Pete Furman

Council rejects phased fees for single large increase – Sedona Red Rock News

After weeks of discussion over proposed increases to Sedona’s development impact fees, which would double them by an estimated 106% to 139%, and statements by multiple members of the Sedona City Council that the proposed fees were too high, the council voted 4-3 on Dec. 10 to direct staff to proceed with implementing the full fees as proposed by city staff and their consultant.

Council members had previously requested additional information on how the proposed fees could be implemented over an extended period on a phased schedule, and City Manager Anette Spickard presented the council with three options to phase in the fees over periods of three or four years, in each case beginning at 50% of the full amount before rising to 75% and 100% at the next two intervals, with two years at either 50% or 75%.

With regard to the proposed phase-in of the increased fees, “are we allowed to slam the brakes on this after year one?” Councilman Derek Pfaff asked.

Spickard replied in the affirmative, noting that “future councils can decide in those out years not to apply that amount.”

“I would just go with it as it is,” Councilwoman Melissa Dunn said of the proposed fees, referring to “huge impact” and “small money.”

“They’re not that much money, we heard last time,” Dunn said.

“Ditto what Councilor Dunn just said,” Councilman Brian Fultz said.

“I don’t support increasing the fees. I think it has a very negative impact,” Vice Mayor Holli Ploog said. “It’s a little bit of money, the general fund can pay for it. Our fees are beyond anywhere else in the entire Verde Valley.”

“People don’t want more development in Sedona,” Pfaff said. “If we discourage other kinds of development [than workforce housing], so what? … I don’t have any problem discouraging development.”

Pfaff added that while he supported raising the fees, he would prefer to do it over an extended period rather than all at once. “This doesn’t incentivize what we want incentivized and decentivize [sic] what we want decentivized [sic],” Councilwoman Kathy Kinsella said, expressing her support for keeping the current fee levels. “That’s the only way that I can sleep at night on this one, by not changing it on what I believe is a faulty formula.”

“I don’t agree that our fees are out of alignment with other cities and towns,” Mayor Scott Jablow said. “I don’t like the idea to raise these fees. I think it is counterproductive to housing … it’s really a tossup for me, I have no idea.”

“Which king is it that wanted to split the baby?” Kinsella asked.

The council then split as Fultz proposed implementation of the full fees, seconded by Dunn. The motion was approved 4-3, with Fultz, Dunn, Jablow and Councilman Pete Furman in favor, and Kinsella, Pfaff and Ploog in opposition.

The fees will be subject to one more public hearing for final approval on Tuesday, Jan. 14.

Creekwalk revived at council planning retreat – Sedona Red Rock News

Just in time for Christmas, the Sedona City Council considered giving residents a creekwalk.

Deputy City Manager Andy Dickey started the discussion during the council’s Dec. 11 priority retreat session by telling council that the Arizona Department of Transportation had approached the city about selling the city two parcels of land that it currently owns adjacent to State Route 179 and Sombart Lane.

“We’re looking into those at the moment,” Dickey said. “I’ve reached out to a local consultant and just completed a Phase I environmental analysis, and that showed no issues.”

In addition to the city paying ADOT the amount that it originally paid for the parcels, Dickey said, “there would be a deed restriction that requires that the city’s use of them be restricted only to transportation use. I have verified with them that this could be for trails, for potentially some kind of creek park, in this little over-three-acre parcel … As far as the creekwalk goes, this would be a key piece to that walkway. It’s just south of where we just completed the [pedestrian] underpass … the idea would be that in the future a creekwalk could connect between this parcel and 179’s underpass.”

“The idea’s not to create a Slide Rock version 2.0 here, but to restrict use to the area that we want it, and work through our legal department on how we establish restricted zones … and keep folks within the walking path,” Dickey added, a condition that Councilwoman Kathy Kinsella described as “passive recreation only.”

At the other end, Dickey noted that the creekwalk could connect to the new Ambiente: Creekside development off Art Barn Road in Uptown.

“I’ve been told that this connection is something the developer is looking into with the [U.S.] Forest [Service],” Dickey said. “This is a brand-new concept that we’re just putting out at this point.”

Staff is currently looking at moving ahead with creekwalk planning in the coming fiscal year.

“It’s really tremendously exciting to see that,” Councilman Pete Furman said. “We really are going to have think through the management of people … maybe there’s a transit element of access.”

“This is part of this bigger conversation around how do we get around in our city and how do we protect the pieces of our city, including neighborhoods, as people are moving through them,” Councilwoman Melissa Dunn said.

According to city staff’s draft plan, the tentative creekwalk route would run south along the west bank of Oak Creek from Ambiente past the Art Barn, the Arroyo Roble Resort and L’Auberge de Sedona before crossing the creek via a footbridge to the east bank at the in-development Oak Creek Heritage Lodge, traversing the island in the creek across from the Center for the New Age and recrossing the creek again to follow the west bank past Tlaquepaque down to the ADOT parcels.

Historical Background

A system of walking paths along and foot bridges across Oak Creek were proposed as part of the Uptown character area plan in 1993.

In 2007, the city considered an arrangement with Arizona State Parks that would have allowed it to fulfill its obligations under the Sedona Heritage Cultural Park Grant, which provided the city with a grant of $650,000 to be used for the development of the Sedona Cultural Park, by allocating an equivalent value of investment toward the creekwalk project. The city and L’Auberge also discussed an easement for a potential creekwalk during L’Auberge’s rezoning for renovations in 2008.

R.D. Olson Development, developers of the planned Oak Creek Heritage Lodge off Schnebly Hill Road, agreed on Dec. 10 to make a contribution of $550,000 toward the construction of the creekwalk, which will become due when the city funds the remainder of the project, the cost of which was estimated at $5.5 million at the time, up from $1.6 million in November 2014.

