ADOT held a public forum at the Sedona
Library on November 5, 2009 to show various lighting options for Hwy
89A in West Sedona. Sedona Councilor Pud Colquitt (center),
Steve DeVol, President of Keep Sedona Beautiful (behind Colquitt),
speaking to DeVol is Barbara Litrell, Executive Director of the
Verde Valley Caregivers. At far left in the striped shirt and
white pants, Sedona City Manager Tim Ernster.
ADOT demonstrates lighting options
for Hwy 89a in Sedona,
residents demonstrate against them
By Tommy Acosta
SEDONA, AZ (November 6, 2009) - More than
200 community residents turned out for the Arizona Department of
Transportation open house on lighting options for Hwy 89A Thursday, Nov.
5, at the Sedona Library.
ADOT staged the event to gather input from Sedona
citizens and stakeholders in order to narrow down the best and most
practical lighting options to present to the Sedona City Council for
final approval next year.
In an extremely-well organized and staged
presentation utilizing glossy picture board renderings of different
style light poles and lighting fixtures, ADOT offered 68 lighting
options that could cost the city anywhere between $150,000 and $3
million to install, depending on the choice.
According to ADOT, the lighting options could cost
the city between $11,000 and $35,000 annually to maintain and operate,
costs going up or down in relation to the aesthetic value of the
lighting systems and the amount of poles and lumens required to maintain
minimum-lighting standards set by ADOT.
ADOT representatives and officials were stationed
near the displays to answer questions by the public and to take input.
ADOT also provided a court stenographer to take verbal input from
citizens.
Comment forms for residents to ask questions on
whether people feel it is important to put lights on 89A, types of
lighting preferred and the amount of money the city should spend on
lighting, were also provided.
Although there was a well-organized demonstration
by community members opposing any lighting for 89A, ADOT officials were
happy with the turnout itself and the opportunity it had to receive
community input, negative or positive.
“We are thrilled with the turnout,” said ADOT
Public Involvement Director Teresa Welborn. “We really want to know what
the people want. People can make comments on the type of lighting they
want, pole heights and fixtures. We are following guidelines set by the
federal government. We believe we can only make good decisions with good
information.”
ADOT Public Information Officer Rod Wigman said
ADOT was not concerned whether people were opposed or for the project as
long as they came in to get information.
“Even though people voice displeasure we would
rather have them come in to talk to us than not,” he said. “There’s a
lot of misinformation out there.”
Ms. Welborn said community members who did not
attend the open house could find out everything they need to know about
the proposed lighting options by visiting the ADOT Website at AZDOT.gov
and clicking the button that says “West Sedona Lights.”
Former Sedona mayor Dick Ellis said the open house
was simply a ruse by ADOT to divert opposition to the lights.
“They are trying to pull us away from the main
issue,” he said. “They are trying to steer us away by asking us to
consider alternatives. They are trying to get us thinking about options.
The real issue is will there be lights or no lights.”
Anti-lights demonstrators at the corner
of Dry Creek Road and White Bear in front of the Sedona Public
Library on November 5, 2009 where an ADOT public forum on various
lighting options took place.
At the meeting, Sedona.biz approached and
interviewed numerous attendees and asked if they were in favor of
the lights. According to ADOT, there were people there who were in
favor of lights for 89A but were reluctant to be interviewed.
Sedona.biz asked at least 20 people if they were
for the lights. ADOT found one person. Sedona.biz found the other.
John DiBattista, speaking in favor of the lights,
said the safety of the community trumped all other concerns.
“I’m in support of protecting our community,” he
said. “If that requires lights, so be it. ADOT went above and beyond on
what they need to do to present to the community information in a manner
that makes sense.”
Jim Wizard said he was in favor of the lights
because he is concerned standard lighting would ruin the aesthetics of
Sedona.
“The bottom line is ADOT is going to put those
lights in with or without our blessing,” he said. “We have to take
control of the issue now. We should go ahead with the Monteray poles
that are similar to those now on S.R. 179. The bigger poles could hurt
our environment. We don’t want to lose control of our destiny.”
