Prescott council delays decision on SR 89 widening after wide public comment; directs staff to extend comment period and detail effluent repairs

Prescott City Council on Tuesday decided not to vote on design alternatives for State Route 89 through the Granite Dells and instead directed staff to extend the public comment period by 30 days, hold additional public question-and-answer opportunities, and return with a plan to replace the aging effluent pipeline that underpins the project. The item had been submitted under Resolution No. 2024-1876 as the first of two public hearings on 15%-level alternative design concepts for an effluent and wastewater pipeline improvement project and associated roadway options.

The discussion drew a sustained public turnout: residents and technical commenters challenged traffic modeling, the limited sampling period for traffic counts, growth-rate assumptions and the transparency of cost information underlying an estimated project budget discussed publicly as roughly $37,000,000. Speakers recommended alternatives including implementing a lower-cost interim option (referred to in the materials as “Alternative 2B”), exploring slip-lining of the effluent main, testing smart traffic-signal systems, and producing graphical “before-and-after” views of the Narrows so the public can visualize scenic impacts.

Council members voiced a mix of concerns. Several councilors said the public outreach materials and website had been difficult for residents to navigate and that key technical files and cost breakdowns were not sufficiently accessible. Multiple speakers and at least one council member requested an independent technical review of the consultant’s analyses. Staff and consultants acknowledged restrictions in the early-stage (15%) design and said more detailed engineering and refined cost estimates would come with later design phases. City staff also reported that slip-lining the pipeline had been evaluated and rejected because of capacity loss and the lack of manholes along the corridor; staff estimated installing the required manholes would itself exceed $1 million.

Given the concurrence on the dais, the city manager summarized council direction: extend the public comment period by approximately 30 days, cancel or reschedule the second public hearing previously noticed for Sept. 9 and instead use the interval to hold a public Q&A/open-house session with staff and consultants, provide more accessible visuals and documentation, and return with a short-term plan for replacing the effluent main. The city attorney was also asked to compare the version of the consultant contract executed by the mayor with the contract council previously approved and, if substantial differences exist, bring the matter back to council.

Discussion vs. Decision: Council did not take a formal vote on a preferred roadway alternative or on project approval. Instead the body issued staff directions to gather more information, improve public access to project documents, and prioritize the effluent-pipeline replacement as a near-term action. Those directions were announced from the dais and summarized by the city manager; no formal motion to adopt a project alternative was passed.

Next steps identified by the council include: extending the public comment period by roughly 30 days, scheduling a public Q&A/open-house to present additional visuals and cost detail, returning with a plan for immediate replacement of the deteriorating effluent line (and an explanation of why slip-lining is not viable), and having the city attorney review contract versions for consistency with council-approved terms.

Why it matters: The SR 89 corridor through the Granite Dells is a scenic and heavily traveled route. The council must weigh safety and capacity needs against the road’s historic and visual character; the project also depends on complex funding and technical questions (wastewater capacity, pipeline integrity and potential traffic impacts) that residents and councilors said merit fuller study and clearer public materials before policy decisions are made.

A number of residents asked the council to consider interim, less-invasive measures first, to require clearer cost breakdowns (including “soft costs” such as design and construction administration), and to pursue independent review of the consultant Kimley‑Horn’s traffic modeling and growth-rate assumptions. Staff said some excluded items in the current contract (final design, lighting, off-site drainage, construction administration) will require separate amendments and that the currently quoted budget is therefore preliminary.

Council members emphasized different priorities: some urged moving quickly to preserve system capacity and avoid repeated emergency repairs while others pushed for delaying any vote until public materials and technical questions have been resolved. The council’s direction to extend the comment period and return with targeted technical answers means no decision on roadway widening or related construction will occur at the previously advertised Sept. 9 meeting.