The Sedona City Council voted unanimously on Feb. 25 to purchase a vacant parcel of land from the Arizona Department of Transportation for the stated purposes of preservation, increased control of the homeless population in the area and the possible development of a future creekwalk.

The commercial-zoned, 3.64-acre parcel is located at 676 SR 179 and the corner of Copper Cliffs Drive.

“When ADOT approached the city to discuss a possible acquisition, it was under the idea that the city would have first right to acquire it as long as a deed restriction went with the property restricting it to a specific highway purpose. We have confirmed with ADOT that this could include either a creekwalk, a creek park or something along those lines,” Deputy City Manager Andy Dickey said. “With the acquisition of the property, the final use that the city decides should go with it will need to be determined.”

Dickey said that the upcoming fiscal year 2026 tentative budget will include a proposal for a study to consider uses for the area, such as “preservation of the property,” and would include public outreach. He added that the city could look at acquiring an additional adjoining ADOT parcel in FY26.

The proposed price for the property was $998,602.50, which was the price ADOT paid in 2008. Dickey said that per the settlement agreement with R.D. Olson Development — through which the council approved the Oak Creek Heritage Lodge — “we would be looking at a 10% reimbursement of the cost of the acquisition” from Olson if the city were to buy the property and use it for a creekwalk. Dickey and City Attorney Kurt Christianson confirmed that the city has not discussed this with R.D. Olson so far.

“If the creekwalk does move forward it would be broken into phases,” Dickey said. “With the south phase we’ve identified as phase one, this would be from the Copper Cliffs area, the south end here, up to the undercrossing at 179 … phase two would be sort of the middle area of the alignment from 179 through the creek area and connecting up just south of L’Auberge Lane. And then the third phase would be the north end, which would run from this area, which is near the Oak Creek Heritage parcel, up to the north end of Uptown.”

Councilwoman Melissa Dunn asked what steps the city would take to prevent people from accessing or camping on the land before it was developed as a park.

“There’s currently homeless folks and things happening on that property that is not desirable,” Dickey said. “We would likely post ‘no trespassing’ on the property and begin to enforce that. We would be looking to keep that element off the property.”

Councilman Derek Pfaff asked if there was a mechanism by which the city could buy out the ADOT restriction on future use of the property, which Christianson said would not be possible, and if not acquiring the property would inhibit the creekwalk project, which Dickey said would become “much more difficult” without that parcel.

Mayor Scott Jablow noted that the commercial zoning would allow for a hotel and that “I would have a problem personally if that were to be done.”

In reply to questions from Councilwoman Kathy Kinsella, Dickey and Christianson explained that ADOT planned to auction the property if the city did not vote to buy it and that the proposed highway-related usage restrictions would only go into effect with a city rather than a private purchase.

“Sedona residents don’t want to go Uptown, as it is too congested,” Mary Wagner said during the public comment period. “The creekwalk will affect the neighborhood for Bear Wallow with sound pollution, with people looking in our windows, with extra trash, scaring away animals big and small with traffic, with the potential of arson, with trespassing, theft and burglary. It will take away our right to have a peaceful enjoyment of our house.”

“It’s like a place where you can get in a inner tube, paddle around, be with your kids all day,” Bear Wallow property owner Ty Weckerly said, discussing the possibility of the public using the creek. “Even if the walkway takes a turn at the hotel, they will see this area, and it is going to be the end for us. It’s not a place that’s going to work.”

“Millions come every year, and all they do is want to take and leave,” Miriam Weckerly said. “They will destroy us. They will destroy our neighborhood. There’s no doubt about it. People, when it’s hot, their children will be in the creek … I’m not sure why the city wants a creekwalk. West Fork, there’s Slide Rock. Those are places for people to go. To maybe cause a fire like in LA to go up that hill from the creekwalk, the city would be gone in no time.” Weckerley also said the city should prioritize “the 13 residents in Bear Wallow.”

“I’m fairly skeptical of the need for the creekwalk,” Pfaff said. He referred to the cost estimates for the project so far as “egregious” and said he might be able to get behind a stand-alone park more easily. “If I recall correctly, the highest level of opposition to anything [in the budget survey] was spending money on the creek walk. Seventy-five percent ‘no.’”

“I hear a lot of fear from my council colleagues about development if we didn’t buy it,” Furman said. “I would ask my council colleagues for some time for our staff to really think about it instead of just reacting in fear.”

“I think it’s a safe route to go to purchase this property,” Kinsella said. “If we don’t own it, we can’t protect it.”

“That’s a really, really sobering number that I can’t wrap my head around over riding,” Fultz said of the budget survey results. “I don’t think we have to own it to preserve it.”

Dunn said that the purchase “has, in my mind, nothing to do with the creekwalk. It has to do with making sure we don’t have homeless encampments over on the creek which can ruin the viability of the creek, besides all the other things, and then of course being able to preserve it by pulling out any trash.”

“Should we turn this down tonight, they have the right to go to auction,” Dunn added.

“I don’t think the community has changed its mind about open space and creek preservation,” Vice Mayor Holli Ploog said. “I think it needs to be cleaned up. I think we need to get the homeless out of there and preserve it.”

“It’s incumbent upon us to be responsible for that land,” Jablow said.

Following an executive session requested by Kinsella for legal advice related to the potential for building a segmented creekwalk, the council voted 7-0 to approve the purchase.