Red Rock Village rezoning:
Another out-of-town developer asks for way too much, offers way too little in return

By Marlene Rayner

Here we go again – summer in Sedona brings absurd Community Plan and City Code amendment proposals, along with “community meetings” – timed for exactly when many residents are away!

Last summer, a city-initiated Community Development Code change to increase residential density and height rules, under the guise of “affordable housing,” was soundly rejected by the community. Residents are beginning to see the pattern here.

Architect Stephen Thompson fields some pretty angry questions; area residents made it clear that they are not happy about the enormous increase in density proposed by the rezoning request.

The latest strategy to do the same, in what the city calls a special planning area, is the “mixed-use” development proposal and rezoning request for the 14.3-acre proposed “Red Rock Village,” in the West Sedona SR89A corridor. This private commercial/residential project proposes outrageous density and height changes for Sedona, using subterfuge.

This property, fronted by Windsong Trailer Park, is bordered by SR 89A, Madole Rd. and Tranquil Ave. (residential single family homes), as well as commercial and residential properties located on Andante Dr.

Doug Huberman (developer of the adjacent Safeway Shopping Center), is proposing to develop California-style (Phoenix, too!) urban expansion in Sedona. Before I go any further, let me say that residents surrounding this area (including myself) expected and would support and applaud good development in this area, supportive of local residentís needs (as also stated in the Community Plan). Further, we all would like to see the Windsong area upgraded.

The developer held two dismissive and poorly organized community meetings (July 14, July 28), and insulted the intelligence of the majority of the very small, community-affected audiences. Less than 10 percent of the 360 Sedona residents within 1,000 feet of the project attended the meeting, which was held at a time when many residents are predictably out of town, or just leaving work.

From the beginning, it was obvious at the meetings that City Development staff has spent much time working with the architect and developer. The architect and developer presented the ìneedî to increase height and housing density in order to make the Red Rock Village project profitable for themselves – and the housing “affordable.”

Explaining the unexplainable - Doug Huberman, developer

The developer’s density pitch is “over the top” for Sedona. It consists of 20-30 units per acre (depending on the acreage used for calculation) versus the city’s highest present limit of 12 units per acre for “mixed-use zoning.”

The height proposal is unconscionable, as they have asked for approval of three- and four-story buildings with penthouses topping out at 18-feet higher than the substantial knoll on Madole Rd.!

Imagine this massive development thrust upon West Sedona – 70,000 sq. feet of first floor commercial development, 180 residential units, three- and four- story buildings with underground garages, crammed into less than six-acres. Plus, the proposed multiple huge church buildings (a sanctuary, school, multi-use building, administrative housing, a 30-foot tall cross, an expansive parking lot), all placed in adjacent residential neighborhoods. In total, more than 750 parking spaces are slated for this project.

What about the displaced Windsong Trailer Park residents and the workers who gather there for day work?

And get this – the nearly 15-acre development completely surrounds one homeowner, who will not sell out (hurrah for him!).

This “mixed-use proposal” supposedly was conceptualized cooperatively with the Wesleyan Church. It should be noted here that churches do not need special zoning and can be located in any zone.

The church should be ashamed for colluding in this project. Where are their ethics in this matter if they do not need the zoning? What are they getting out of this “deal?”

The entire property is essentially a land-locked parcel, with only one entrance/exit on SR 89A for at least 180 new residents, plus the commercial traffic, and also the proposed 350-member church and its daily school traffic.

Of course, the developer avoided the entrance/exit issue, by suggesting that by connecting through miniscule Tranquil Ave., and shunting traffic through the Safeway Shopping Center (between McDonaldís and Cafe Jose), it would create alternate routes for the residential/commercial traffic and the church/school attendees ñ thus, obliterating Tranquil Ave. and Andante Dr. residences, and further complicating lower Rodeo Rd.

In addition, the project swallows up much of Madole Rd. and will force Madole residents to drive through the “Red Rock Village” to enter and exit their homes.

In order for the developer to proceed with this plan, a rezoning of the entire parcel to ìmixed-useî is required, due to significant density and open-space issues with the City Development Code. This rezoning to mixed-use must not be allowed to succeed! Besides its detriment to the Community Plan, if the project falls apart, we are still stuck with the rezoning (and massively increased density).

