Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildlife Crossing Rio Verde topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners consider $250,000 feasibility study for Rio Verde Drive wildlife crossing; no vote taken
Summary
A commission sub‑group recommended funding a feasibility study for a proposed Rio Verde Drive wildlife crossing instead of advancing a $35 million standalone project; public comment questioned the need and the commission deferred a final recommendation to a later meeting.
Commissioners on April 10 discussed whether to fund a feasibility study for a proposed wildlife crossing on Rio Verde Drive and debated whether the project should be advanced now or deferred until the roadway is widened. The item was presented by Commissioner Newman and discussed by staff and members of the public.
Public speaker Eric Filsinger, who said he has decades of experience in the McDowell Sonoran Preserve, urged caution and questioned the need for a land bridge at Rio Verde. “Is the land bridge a real need? … I don’t believe there's a huge need,” Filsinger said, citing Arizona Game and Fish tracking data that he said showed east–west wildlife movement in washes rather than across Rio Verde.
Commissioner Newman summarized work by a small sub‑group and staff, and said the large $35 million number in the city’s capital plan reflected a 200‑foot‑wide design that likely is larger than necessary. Newman proposed transferring about $250,000 from the capital plan to pay for a feasibility study that would scope alternatives, gather Scottsdale‑specific wildlife and accident data, explore costs for a range of designs (including narrower land bridges or underpasses), and evaluate timing relative to future roadway widening.
Newman said two implementation options remain: build a north–south crossing now as a stand‑alone project, or wait until Rio Verde Drive is widened and add a crossing as part of that future roadway work. Newman and staff noted there is limited accident and animal‑strike data showing a pressing safety emergency at present and that right‑of‑way and fencing considerations are complicated by city limits and adjoining unincorporated land.
No formal motion to fund the feasibility study was adopted at the meeting; Newman said the commission would consider a recommendation the following day as part of the commission’s budget report. Commissioners who spoke praised the idea of obtaining Scottsdale‑specific data before committing to a high‑cost design, and staff said a feasibility study could be completed in time to influence future capital budgeting.
