Arizona 2025 Regular Session

Arizona Senate Bill SB1029

Caption

Pedestrians; street median; prohibition

Summary

SB 1029 would prohibit pedestrians from remaining on a painted traffic median or on a raised traffic island or median that is less than 10 feet wide, except when they are actively and expeditiously crossing from one side of a street to the other. The bill is aimed at limiting pedestrian presence in narrow medians and islands that are not designed for lingering or standing. The bill includes two exceptions. First, it would not apply to a person dealing with an exigent circumstance, such as a medical emergency or a motor vehicle problem. Second, it would not apply to medians or islands that are built to accommodate people, including those with constructed paths, sidewalks, bus stops, benches, or similar features.

Impact

If enacted, SB 1029 would add a new section to Arizona law in Title 28 governing pedestrian rights and duties. It would create a specific statewide rule restricting pedestrian occupancy of narrow medians and traffic islands, while preserving access for emergency situations and for medians designed for pedestrian use. The practical effect would be to give law enforcement and local authorities a clearer statutory basis to address pedestrians standing or lingering in certain roadway medians and islands.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcripts or recorded votes, so there is no documented debate or formal legislative sentiment in the materials provided. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be a safety-oriented traffic regulation focused on reducing pedestrian exposure in roadway medians rather than a broader policy change.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. Potential areas of debate, based on the bill language, could include whether the 10-foot threshold is appropriate, how strictly "expeditiously crossing" would be interpreted, and whether the exceptions for emergencies and pedestrian-designed medians are sufficiently clear. Any opposition would likely come from concerns about enforcement discretion or impacts on pedestrians who use medians for refuge or access.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

No similar bills found.