Indiana 2025 Regular Session

Indiana Senate Bill SB0183

Introduced
1/8/25  
Refer
1/8/25  
Report Pass
2/4/25  
Engrossed
2/21/25  
Refer
3/3/25  
Report Pass
3/31/25  

Caption

Road intersection safety.

Impact

The introduction of SB 183 is expected to have a significant impact on local regulations and land use around county, municipal, and township roads. By imposing the requirement for a clear line of sight at road intersections, the bill emphasizes the responsibility of property owners in maintaining safety standards for public roads. The law will provide local officials with the authority to notify property owners of noncompliance and take corrective actions, including the removal of obstructions if necessary. This could lead to changes in how properties near intersections are developed and maintained.

Summary

Senate Bill 183, titled 'Road Intersection Safety', seeks to enhance the safety of road intersections not controlled by traffic signals in Indiana. The bill mandates that property owners or lessees at such intersections maintain a line of sight area that is free from obstructions. This line of sight area includes the right-of-way of each intersecting road for a distance of fifty-five feet from the center point of the intersection and sets restrictions on vegetation and structures exceeding three feet in height. The bill is designed to prevent conditions that could obstruct the visibility of drivers, therefore reducing the likelihood of accidents at these intersections.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB 183 appears to be generally supportive among legislators focused on public safety, with a notable push from local government bodies who see the need for clearer standards to prevent accidents. However, concerns have been raised about the potential financial burden on property owners who may need to remove existing obstructions to comply with the new regulations. This tension highlights a balancing act between public safety goals and the rights of landowners.

Contention

Notable points of contention include how the bill's requirements will be enforced and the balance between public safety and private property rights. Critics may argue that stringent regulations could lead to disputes over compliance, especially if property owners are unaware of the restrictions or if they believe existing structures should remain. Another contentious aspect is the financial implications for landowners, who may face costs associated with the necessary alterations to their property to meet the new standards.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

UT HB0290

Bicycle Lane Safety Amendments

MS HB1197

The Safe Solicitation Act; create to regulate issuance of solicitation permits.

CA AB2744

Vehicles: pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle safety.

NJ A3749

Permits municipality to establish restricted parking spaces for certain volunteer firefighters.

NJ A2816

Permits municipality to establish restricted parking spaces for certain volunteer firefighters.

ND HB1298

The amount of statutory fees, speed limitations on multilane highways, variable speed limits, alteration of maximum speed limits on state highways, speed zone reduction limitations, and city fines and penalties; to provide for a legislative management report; and to provide a penalty.

MT HB43

Generally revise motor vehicle traffic regulation laws