Almost every citizen who agreed to be interviewed
was against lights for S.R. 89A in West Sedona, save for traffic lights
at the Andante and Airport Road intersections.
The following are comments from a sample of those
in opposition:
“In order to install those lights ADOT must dig
trenches and cut down trees on 89A,” said Jannah Reimer. “Almost every
tree along the path could be killed or damaged. We put yellow ribbons on
the trees that would be affected. Go take a look. This is shocking.”
“I’m very upset,” said Cynthia Nasta demonstrating
outside the library. “This is not the will of the people. This will
destroy the beauty of our night skies. There is a nightmarish situation
at the Andante intersection. Light poles will not improve it. One decent
stoplight there would be a real improvement.”
“Since Phoenix has plenty of lighting on its
streets maybe we should ask how many pedestrian fatalities they had last
year,” Susan Payne said. “I’ll bet it’s a lot more than we had over the
last ten.”
“The effort to put lights in on 89A is manipulation
by fear to cause people to accept a conventional answer to a problem not
really pertinent to our situation,” Patrick Hickey said.
“The light poles will create a visual clutter
during the day, ruin our views of the red rocks and destroy our views of
our beautiful night skies,” said Larry Rosenberg. “These lights are a
synonym for ugliness. This is one of the most beautiful places in the
world. Ugliness does not make sense. These lights will ruin our
treasures – our red rock views and our night skies.”
“This event, in addition to the other events
regarding lights on 89A has become an overwhelming and resounding
message to ADOT and the city council that continuous lighting on 89A is
absolutely unnecessary,” said Barbara Mayer. “Safety, of course, is our
number one issue. But the proposed lighting is absolute overkill and
detrimental to the quality of life and essence of what Sedona really
is.”
Shedding a positive light on the open house, Sedona
City Manager Tim Ernster reiterated the ADOT position that the event,
regardless of whether people are for or against the lighting, provided
the community an opportunity to get answers and voice their views, as
well provide ADOT an opportunity to record them.
“I didn’t expect so many people to show up,” he
said. “I’m pleased to see so many people come out to express their
opinion.”
Readers' comments
#1 TO: Officials of Arizona
Department of Transportation and
Federal Highway Administration
SUBJECT: SR89A WEST SEDONA LIGHTING PROJECT
It’s difficult, if not impossible, to understand
the mind set of those who are steadfast in their
determination to install continuous lighting on
the referenced state highway.
Having listened first hand to public appeal,
falling on deaf ears, how can any of you in good
conscience continue to pursue, let alone
justify, your insistence to waste money on a
project which has been proven to be unnecessary.
Testimony has shown that a slower speed limit
and increased police patrol have significantly
reduced, if not eliminated, night time traffic
accidents on the designated route. In addition,
the saloon whereby patrons hung out and
possibly, in negligence, crossed that route
during nighttime hours no longer exists.
Traffic signals at Andante and Airport Roads are
what is needed as soon as possible.
To be remiss and waste funding which would be
put to better use elsewhere is unconscionable.
For example, the need to maintain rest stops on
interstate routes, as indicated by the attached
article, would serve to deter a far more
dangerous situation than what is being alleged
to exist on SR89A in West Sedona.
Please, please ~ cancel the FHWA Grant for the
SR89A West Sedona Lighting Project and transfer
the funding to other more worthy ADOT projects.
Thank you,
(Ms.) Eddie S. Maddock
#2 I was at the Open House at
4:30. Had I been there at the time Carl was
interviewing people I would have been happy to
tell him why I want the lights. To lighten up a
commercial area of a state highway for the sake
of safe walking, biking, and driving after dark.
Safety should always come first. I find it just
as incredible that anyone WOULDN'T want the
lights. Flagstaff is a Dark Sky city and was the
first. ADOT is offering the same lights as one
of our options. It is not a valid argument to
believe that Sedona would risk it's potential
designation due to adding the lights down SR89A.
