Bear Howard:
Bear Howard Chronicles
Listen to this story, read by a professional Ai announcer:
Sedona, AZ — The recent article in the local paper confirms what many of us who regularly use 179 have known for quite some time: the crosswalk between the two Tlaquepaques (north and south) does not, in fact, slow traffic. Instead, it plays a crucial role in facilitating smoother merging between uptown and westbound traffic. Despite complaints from well-meaning locals, the crosswalk creates necessary openings, helping traffic flow more efficiently. It also significantly enhances pedestrian safety and accessibility, fostering a more inclusive and community-friendly environment. Let’s not forget that there are local merchants on the north side trying to make a living, and the crosswalk aids in their business by attracting more foot traffic.
Here is the Red Rock News article for background on this BH chronicle. https://www.redrocknews.com/2024/11/29/test-show-crosswalk-closure-doesnt-speed-up-traffic/
Yesterday, I witnessed something that left me chuckling. A group of 20-plus people unhooked and moved a barricade blocking the closed crosswalk in front of Tlaquepaque. They went through all that effort rather than simply using the city-provided underpass steps away. Irony at its finest.
A Little History: Sedona’s growing popularity post-pandemic has prompted some locals to seek someone or something to blame for the increase in visitors and traffic. The crosswalk has become an easy target. Some residents and city council members have voiced opposition, citing congestion caused by the influx of tourists. However, it’s important to note that the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), not the city, governs 179, and they decided the crosswalk was necessary, so they built it when the new SR 179 was built in the 2000’s.
Despite vocal opposition, ADOT’s engineers have consistently stated that the crosswalk does not impede traffic flow. These engineers are not just offering opinions; their conclusions are based on rigorous analysis and years of expertise. Yet, the voices of the NIMBY citizen engineers, who believe they should have more sway in these decisions, often overshadow expert advice.
As we’ve seen before, the city council’s approval of the 179 underpasses was influenced by local pressure, leading them to overlook the broader impacts of the design. ADOT—the responsible agency for managing 179—has instructed the city to hold off on closing the crosswalk until studies show it would improve traffic flow. As you can see from the article, the verdict is not in on whether or not it will actually improve traffic flow during high tourism/traffic periods. First indications challenge the need to close the sidewalks at any time.
The Reality: Contrary to popular belief, ADOT studies have shown that the crosswalk is not the source of traffic problems. The real issue lies in too many cars on an inadequately designed SR 179 road and an inefficient intersection at the “Y.”
In the early 2000s, ADOT clearly stated that the two-lane $100 million plan would not work in rebuilding SR 179 from the Village to Sedona as a safer more efficient “road”. But, in the end, it was built as a two-lane road, with 10 roundabouts, and no traffic lights, after ADOT let a group of citizen “experts” be involved in the process of designing the proposed 12-mile road.
How did this happen? This group, called Voice of Choice lobbied, got their “slate” elected to the city council, and then used their “votes” to change the city’s support from ADOT’s 4-lane design to endorsing the citizen “experts” 2-lane approach. So, we have a $100 million two-lane road that has proven to be inadequate, just as ADOT’s experts predicted.
The mistake, however, was allowing the locals to have input to the extent that it steered the design process to what they preferred in opposition to ADOT’s professional engineer conclusions on future traffic needs for this well-used popular access road to Sedona. Someday in the future, the road will get rebuilt to correct what ADOT built in the mid-2000s. And let’s not forget that all of this road construction is being paid for with fuel taxes paid by the millions of Arizonans and tourists using the highways and buying gas.
Back to the “crosswalk.” The crosswalk will remain open (most of the time) alongside the million-dollar underpass, which, by the way, is a very nice river-view walkway. Previous city councils should have heeded lessons from earlier decisions that ignored expert opinions, allowing vocal residents with no design or planning expertise to unduly influence capital projects.
