Scottsdale Transportation Commission outlines yearlong rollout of Strategic Transportation Safety Plan

The Scottsdale Transportation Commission opened a months-long discussion of a Strategic Transportation Safety Plan on Jan. 16, laying out an eight‑meeting schedule, public outreach tactics and the consultant-led analysis staff will use to identify high‑risk locations.

Commission staff told commissioners the plan will guide safety improvements, programs and strategies for all travel modes, with a special focus on vulnerable users; the consultant has begun collision-data analysis and a public‑participation plan that includes walking audits and virtual‑reality bicycling simulations.

Commissioners pressed staff on which peer cities are being reviewed, which stakeholders will be involved, how vulnerable users will be analyzed, and how the plan will move from draft to implementation. Staff said the plan would coordinate with state and regional partners, incorporate demographic data, and include metrics and an implementation pathway aligned with the city’s Transportation Action Plan.

Nathan (transportation staff), who presented the timeline and consultant work, said the city began consultant services in the fall and “one of the key elements is that safety is a shared responsibility,” adding the analysis will consider multimodal collision data and policies used successfully in peer communities. He told the commission the Maricopa Association of Governments’ ranking showed Scottsdale had one intersection — Indian School and Hayden — among its top 100 crash‑risk locations, and that the consultant (TyLin) and stakeholders including Blue Zones are involved in the study and outreach.

Staff described a tentative meeting sequence: an initial common‑practices and department successes briefing in February; policy and goals discussion in March; data analysis and identification of high‑risk locations in April; education, enforcement and workforce‑safety topics in May through August; a first complete draft in November; and final revisions and a planned March approval after the consultant contract ends. The presenter said the March meeting is the target for final document approval if the schedule holds.

Commissioners asked for more emphasis on vulnerable road users, separate analysis for pedestrian and bicycle crashes, demographic context for safety priorities (noting Scottsdale’s older population), and clearer metrics and timelines for the plan’s safety targets. Commissioner Marmon asked which stakeholders would participate; staff listed internal stakeholders (police, fire, planning, traffic engineering, transportation operations) and possible external participants such as public‑health representatives and ADA/age‑friendly advocates.

Public‑outreach tactics described include two public meetings, walking audits, pop‑up virtual‑reality bicycling experiences (already staged at Canal Convergence), booths at community events (Old Town farmers market, spring training), and a plan website for updates and comment. Staff said they would publish public‑meeting dates and provide recorded material for those who cannot attend in person.

Commissioners also discussed implementation and funding. Staff said some larger infrastructure measures would require budget processes and that the Transportation Action Plan’s implementation section would be used to prioritize projects if safety analysis elevates them. Vice Chair Wilcoxon recommended adding first‑responder and EMS perspectives to the plan in addition to enforcement. Commissioners suggested targeted enforcement tied to public education and recommended inviting media for outreach events that pair enforcement with education.

The commission asked staff to be explicit about how the plan’s goals will be measured, to present affected corridors and project priorities as they emerge, and to keep the public engaged through multiple touchpoints during implementation. Staff agreed to identify peer cities in February, to provide the public‑meeting schedule in advance, and to highlight vulnerable‑user analysis and demographic context in upcoming briefings.

The commission did not take a formal vote on the plan at the Jan. 16 meeting; commissioners agreed on the proposed meeting cadence for review and to allow staff flexibility to add meetings if the draft required additional review.

Looking ahead, staff said April will contain the most data‑heavy sessions, including a high‑injury network analysis and countermeasure discussion. The presenter repeated the plan’s overarching goal: to reduce crashes that result in fatal or serious injuries, and said the plan will include evaluation tools to track progress toward that goal.

The presentation concluded with staff committing to include pedestrian safety, bicycle safety, work‑zone safety and workforce protection in the plan and to return to the commission with draft materials and public‑meeting details.

Ending: Staff will present the first focused items in February and March and expects to return a first draft for commission review in November, with final approval targeted for March after revisions and public input.