The Yavapai County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously July 2 to deny Western Land Ranches LLC’s preliminary plat for a 194‑lot subdivision at Kirkland Junction, after extensive public testimony and department reviews.

The board’s decision followed multiple Planning and Zoning Commission hearings and a remand from the Board in late 2024. Vice Chair Compton moved to deny the plat, citing inadequate fire protection and unresolved water-supply questions; the motion carried with a unanimous vote.

County staff and the developer presented on technical compliance: Development Services planner Matt Blake summarized the application and recent revisions and noted the project kept the existing RCU‑2A zoning and proposed a range of lot sizes averaging about 3.8 acres. The developer’s team, represented by counsel Axel Bookwalter and engineer Scott Lyon, emphasized proposed mitigation measures — 34.6 acres of common open space, trail systems, riparian protection language in draft covenants and a planned 60,000‑gallon firefighting water storage tank — and argued the project would reduce historic agricultural water use on the site.

Public testimony was overwhelmingly opposed. Dozens of residents, ranchers and local landowners described reliance on Kirkland Creek and local wells, described past and ongoing low groundwater conditions, and urged denial. Concerns cited included: the number of new domestic wells and septic systems clustered above a riparian corridor; potential contamination and impacts to surface flows; the adequacy of volunteer fire protection and turnout distances for emergency response; and the project’s traffic impacts on rural roads such as Kirkland Valley Road and Iron Springs Road.

Multiple public-safety agencies and volunteer fire representatives participated in the discussion. County staff said the submitted fire agreement between the developer and the Southern Yavapai volunteer fire department did not resolve all adequacy concerns and that the state fire marshal had not completed timely review of the contract. Development Services noted the board has discretion under the subdivision regulations to determine what fire-protection measures are adequate for a given subdivision.

After deliberations, Vice Chair Compton said the proposed fire protection measures were not adequate to protect the subdivision or the surrounding community, and made the motion to deny. The board approved the denial unanimously. Development Services will record the board’s stated reasons on the record, consistent with ARS 11‑882(B) and county subdivision rules.

The denial closes the current preliminary-plat application. The developer may revise and refile; any future submittal would need to address the water-supply, fire-protection and riparian protection concerns cited in the board’s ruling.