Scottsdale council votes to redesign Scottsdale Road/Dynamite intersection from roundabout to signal; staff warned funding risk

The Scottsdale City Council on April 8 voted to redesign the Scottsdale Road and Dynamite Boulevard intersection from a planned multilane roundabout to a signalized intersection and directed the interim city manager to return to council with any necessary budget transfers and contract modifications.

The council majority approved the measure after several hours of public comment and technical staff presentation, with transportation staff cautioning the change could jeopardize federal grant funding and add months to the project timeline.

“The action before you is related to the potential redesign of the intersection,” said Allison Timkew, transportation and infrastructure senior director, during a staff presentation that described the two-mile Scottsdale Road reconstruction project, drainage improvements, sidewalks and medians and the original roundabout design. Timkew told council staff estimate it would take about eight months to redesign the intersection and that traffic-signal equipment procurement typically requires about nine months.

Why it matters: The intersection redesign is one element of a $40‑million‑plus corridor reconstruction that also includes flood mitigation, curb and gutter, medians and multiuse paths. Council members and many residents framed the decision as weighing local preference and driver behavior against engineers’ safety recommendations and the risk of losing federal funding.

Staff summary and schedule: Timkew said federal surface transportation funds (STBG/STBG‑like programs and a Highway Safety Improvement Program award) were obligated for the project and that changing the intersection type would require negotiation with the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) and ADOT. The presentation included an engineering estimate of approximately $280,000 to redesign the intersection, noted additional right‑of‑way and possible third‑party utility relocations, and said construction of roadway segments north and south of the intersection was already under way. Timkew said staff would seek a funding “swap” with MAG so that regional ALCP (Arterial Life Cycle Program) funds could replace the federal portion if the council directed the change.

Public comment centered on safety, cost and local input. Supporters of the roundabout cited national safety research and local crash data, including presentations that roundabouts reduce severe and fatal collisions and would slow traffic. Several residents and traffic‑safety advocates cited collision totals used in the original design and urged the council to keep the roundabout. Opponents, many of them north Scottsdale residents who said they live near the intersection, argued that multilane roundabouts are difficult for drivers, large trailers and horse trailers to navigate and that the council should heed local preferences.

Speakers also disputed the potential fiscal impact. Multiple public speakers and council members cited a figure of about $31 million in federal funding that could be affected; staff described a federal contribution figure in the slideshow and said MAG must approve any swaps or transfers. Timkew repeatedly cautioned that MAG approval is required and that there is no guarantee replacement regional funds would be approved.

Council discussion included references to safety data and to the contract status with the construction contractor. Council members who supported the redesign emphasized the number of nearby residents who opposed the roundabout and asked staff about consequences and timing. Council members defending the roundabout pointed to staff safety findings and to the long planning and grant process that led to the current design.

Motion and outcome: Councilman Barry Graham moved to redesign the intersection from a roundabout to a signalized intersection and to direct the interim city manager to take necessary steps and return to council with any required contract or budget actions. The motion was seconded and carried; the transcript records the motion as passed but does not record a roll‑call tally in the recorded minutes.

What the vote directs staff to do: The council’s direction requires the interim city manager and transportation staff to redesign the intersection, begin signal procurement planning, identify additional right‑of‑way needs, and pursue a funding transfer with MAG. Timkew said staff would submit a funding swap request to MAG beginning October 1 (federal fiscal year 2026) and that construction could continue on roadway segments outside the intersection while redesign proceeded. Staff emphasized the schedule and funding are estimates and contingent on MAG and ADOT approvals.

Next steps and risks: Staff said redesign would require an estimated eight months of design work, additional right‑of‑way acquisition (estimated at eight to nine months), possible extra utility relocations, and long lead times for traffic signal procurement. Timkew and other staff cautioned the council that swapping funds is not guaranteed; the city would be responsible for local expenditures made before any replacement funding was secured and could face change‑order costs or penalties with the current contractor if work at the intersection must be reworked.

Council members said they were balancing safety, fiscal responsibility and neighborhood input. Several residents asked the council to reconsider; others urged the council to keep the original design. Council members who voted for the redesign said they were responding to local concerns and the belief that a signal would better suit the immediate neighborhood. Those who opposed the change cited staff safety guidance, grant timelines and the potential to forfeit federal funds as reasons to keep the roundabout.

The council’s direction obligates staff to return with specifics — including any proposed budget transfers, contract amendments and associated cost and schedule impacts — before significant construction at the intersection proceeds in the redesigned form.