Although designated a ìspecial planning areaî on city maps, significant community benefit is needed to justify such substantial up-zoning – and none is visible here (other than the removal of Windsong).

Currently, only 4.15-acres are zoned commercial (those fronting SR 89A). Huberman owns 2.65 of these acres (Windsong Trailer Park), plus two residential properties purchased in 2007 (one acre total, just west of Madole Rd.). Washington-Federal Bank owns the other 1.5 acres (the former AmeriGas location).

The rest of the 14.3-acre parcel is zoned RMH-10, one residential or manufactured home on approximately 0.23 acres (about four single-family residential units per acre). Similarly, the immediate surrounding properties are zoned for residential, single-family homes (up to four units per acre).

Such a huge, mixed-use development, along with the proposed church development is more than this area can endure.

There are multiple problems with such a rezoning proposal, including but not limited to:

• Density issues (20-30 units/acre vs. current zoning of four units/acre),

• Height issues (three- and four-story buildings),

• The enormous church complex,

• A massive parking lot on a neighborhood street,

• Lighting,

• Interference with the existing view corridors for nearby residents and from SR 89A,

• The massive traffic issues,

• Safety issues with the use of Tranquil Ave. and the Safeway Shopping Center as alternate routes (where traffic safety concerns already exist since the opening of Probuild),

• Blasting/drilling for underground garages,

• Complete obliteration of native vegetation on nearly all the site,

• And finally, the development control for that entire parcel that local residents give up with the mixed-use zoning designation.

Many of us came from places already destroyed by this kind of development. We have seen it happen elsewhere. Those of us who chose to live in this beautiful small town (not urban!) did so for environmental reasons, including convenience and walkability, as well-stated in the Sedona Community Plan.

We trusted Sedona’s “buffer zones” protecting residences from commercial development, and that the adjacent residential zonings would remain preserved according to, again, the environmentally sensitive-sounding Sedona Community Plan.

This “Red Rock Village” proposal doesnít come close to anything any sensible Sedona resident would approve of. The rejection of the ìaffordable housingî Code Amendment last year should have put the city on notice that residents want a different view from City Hall. It appears here that now the plan is to push through sneaky increases in density and height proposals, property by property.

Huberman should be strictly limited to any building on his 2.65 commercial property, alone or in a deal with the bank property. This limits his development to commercial, plus a considerable number of residential units (with proper open space and two-story development), and without the church parking lot or alternate traffic patterns. The development should not surround the single homeowner (noted earlier) on that side of Madole. Road access should be centrally planned to the back (church) property, and maintained on Madole Rd. and to that single homeowner.

The entire nine-acre church property should remain zoned as RMH-10, since a church does not need any zone change to build. We have no guarantee a church will actually be built there. The pastor has suggested a five-to-20-year time frame. Remember, once the zoning is changed from RMH-10 to “mixed-use,” it is “up-zoned,” and could allow further future commercial encroachment into “residential spaces.”

The precedent here for long-term city development is huge. Make no mistake, approval of this kind of ìproperty dealî to underhandedly increase density and height may be common elsewhere, but it is only the second such deal here (including Fitchís Cultural Park development, which still remains in escrow). This proposed project is a “Trojan Horse,” bearing and obfuscating huge future implications for increasing density and height in Sedona.

Because of the potential damage to Sedona residents now and in the future, and the resentment we feel at another round of community opposition, we have a petition stating our community opposition to any zoning change for these properties, and to demand a ìsuper majorityî vote should the project get to a vote at Planning & Zoning and at the City Council.

A super majority vote requires a five-out-of-seven vote from a deliberating body, versus a simple majority (which requires four out of seven). This petition also delegates a few people (people who collected the signatures or their authorized representatives) to present the petitionersí opposition at, including but not limited to, any and all Sedona work sessions, meetings, public hearings, discussions, and gatherings coming from the Sedona Planning and Zoning Commission, Sedona Community Development, and the Sedona City Council.

A copy of the petition is available by email. Please feel free to call (203-0340) or email me (marlenerayner@yahoo.com). Someone can come by for your signature, if we havenít already called or knocked on your door.

Act now; Sedona’s future is on the line.

Articles of interest:

The role of the Sedona City Council: Rulers or Representatives?
What is the role for our City Council? To rule us, or to represent us?
By Paul Chevalier

Thinking About Sedona
Losing our right to vote
By Paul Chevalier