Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Amphitheatre Restoration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident group proposes phased restoration of Sedona Amphitheatre, ties revenue to housing funding
Summary
Sedona Cultural Park 2 (SCP2) proposed restoring the city amphitheatre in three phases (initial cost ~ $2.0M, full build to ~5,500 seats ~$12M additional) and integrating mixed‑use housing on other parcels to help finance operations and housing programs; council requested more financial details and structural reports while noting community concerns.
Jennifer May and members of Sedona Cultural Park 2 urged the council to restore the city amphitheatre and make the park a cultural and housing hub. "This is an opportunity to bring back a treasured cultural asset while addressing one of Sedona's greatest challenges together in one integrated vision," May said during the presentation.
Architect Daniel Gensvold and engineer Herb Tiffany described an updated Cultural Park master plan that would retain the amphitheatre and place housing in terraces to the rear of the site. Tiffany outlined a phased renovation: Phase 1 estimated at just over $2.0 million to restore site drainage, stage and seating to 1,845 fixed seats; Phase 2 at roughly $7.5 million to restore the venue to about 5,063 seats; and a Phase 3 build‑out adding premium seating and amenities for roughly $12 million, bringing a potential total to complete the original vision in the tens of millions.
SCP2 said a nonprofit operating model, paired with city ownership of the venue, could channel ticket, parking and concession taxes toward housing and park maintenance. "Our goal is a funding stream that reduces reliance on the general fund and avoids new taxes," the group said. Councilors asked for structural condition reports and clarification of long‑term operational risk; city staff and one councilor noted a prior city structural assessment and said staff would retrieve the report for council review.
Public comment at the hearing included voices both for and against housing on the Cultural Park; an initiative group told the council it supports cultural uses but opposes residential development on the parcel. Several councilors said they remain cautious about the city's fiscal exposure and want clearer business projections and donor commitments before supporting a city role beyond facilitating discussions.
Next steps: SCP2 and city staff will continue due diligence; staff will compile structural assessments (existing reports were referenced) and return with more detailed financial modeling, donor commitments and options for partner operating agreements. No formal action or commitment was taken.