Council settles with RD Olson to end Heritage Lodge suit – Sedona Red Rock News

The Sedona City Council voted 5-2 on Tuesday, Dec. 10, to reverse its June 25 reversal of the Planning and Zoning Commission’s unanimous approval of Oak Creek Heritage Lodge hotel project on the grounds that it did not satisfy environmental and planning requirements.

The council reversed itself in order to enter into a settlement agreement with property owner RD Olson Development, which sued the city in Yavapai County Superior Court on July 24 for “effectuating [sic] a zoning decision in the context of an administrative appeal,” abusing its discretion and acting in an arbitrary and capricious manner by overturning the commission’s approval.

Prior to the council’s acceptance of the settlement agreement, oral arguments in the suit had been scheduled for Wednesday, Jan. 15.

Under the terms of the agreement, RD Olson will break up the southern cluster of buildings into a larger number of smaller buildings, reduce the extent to which balconies overhang the floodway on the property, increase the number of parking spaces from 90 to 118, set limits on the number of event attendees and non-guest customers and contribute $550,000 toward the city’s proposed creekwalk or pedestrian bridge adjoining the resort property.

The contribution will not be due until the city fully funds the creekwalk plan, the cost of which is estimated by city staff as being $5.5 million.

The City Council’s renewed interest in a creekwalk will be covered in the Dec. 25 edition of the Sedona Red Rock News.

In exchange for these concessions, the council agreed to reverse its previous finding and approve RD Olson’s development review, allowing the project to proceed, and to exempt the Heritage Lodge from the increased development fees that the council voted to approve later during the meeting.

The development fee increase will also be covered in the Dec. 25 edition of the NEWS.

“We’ve received a number of comments alleging that the city does not have authority to change course at this point and that it just has to accept the outcome of the litigation,” City Attorney Kurt Christianson told the council. “The City Council has both inherent authority and express authority to settle this litigation. City Council, just like all litigants, has authority to enter into settlement agreements.”

“No new traffic study was done,” Christianson said in response to a question from Councilman Brian Fultz. “It’s anticipated to be the same, or slightly less with the restrictions on the guests.”

Public Comment

Members of the public came down 10- to-4 in support of the settlement agreement during the hearing.

“It disturbs me that we have to have an attorney and an attorney and an attorney to present developments,” neighbor Jake Weber said, and recommended having either more lawyers or fewer lawyers on the council. “This will help the budget. This is a long-term tourist that stays with us.”

“I ask that you consider this to be a future classic addition to Sedona, because it will be one that we can all be very proud of,” Fred Shinn said.

“I am totally in support of this stellar development,” neighbor Terri Frankel said. “Planning and Zoning got it right … Robert Olson and his team have since polished the diamond.”

“The Olson development is a quality development,” neighbor Mary Kyllo said. “His development will be an asset to my neighborhood.”

“I am absolutely, completely and totally opposed to the scale of Mr. Oslon’s resort,” neighbor Miriam Wackerly said, and predicted that the creekwalk would have “horrible negative effects.”

“You want to open up an area to, what, we have 6, 8, 10 million visitors per year?” Wackerly asked. According to the city’s latest tourism study, the city received an estimated 3,160,322 visits in 2022 and averages 1.39 million unique visitors.

“They’re going to be walking basically in our backyard … It’ll end up a toilet because people will go in Oak Creek. If they have that access, they will … It’s insanity … during COVID, the ducks left, the eagles left, the animals left,” Wackerly said.

“This is a new application. The developer doesn’t want to go through the process again. He wants to steamroll through City Code,” Timothy LaSota said. “The vote was the vote, it was final, and that was it … your code requires you to stick with that decision or approve a new application.” LaSota also urged that arbitrary and capricious arguments are “practically impossible for anyone to win against the government.”

“You guys are trying to erode, with this plan, both sides of the creek,” Michelle Thomas said. “Who’s going to stop people from going in the water?”

“When a guest stays at a fine resort like this, that’s one less house being rented,” Al Comello said.

“Going through this whole process, I just kind of wonder, what is the point of doing it if we’re just going to be met with lawsuits and then not get anything out of it,” said Lauren Thomas, who had initiated one of the appeals of the commission’s decision and was personally sued by RD Olson as a result. “Inviting more people to come to our private area — it’s wrong.”

Councilwoman Melissa Dunn said that she was “cognizant of the compromises that have been made with the settlement” but was still not comfortable that the traffic issues previously raised by members of council had not been resolved.

“When I voted to overturn the P&Z decision, it was expecting that we would arrive at a point of a settlement negotiation,” Fultz said before echoing Dunn’s sentiments on traffic.

“The reality is, it was zoned. The hotel rooms are less than what could be built there … the Olsons have tried to work with us,” Vice Mayor Holli Ploog said. “I appreciate that we have to compromise in this world … I’m very very conflicted but I’m also very practical.”

“Sedona needs a new resort like I need a new hairbrush, but that’s not the standard,” said Councilman Derek Pfaff, who is bald. “As much as I would like to find an excuse to say no, I’m hard-pressed to figure that.”

“The best would be to leave it virgin land,” Mayor Scott Jablow said.

During the council’s previous hearing on the resort, architect Stephen Thompson told council that the land in question had been under cultivation for 1,200 years.

Jablow then added that the proposed revisions to the resort “solved the issues I had with it.”

The council voted 5-2 to approve the settlement agreement, with Fultz and Dunn opposed.

The yellow-billed cuckoo, which had been referenced by several of the appellants as a reason to overturn the P&Z vote, who suggested the area was cuckoo habitat, was not mentioned.