Comments on: Former Sedona Chief of Police Says 89A Lights Necessary

By: Jim

Jim — Sun, 10 Jul 2011 21:42:42 +0000

Hey Ben, don’t know who Patti is but she isn’t lying about the Cornville resident who is the editor of an online publication and spends considerable time pushing for the 89A turnback. It’s the absolute truth of which you’re probably already aware. In fact, how do we know your true identity? Pointing fingers can be a dangerous thing.

By: Ben

Ben — Sun, 10 Jul 2011 01:07:31 +0000

Dear readers,
There is no Patti, and she doesn’t live in cottonwood. not to disappoint you, but there is no Liz either. these are only someones twisted alter eogs, so they can spew lies and not be caught.
Ben

By: Patti

Patti — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 16:17:26 +0000

As a Cottonwood resident, I do not understand the number of people outside Sedona City Limits who constantly toss their hat into this three ring circus of whether or not the voting citizens of Sedona should own 89A. Listening to a bunch of busy bodies, most from Cornville, chit chat about how the people in Sedona MUST agree to own the highway is appalling. Why interfere in a decision whereby the cost will be totally a burden for those within a restricted area when the extended benefits will not be changed. When ADOT built the bypass in Cottonwood it made sense for the turnback of the portion of Main Street no longer used as a state route. However, if our city leaders made a deal with ADOT to accept transfer of ownership with the remaining 89A running through our town, I’d be very angry if outsiders attempted to stick their noses into it. We, the citizens of Cottonwood, like those in Sedona would be forced to assume future costs.
I recall reading a comment on this web site about not knowing how the editor felt about this issue which I appreciated because it indicates a pure unbiased publication. Not so with two other Sedona online productions, one of which the editor lives in Cornville and consistently posts negative, prodding statements about the people in Sedona who questioned the city council’s narrow margin of support for the route transfer.

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 16:00:35 +0000

Something Mike avoids mentioning is that the city’s contribution for preferred lighting didn’t included taking ownership of SR 179. Therefore it remains a State Route and liability plus costs for repairs, maintenance, etc. including operational expenses of the lighting remains the responsibility of ADOT. Not so should the city end up owning W89A. Maybe it’s time to tell all of a story and not just imply a happy ending like other fairy tales.

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 04 Jul 2011 18:46:08 +0000

Rumor has it that ADOT paid for the SR 179 lighting system in front of Hillside which is a context sensitive design and provides a SAFE night environment. FACT – CITY OF SEDONA PAID FOR THESE LIGHTS. The lighting is installed from the “Y” to the round a bout at Canyon Drive. The SR 179 lighting cost the city $378,880 for the Pedestrian Lighting. This included 70 15-ft poles and 2 30-ft poles, and all the appurtenances that went with them. As a side note, the City did also provide $62,500 in upgrading the other lighting (converting it from ADOT standard to Visionaire). This cost is very low, it was estimated by ADOT at $907,330 (source – city of Sedona)

Note: ADOT is estimating $2.2 MILLION for 108 35′ poles on 89A – a waste of public money?
Do the math – $20,370 per light 89A
Do the math – $5,412 per light on SR179

For what ADOT is proposing to spend on continuous lights, you could put in 150 SR179 fixtures for $811,000, and have $1.4 MILLION left over for crosswalks and other safety improvements. Numbers are numbers.

By: N. Baer

N. Baer — Mon, 04 Jul 2011 18:22:32 +0000

Let’s not confuse the issue more with the use of the noun “freeway” as SR 89A is NOT a freeway. A freeway is defined as “an expressway with fully controlled access, or a toll-free highway” (Merriam Webster online dictionary).

By: Vince

Vince — Mon, 04 Jul 2011 17:49:51 +0000

Here’s a chart comparing the heights, extension, and wattage for readers who are interested in knowing the facts, rather than accepting Liz’s statements as true or even accurate.

LOCATIONS Ht (ft) (Watts) Extension Style
Arm (ft)
Proposed (108) 89A
Streetlights 35 200 HPS 2.5 monterrey
Present traffic signals 35 250 HPS 15 cobra
Round-a-bouts 30 250 HPS none monterrey
SR179 Hillside
Pedestrian Sidewalk
Lights 15 150 HPS none monterrey
Uptown Pedestrian
Sidewalk Lights 15 70 HPS none monterrey

By: Liz

Liz — Mon, 04 Jul 2011 05:09:29 +0000

Lin, Once again you seem to favor intentional gross distortion of facts. Freeway lights have never been proposed for Hwy 89-A. The lights proposed for Hwy 89A are in fact, the same dark sky compliant lights that exist today at each of the round-abouts except a few feet taller and 25% less lumen.

What next Lin, the old line “River of Lights”? You, Litrell and gang cannot fool me a second time, we (Sedona Residents) are better informed this time and we will not take on the mountain of debt required to own a Highway! We know the truth about the process of ADOT and we will put this issue to rest with a landslide Vote against ownership of Hwy 89A. Liz, SaveSedonaNow.com

By: Lin Ennis

Lin Ennis — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 22:18:07 +0000

At last we can come together on something: Let’s ALL read our mailed-to-us ballots carefully, educate ourselves on the real costs of owning the road with the first 15 years paid for by ADOT, versus owning the road four years later with no future maintenance costs paid by ADOT.

I was touched by Terrie Frankel’s appeal at last night’s Council meeting. She said we can come together for safety and for lights. I agree — but not garish freeway-style lights. Let’s use beautiful pedestrian lighting likein the gallery district, 179 and Uptown.

Isn’t this about pedestrian safety? And retaining the beauty that brings in the sales tax dollars?

The worst thing that can happen now is people feeling disenfranchised and not voting.

By: Public to vote November 8 2011

Public to vote November 8 2011 — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:11:37 +0000

November 8, 2011 is the public referendum vote on whether the Sedona City Council will pursue an agreement with ADOT to take back a section of the highway. The Sedona City Council scheduled the November 8 election date at its meeting of June 28, 2011.