The Yavapai County Board of Supervisors had determined that Williamson Valley Road from Pioneer Parkway in Prescott to the intersection with Outer Loop Road near Chino Valley must expand to five lanes (four travel lanes and a center turn lane) to accommodate future traffic needs. The project will cost the county an estimated $80 million.
The residents of the area are fighting that idea tooth and nail.
In talking with Georgene Lockwood, former president of the Friends of Williamson Valley, and Ken Mino, president of WVCP Inc., it becomes clear that these are not just your run-of-the-mill NIMBYs (not in my back yard).
Just about everyone acknowledges that something must happen with the road. It is currently two lanes (one travel lane in each direction) with no paved shoulder, no turn lanes, no concessions to ever-increasing traffic.
The major problem with the project is the arbitrary way the supervisors changed their plans from the concept of two lanes with left-turn lanes and right-hand deceleration lanes or three lanes with a dedicated center turn lane, as the plan originally laid out in 2004, into a major five-lane highway stretching from Prescott to Interstate 40.
The board arbitrarily changed the plan to the super-highway concept without the prior knowledge or input of the citizens. In October 2004 the Public Works Department held a meeting where the two- or three-lane road idea came to light. In November of that same year the plan suddenly changed to the five-lane concept.
The board based their upgraded plans on population projections relying on future subdivisions and developments along the road all the way to Interstate 40 near Seligman. One big problem with their growth scenario is the question of where is the water coming from to support all that new growth.
Another stumbling block to the supervisors' plan is the fact that those future developments will have their own town centers and shopping areas, thereby negating the need to drive several miles into Prescott to pick up a gallon of milk or loaf of bread.
Also on the board is the rural nature of the area, with horseback riding being the main form of entertainment. Horses and high-speed highways just do not mix.
The board of supervisors have taken a high hand with the residents of the area, discounting their objections as not reflecting the true will of the people because only 31 percent of the citizens responded to the Williamson Valley Corridor Plan survey in 2005, with 80 percent of that turnout opposing the widening. If 80 percent of 31 percent of voters show up to take a stand for a cause in this day and age, that's a huge turnout.
Repeated requests for a delay in putting the plan into action have reached deaf ears among the board.
The county Board of Supervisors seems determined to ram a super-highway-type road down the throats of the current citizens. That is poor governance and sets a dangerous precedent. The board must start listening to the people who elected them and at whose pleasure they serve.
Reader Comments
Posted: Monday, May 12, 2008
Article comment by:
Tom Steele
And we can thank Supervisor Carol Springer who came on the scene in 2004 for the massive alteration to 5 lanes. As George Seaman states, let the capitalists Land Barons pay the costs leading to their profits.
Posted: Sunday, May 11, 2008
Article comment by:
George Seaman
Making an aesthetic argument against widening the road simply does not hold water. I do not much like the idea of a widened road either but 'rural lifestyle' will never be a sufficient argument when we are faced with needs such as a road. It is not too distant in our past when WV road was a dirt path. People moved in and traffic increased and the road needed to be paved.
I think that the argument that makes the most sense in regards to the widening project has to do with the cost of the project and who is going to pay for it (see my comment on Ben's article). If a few corporations are going to be making a much higher profit because of a widened road (which they will), then the people who are making this higher profit ought to be the ones who are paying for the means to get it. I think that is called capitalism?
Instead, the Board of Supervisors has set up a means by which rural, non-municipal, landowners will be paying a $3400 impact fee on all new homes to pay for these roads even if they don't use them. If a person has a 40 acre piece of property that they want to develop or sell off, that fee has effectively taken away $68,000 of value from that land (if divided into 2 acre pieces) regardless if it will benefit from a county road or not. This is the real travesty of this road project, the people who are in line to make the biggest profit from the presence of a 5 lane road aren't going to bear the burden of the cost of making that profit. Some poor schmuck who thought it was a smart idea to buy some land out near Seligman or Ashfork is going to bear the brunt of the cost.
This tax is even threatening to put rural real estate agents out of business, but I guess the BOS really doesn't care too much about that either? And I must say that none of these points should come as a surprise to the Supervisors because I shared them before the implementation went into effect.
And of course there is s simple and legal solution to this problem: create true regional roadway districts which comply with state law and do away with the unfair and unjust 'one-size-fits' all mentality of the current tax burden.
George Seaman
