Comments on: Sedona Paid to Receive Valuable Real Estate

By: ADOT Public Hearings on I-17

ADOT Public Hearings on I-17 — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 07:58:12 +0000

ADOT Public Meeting On Plan for Improvements to Interstate 17 Between SR 179 (Sedona Turnoff) and Flagstaff in preparation of a long-range plan for the improvement of Interstate 17 between State Route 179 (the Sedona turnoff) and Interstate 40. The interchange design at this location will be a topic of discussion. The meeting will take place: Wednesday, September 21, 2011,
5 p.m. to 7 p.m., presentation at 5:15 p.m. at the Oakcreek Country Club, 690 Bell Rock Blvd., VOC Sedona. Representatives of ADOT, FHWA, and their consulting team will be available to provide information, answer questions, discuss the project, and receive comments from the public.

Copies of the draft Environmental Assessment may be viewed online at http://www.azdot.gov/I17FlagstaffStudy or http://www.adotenvironmental.com or at the Sedona Public Library.

By: Barbara Litrell

Barbara Litrell — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:53:41 +0000

In response to Bob B of uptown Sedona — You asked for someone to weigh in that doesn’t have a bone to pick. I don’t think have a bone to pick, but I do have some perspective to share. These comments are my own. I am not speaking for City Council or City staff.

I too have wondered about the exorbitant numbers being used by those opposed to the route transfer and I can only assume they are using the cost of doing 179’s 14+ miles from the VIllage to the Y (which cost ADOT about $120,000,000) and are dividing it by the miles to come up with a cost per mile and then applying it to the 4.8 miles of West Sedona’s 89A in order to come up with a $50-60 million dollar number — and sometimes more, that I have heard.

However, in my opinion, this argument uses incorrect assumptions. Highway 179 required new added roadbed with bridges, hill cuts, support walls, roundabouts, land acquisitions, and new sidewalks, bifurcation through the forest, scenic pullout/parking areas, etc. This is an apples to oranges argument.

Brent Bitz made excellent points in favor of a route transfer. The article you cited about ADOT’s project on Interstate 17 talks about a $5 million project for 6 miles of repaving of one of Arizona’s major highways, high speed, large trucks, tremendous volume. We need to stay reasonable in this discussion and separate fact from fiction in order to be informed voters. For a lot more information, check out http://www.voiceofchoicefor89a.com.

By: Bob B.

Bob B. — Wed, 07 Sep 2011 21:43:17 +0000

I really couldn’t ask for more from this article and the ones supporting on this topic. Thanks to Mr. Bitz for giving a different perspective and to writers that chose rational arguments over emotional prattle.

After helping myself to all the suggested articles here, it appears that the position for supporting the turnbackaround is best. (89A)

The financial arguments by the other side aren’t holding water after looking at ADOT’s projected cost to improve and pave Intrastate 17 from Flagstaff south (if interested look at the ADOT headlines to see what I’m referring to).

It does not appear that ADOT expenditures for a miles and miles of that major Intrastate highway even comes close to the dollars that the other side is saying the Sedona stretch of 89A will cost us even years and years down the road.

How are they so out of the ballpark with their numbers?

I’d like to hear why if someone knows. If ADOT doesn’t pay that kind of money for a major highway reno, how is it that people against the Council’s position use such big numbers?

Be nice to hear someone weigh in that hasn’t a bone to pick.

Thanks.
Bob B. (property in uptown)