The setting was the same, as were many of the faces and even their attire. But not the outcome. Earlier this year, more than 200 people filled the Yavapai County complex in Cottonwood to express their concerns over a proposed residential development outside of Sedona — El Rojo Grande. In that case, the Yavapai County Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommended denial of a zone change. The applicant subsequently withdrew and abandoned the project.
Now, jump ahead five months.
On Thursday , June 20, at least 125 people — many again wearing red in solidarity — came out to oppose a zone change request regarding a parcel at the intersection of Jacks Canyon Road and State Route 179 in the Village of Oak Creek. This is the site of a proposed 154-room Hilton Garden Inn.
Unlike El Rojo Grande, the commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the zone change to the Yavapai County Board of Supervisors, which will hear the matter on Wednesday, Aug. 21, at 9 a.m. at the county complex in Cottonwood. Attorney Jennifer Boblick, who represents land owners Chandrika and Jack Patel, said after the meeting that her clients were very pleased with the vote.
“They were very happy,” she said of the Patels, who have owned the 4.74-acre parcel since 1992. “This has been a long process and Chandrika and Jack made a lot of changes in their plans to address community concerns. Having their efforts recognized by the Planning Commission meant a lot to the Patels.”
Boblick went on to add, “When you peel away the emotional layers of this project, you are left with a very basic rezoning request. This is a vacant site that has seen a community grow around it. The site needs proper zoning that matches the nature of its location, not a placeholder district that was never intended to remain in developed areas. The Patels are exercising their right to request appropriate zoning and development of their property just like that afforded every other property owner in the Village of Oak Creek.”
As part of the recommendation to approve, the commission added several stipulations. Some of these included that if a hotel is built, the maximum height shall be 34 feet measured from the natural grade, including the parapets. The maximum height for the elevator, stairwell and shade structures will be 44 feet. If something other than a hotel is built on the property, the maximum height will be 30 feet.
Moreover, a building permit application must be submitted within five years of approval of the supervisors or the requested zoning of C2-1 [commercial, general sales and services] will revert back to the current zoning of RCU-2A [residential, rural, two-acre minimum lots]. To the surprise and dismay of those opposed, the chairman announced at the beginning of the meeting that those in favor and against the project would each receive 20 minutes to speak. Those opposed were also allowed one minute per person if they were bringing up a concern not already addressed.
Those not in favor of the project felt so for a variety of reasons. Some of those included the proposed hotel being too big, traffic congestion, too many hotels already in the area, wildfire evacuation concerns at the intersection of Jacks Canyon Road and State Route 179, impact on the quality of life, decreased property values, increased emergency service response time, lack of housing for employees and impacted viewshed.
County officials received more than 1,000 letters, emails and signatures in opposition to the project — most of which came from the VOC. They received seven letters of support. During the meeting, more than 75 written comments in opposition from those in attendance were added to the record.
A brief synopsis of their concerns were read to the commissioners by Development Services Director David Williams. The Big Park Regional Coordinating Council voted 25-3 against the zone change request on June 13 after its planning and zoning committee voted 6-3 in favor of it the week prior.
Mary Morris was one of two BPRCC members designated to speak in opposition of the zone change. She referenced the 2016 Verde Valley Master Transportation Plan, which she said lists Jacks Canyon Road at near capacity in terms of road congestion.
“That was 2016 and those findings are three years old,” she said. “It was before construction began on the soon-to-be-open 117-room Element Hotel and before redevelopment of the Sedona Vista Village commercial center. Both of these will add substantially to the congestion at that intersection. Hospitality industry statistics show that hotel guests are more transient than residents. Each guest can be expected to make many in-and-out trips from the hotel for activities daily. And then there’s the added traffic of employees. Add to this the impact of yet another, even larger, commercial enterprise pouring traffic into the already bottle-necked intersection which stands to be substantially worsened.”
Williams reminded everyone early on as to what the commission can and can’t consider when voting on a zone change.
What could be considered includes:
- Impact on surrounding properties
- Impact on traffic
- Conformance to development standards
- Maintaining the character of the neighborhood
- Preservation of safety and welfare
- Consistency with the Yavapai County Comprehensive Plan
What couldn’t be considered includes:
- Personality of the applicant
- Water availability
- Financial gain or hardship
- Economic development
- Viability of the project
- Setting precedence
- CC&R requirements
Commissioner Mark Mumaw, one of two commissioners who represent District 3, which includes the VOC, said that he’s known for years that the property in question would eventually be rezoned commercial, as are most parcels along the State Route 179 corridor through the Village. He said that with the added stipulations, it gives the county some control over what could be built under C2-1 zoning.
“This should not be a surprise to anybody,” he said in terms of a rezoning request. “It’s unfortunate that if the community wanted to do something different with it that it didn’t take some course of action like incorporation or find a way to purchase the property and turn it into something else, but they didn’t do that.”
Mumaw went on to say that he’s extremely concerned that if the county were to deny this request, it could be sued by the Patels. And based on past cases, he said none of the stipulations would have to be honored — including height nor the agreed-upon setbacks — if the court ruled against the county.
“Then you’re looking at any C2-1 zoning at 50 feet high with 10-foot to 20-foot setbacks,” he said. “I, personally, am not willing to take that kind of risk for my community. With the stipulations, this is something I can live with. This could be far, far, far worse.”
Ron Eland can be reached at 282-7795, ext. 122 or by email at reland@larsonnewspapers.com