I might also add that there are lights around
the round-abouts, Uptown and down SR179. No
complaints then. Why now?
Kathy Howe
#3 OK let's see...How about the
fact that there are many other more effective
safety treatments outlined in the 89A safety
panel report that are more effective and being
ignored (negligence). How about ADOI not
expediting putting a traffic signal up
immediately and an emergency procedure
(negligence). How about the fact that 98 percent
of the injuries on the road happen during the
day. Lights do nothing to protect people during
the day (Stupidity). How about the fact that
ADOT is trying to bulldoze this community
because they don't want to lose a $2 million
grant which will pay for significant overhead
(arrogance). Combined with the fact that they
are in a $100 million deficit this year and the
last thing they want to do is give back 2
million to the Feds. How about the fact that
they have not disclosed the contractor who gains
to benefit the most (corruption). How about the
fact that they send paid consultants to public
meetings who only get paid if the lights go up
(unethical)?
Conflict of interest? Safety First? Let's not be
naive folks. This is big business and big gov't
rolling through Sedona. 100 against to 5 in
favor according to the news report. That is
significant community controversy which should
stop the Environmental Assessment in its
tracks....in addition to the dozens of dead
trees on the roadway as a result of the ADOT
bulldozers. The old guard of Sedona just doesn't
get the new paradigm. Justice will be served for
the people of Sedona before an impartial judge
and the beauty of Sedona's starry night skies
WILL be saved for millions to enjoy. ADOT should
know that this town is mobilized and emboldened
by its careless disregard for the people who
live in this community and the millions who
visit. How much are they willing to spend to
defend this $2 million grant. That would
certainly be a waste of taxpayer money. Money
they don't have.
Nice job Sedona citizens over the last week. A
statement is being made, the honchos are
starting to rattle and the walls are going to
come tubling down. Keep pushing and chipping
away. The power of the will of the people will
not be ignored and real safety improvements will
be made.
Cliff Ochser
#4 In downtown Glendale,
California, there are two lanes of traffic in
either direction on Brand Avenue, the major
retail/business thoroughfare. At several places
along the street there are crosswalks
illuminated by embedded flashing lights in the
street surface. The pedestrian activates the
lights at the curb switch and they are
impossible to miss, along with signage and
flashing pedestrian signals.
Perhaps one of these crosswalks could be
installed from New Frontiers to Olde Sedona.
Maybe one at Andante and others in uptown. The
advantage is that they are not activated until
needed, and they definitely alert drivers that
someone is using a crosswalk. Then perhaps there
are places along the highway that can be
addressed for general traffic safety, regardless
of pedestrian usage.
Solutions are out there. We need to step outside
our sometime provincial perspective and find
them.
#6 Streeet lights in
Sedona..Ahhh yes. This whole argument reminds me
of a dog chasing it's tail. 68 options for
street lights? Gimme a break! I'd like to
address a few facts.
1) What has buisness revienews have over their
possible consumers safety?
2) Who should care 'WHO' pays for a safety
measure if whatever is adopted id 'SAFER"?
example: if 3 familly members are run over in
your neiborhood, should YOU personally care who
pays for the cost of a stop[ sign that has been
asked for throughout., or are you just satisfied
to sur whomever you can which all reidents will
pay for in the end.
Get Real! Be Proactive, and quit whinning about
$$$ and your preceived 'quality of life' and at
the least...understand, you, the residents have
to share this Red Rock Island, which by the way
is mostly US Foerst, with anyone who wants to
visit or live.
Some of you folks have waaay too much time on
your hands... Go visit New Orleans if you really
want to complain.
Readers' Comments
SEDONA.BIZ COMMENTS: We have added a new way to post comments. You can post as a guest (the name you type-in will be displayed), you can login using your Twitter account login info, or you can sign up at Disqus.
To comment as a GUEST, type your comment, name, and
email. (only the name will be displayed).
Click on POST AS GUEST. If you have trouble posting, email editor@sedona.biz, and we'll help.
