HB 1628 is a broad land-use and utility-siting bill that would substantially shift regulatory authority over certain large infrastructure projects from local governments to the state. It defines a “multi-jurisdictional infrastructure project” to include projects involving electricity, gas or fluids, or water infrastructure that affect more than one county, and then makes the state the sole regulator for the siting and construction of qualifying electric generation facilities of at least 50 megawatts and for the siting, construction, and deployment of transmission, distribution, and storage infrastructure. For those projects, local ordinances, zoning approvals, permits, and other local land-use controls would be preempted, and applicants would not need local permits or zoning approvals for siting and construction.
The bill also revises a wide range of Indiana local development procedures. It requires local units to use specific flood and rainfall data when regulating stormwater runoff, sets deadlines for plat committee review and plan commission action, and deems a plat approved if written findings and a decision are not issued within 60 days after a public hearing. It creates timelines for permit review, requires extensions when delays are caused by extraordinary events, and establishes rules for development agreements that lock in applicable legal restrictions for the duration of the agreement, subject to limited exceptions. It also repeals the existing statute that generally freezes applicable zoning and related rules for three years after a permit application is filed and replaces it with a new “developer’s rights” framework.
A major portion of the bill updates Indiana’s wind and solar siting statutes. For wind power devices and commercial solar energy systems, the bill keeps or revises setback, noise, shadow flicker, glare, fencing, drainage, underground cabling, decommissioning, and bonding requirements, while also limiting local authority to impose more restrictive standards in certain respects. It preserves waiver options with written consent from affected property owners for some setback and performance requirements. The bill also requires decommissioning plans and phased financial security for both wind and solar projects, with periodic reevaluation of estimated removal costs and authority for local governments to remove abandoned assets if owners fail to do so.
HB 1628 would materially affect Indiana Code provisions governing utilities, planning and zoning, subdivision control, permits, development agreements, and local government authority. It would add new chapters and sections in Title 8 and Title 36, amend existing wind and solar siting laws, and repeal IC 36-7-4-1109, replacing it with a new set of developer-rights provisions that constrain how local governments can change rules affecting pending or approved projects. The practical effect would be to reduce local discretion over large energy and infrastructure projects and to create more uniform, state-level rules for development timing, approvals, and vested rights.
Because no committee transcript or vote history is provided, the overall sentiment cannot be measured from recorded debate or roll calls. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears pro-development and pro-certainty for project owners, while also preserving some environmental, safety, and nuisance protections for nearby property owners. The most likely points of contention are the strong preemption of local zoning and permitting authority, the broad developer protections against changing regulations, and the detailed siting rules for wind and solar projects, which may be viewed as either necessary predictability for infrastructure investment or as a significant erosion of home-rule and local control.
The bill would amend Indiana law to centralize regulation of qualifying multi-jurisdictional utility infrastructure projects at the state level and to preempt local ordinances, permits, and zoning approvals for those projects. It would also revise Indiana’s planning, subdivision, permit-timing, and development-agreement statutes, replace the existing three-year permit-vesting rule, and update wind and solar siting requirements, setbacks, decommissioning obligations, and local review timelines across multiple code titles.
No committee discussion or voting record is included, so there is no documented legislative sentiment from hearings or floor action. From the bill text, the measure is structured to favor faster, more predictable development approvals and stronger statewide control, while retaining some property-owner protections and technical standards; that suggests likely support from development and utility interests and likely concern from local governments and opponents of preemption.
The central point of contention is the bill’s broad preemption of local authority over large energy and infrastructure projects, including the elimination of local zoning and permit requirements for qualifying projects. Local governments and home-rule advocates would likely object to the loss of discretion, while utilities and developers would likely support the statewide uniformity and reduced approval risk. Additional likely disputes involve the new developer-rights provisions that lock in existing rules for years, the repeal of the current permit-vesting statute, and the detailed wind and solar setback, noise, and decommissioning requirements, which balance project certainty against neighboring landowner and community concerns.