specified for parking near intersections could be modified by official signs, markings or parking meters. New York State Joint Legislative Committee on Motor Vehicle Problems, Modernization of the Vehicle and Traffic Law of State of New York Based on the Uniform Vehicle Code: Part One - Rules of the Road 1954 N.Y. Legis. Doc. No. 36, at 103. The report does not, however, indicate why this variation from the Uniform Code was proposed.

The legislative history of a subsequent amendment of section 1202 is more helpful. In 1958, the statute was amended to indicate more clearly which parking, stopping and standing rules were subject to the qualification that a different distance could be indicated by "official signs, markings or parking meters." See Law 1958, ch. 853. A letter in the bill jacket describes this revision as designating which rules can be "altered or nullified by local authorities." Memorandum of Dep't of Taxation and Finance (Apr. 14, 1958), reprinted in Bill Jacket to Ch. 853 (1958), at 22 (emphasis added).

The plain language, statutory context and legislative history of VTL § 1202 thus indicate that local governments with authority to regulate parking may designate a minimum distance for permissible parking from a crosswalk, flashing signal, stop or yield sign, or traffic control signal. The remaining question is whether the Village may establish a smaller minimum distance than that provided for in the state law, i.e., whether it may permit parking closer than 20 feet to a crosswalk or closer than 30 feet to a flashing signal, stop and yield sign, or traffic control signal.

We rely on the plain language of the statute and the lack of any contrary legislative history to conclude that section 1202 authorizes a village to establish a smaller minimum distance. The statute indicates only that a different minimum distance may be established. If the Legislature had not intended to authorize the establishment of a lesser distance, it could have used a more restrictive term such as "greater," rather than the general term "different." Thus, the statutory language itself does not preclude a local government from establishing a lesser distance and thereby permitting parking nearer an intersection. The limited legislative history of this provision does not address whether the Legislature intended local authorities only to be able to further restrict parking from intersections, or whether it also contemplated that local authorities could permit parking closer to intersections. Nor is the delegation of parking regulation to local authorities instructive on this point. Villages have been delegated broad authority to "[p]rohibit, restrict or limit the stopping, standing or parking of vehicles," VTL § 1640(a)(6), which could include establishing both greater and lesser distances.

Because the statute refers only to "a different distance" and does not otherwise qualify the distances that may be established, we conclude that state law does not prohibit the Village from permitting parking closer to intersections than the distances specified in section 1202. We note, however, that while "a municipality is accorded a qualified immunity from liability arising out of a highway planning decision," it "may be held liable when its study of a traffic condition is plainly inadequate or there is no reasonable basis for its traffic plan." Galligan v. Long Island Railroad Co., 198 A.D.2d 399, 399-400 (2d Dep't 1993) (applying rule to municipal parking regulation); see also Friedman v. State, 67 N.Y.2d 271, 284 (1986) (applying rule to state highway design). The Village should therefore carefully consider relevant safety issues in determining whether to permit parking closer to intersections.

The Attorney General issues formal opinions only to officers and departments of state government. Thus, this is an informal opinion rendered to assist you in advising the municipality you represent.

Very truly yours,

LAURA ETLINGER
Assistant Solicitor General
In Charge of Opinions