Scottsdale Council rejects 'road diet' petition

Tom Scanlon, East Valley Tribune (Mesa, Ariz.)
·3 min read

Apr. 1—"Now is the time when we receive any petitions," Mayor David Ortega recites, at each Scottsdale City Council meeting.

Normally, there are none — and the meeting moves along.

But at its Feb. 20 meeting, Council received two petitions.

One had a single signature. The other was signed by 188.

Brent Bieser's lone-man petition involves the Zoning Code and Development Review Board.

"It has come to my attention," Bieser's petition states, "that at some point in the past, the Scottsdale City Council removed the requirement that any new construction and remodels on S-R zoned parcels were required to go before the full Development Review Board for review and approval with the appropriate public notifications."

This change, he insists, "has resulted in damage occurring to our residential neighborhood that is virtually impossible to repair."

He calls for the DRB requirement to be reinstated for S-R cases.

The city manager's office is still working on a response to the Bieser petition, Holly Walter, a city spokeswoman, said last week.

But a response was quickly written on the second citizen petition with 188 signatures, presented by Bob Lettieri — who is running for council this year.

According to the summary provided, "The petition asks the city to amend the Transportation Action Plan to remove six streets that are currently planned for reclassification."

The six streets are: 96th St from Via Linda to Shea; McCormick Parkway from Scottsdale Road to Hayden Road; Hayden Road from McKellips to Indian School Road; 100th Street/Frank Lloyd Wright; Drinkwater Boulevard/Scottsdale Road; and Goldwater Boulevard/Scottsdale Road.

"Reclassification in the Transportation Action Plan sets the stage for the 'Road Diet' via removal of car lanes in the future," Lettieri's petition states.

"The residents have spoken loud and clear. They don't want lanes removed from roads."

A March 11 answer to the petition — forwarded to council members — was crafted by Will Brooks, a management associate.

"The city cannot do what the petitioners request because these street segments were already reclassified in 2022 TAP," the answer states.

"However, it is clear the petitioners are actually concerned

about travel lanes being removed, not simply reclassified.

"Reclassification does not mean lanes will be removed without evaluation and public input."

Brooks added reclassification only means that staff will consider lane removals for:

—Adding key safety features for pedestrians, cyclists and auto drivers;

—Current volume of traffic being well below capacity;

—Alignment with key General Plan goals, including making decisions that strive to reduce length and number of car trips and to diversify transportation options.

"While the reclassifications won't be reversed," Brooks wrote, "city staff will continue to consult with the City Council and ask for public feedback for any proposed street reclassifications and consideration of major street lane reductions."

And, Brooks notes, lane additions or reductions "are guided by the voter-approved General Plan. By adding bicycle lanes and additional pedestrian features, Scottsdale follows the guidance to 'diversify its transportation choices that may require specific area solutions.'

"While automobile travel will remain an important part of the transportation network, the city will 'make land use decisions that strive to reduce the length and number of automobile trips.'

"Scottsdale will continue to follow this voter approved guidance."