The Ongoing Debate: Whenever a new development or infrastructure project comes before the city council or Planning and Zoning, the usual suspects emerge: Sedona’s own citizen engineers and experts on literally everything. These are the individuals who complain on social media and at city meetings, often attempting to undermine traffic studies and technical data, demanding that projects be scrapped based on personal opinions rather than expert knowledge.
The current city council needs to learn from past mistakes and prioritize expert advice over the demands of loud but uninformed voices. Elected officials have a responsibility to make decisions grounded in facts and data, not to bend to pressure from a select few. The future of Sedona’s infrastructure depends on the council’s ability to make informed, long-term decisions that benefit the entire community, not just a small group of vocal residents. It is, after all, a “representative government” system, our city Council represents everybody, not those who can get their attention by yelling the loudest.
Conclusion: This is the outcome when amateurs run the show—whether at the federal level or in our small town. We now have an inefficient, poorly designed “new” highway and a tunnel under it that doesn’t serve its intended purpose—and we only have ourselves to blame.
Let’s hope the current city council learns this valuable lesson and allows professionals, not small-town interest groups without engineering or design experience, to lead the design of the new Western Gateway development. It’s time for Sedona to prioritize the long-term sustainability of its infrastructure and community needs, rather than listening to the loudest voices in the room.
Note: Images are Ai-generated and the story uses digital assistance for clarity and readability.
This is an advertisement
2 Comments
In this article, Bear Howard brings attention to the ongoing debate around the crosswalk on SR 179 in Sedona, Arizona. Despite opposition from some locals, Howard argues that the crosswalk does not impede traffic, but instead aids in smooth merging, pedestrian safety, and business for local merchants. He points out that the real traffic problem lies in the design of the road itself, a result of local influence that led to a less efficient, two-lane highway instead of a more suitable four-lane option proposed by ADOT. Howard critiques the city’s tendency to bend to the voices of a few vocal residents rather than relying on expert advice, which has contributed to an infrastructure that doesn’t meet the community’s long-term needs. His call is for the city council to prioritize professional expertise when planning future developments, such as the Western Gateway project, to ensure sustainable and efficient infrastructure for the future.
This reflection highlights the tension between local opinions and expert guidance, with Howard urging decision-makers to consider the broader picture when making infrastructure decisions.
Mr. Howard remains out of touch and people like him are the biggest barrier to better decisions that affect our town. Sedona needs more resident engagement, not less.
Mr. Howard is part of a long history of men who think that the wise men on the mountain top should run the show. The ignorant rabble doesn’t know what’s good for them and they have studies to prove it. It’s so ugly and repulsive. Thankfully many folks have worked hard over the years to push back. And we’re continuing now.
Listen to what this guy is actually saying: stay off NextDoor where you can dialog with your neighbors, don’t form citizen groups to advocate for your preferences, don’t be “loud” (meaning share your ideas), leave everything to him and his smart pals.
Well, they don’t seem very smart to me.
And as the recent vote on Safe Place to Park indicates, a majority of voters don’t think they are so wise either.
And let’s look at some of the examples he cites here. I’m not alone in being very grateful that 179 is just two lanes. The idea of another 4-lane highway ushering even more cars at much higher speeds into town is not appealing. In rush hour it’s a long trip to VOC and back, sure. Just as it is in towns with 10-lane highways like LA or Chicago or NY. But I’m guessing many folks who live here moved away from those places and those highways for a different way of life. No thanks. 2 lanes is perfectly fine with me here in Slowdona. There’s nothing cool about being in a hurry.
And maybe I am in the slim minority on the pedestrian underpass, but I think it’s a lovely addition to Tlaquepaque. Whatever the effect on traffic, I’m grateful The City completed that project and the resident engagement that requested it. It makes the Tlaquepaque experience so much nicer, further insulating it from outside-world stresses and making it more of a special place. Yes, simply not having to cross a busy street—much less a 4-lane one—accomplishes all that.
But I’m guessing your disdain for the rest of us lowly brutes prevents you from seeing any of it. It’s too bad.
You’re a hawk who thinks he’s dove and can’t spot the irony. I think you’re a tragic figure.
Good luck with your crusade.