| Author | Post |
|---|
DavidB
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 416 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 4th, 2008 01:32 am |
|
I guess I am at a bit of a loss as to why this is such a hot button issue for some. If noise level restrictions are retained, what difference does it make if jets or helicopters are allowed to use the airpark? If helicopter approach and departure rules prevent them from overflying surrounding neighborhoods, how is this going to deny you use and enjoyment of your homes? That flight school out of Gateway ran helicopters over Orchard and Pegasus for months and nobody said anything about that. Now all of a sudden helicopters that will be following tighter rules with regard to where they fly is a crisis? It just isn't logical.
To those who propose flying out of Gateway, what would be the point of living in an airpark if you had to drive to Gateway to fly your aircraft? That completey marginalizes what Pegasus offers that most communities don't and limits the already very small demographic that is in the market for this type of home.
When you say that the development of Pegasus will only benefit the homeowners, you must not be thinking about the property taxes and the influx of revenue that a completed development would bring to the community. We all need roads, parks, and infrastructure. Where do you think that money is going to come from? We can't keep borrowing it from the state. Attracting the types of people that can afford these types of aircraft will certainly lead to increased sales and property tax revenues as well as much needed revenue for struggling local businesses.
One need only look at Stellar Airpark in Chandler as an example of what a development like this can do for a community. Business THRIVES in that area because aviation attracts it.
Do you think a "Ghost Town" is a good thing for Queen Creek? Limiting options for potential residents just might grant you your wish. Do you really think that empy lots in Pegasus is helping anybody's property values? Real estate 101 would teach you that when an area becomes fully developed, ALL properties increase in value because of basic supply / demand.
Just my 2 cents
|
here2day_gone2morrow_qc
Member
| Joined: | Tue May 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 101 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 4th, 2008 01:06 am |
|
| Mr. Ron S. I am want to know can the Orchard Ranch have a presenter with this info to the HOA and maybe then some people there are not so spooked like the horse. Maybe to have a knee jerk reation is not a surprise. I am ask you Mr. GClark if you can get this or someone to make current information to be part of a HOA meeting for you.
|
Ron S.
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 32 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 4th, 2008 12:41 am |
|
It is true that some helicopters are louder in db level then smaller prop planes but there are still larger prop planes already allowed with higher noise levels. Pegasus Airpark proposes to keep the helicopter noise level below that by restricting the helicopter traffic pattern so helicopters are forced to climb and descend over Pegasus from the traffic pattern altitude which will prevent them from having any low flights over populated areas. Furthermore for a densely populated area such as Orchard Ranch the pattern can be restricted so no helicopter traffic is allowed to arrive or depart in that direction. Helicopters do not require a large traffic pattern like fixed wing so they can route themselves away from populated areas, houses, horse trails, etc.
The weight restrictions on Pegasus for a maximum of 12,500 pounds gross weight also applies to helicopters so this will keep out any of the larger noisy type of corporate aircraft.
Helicopter training traffic from Gateway Airport has been flying over the Queen Creek area and using Pegasus as a checkpoint on their route north and south. This traffic uses a lower altitude then the Pegasus traffic pattern so the few helicopters that may be based at Pegasus will most likely create less noise the transient traffic.
|
here2day_gone2morrow_qc
Member
| Joined: | Tue May 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 101 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 11:47 pm |
|
Mr. Ron S have make a good post but am still leave with me want to know how much the decible for the helicopter. It can appear to reading that some compromise can be have make for the quiet jet up to certain size but maybe not for allowance of the helicopter. I am ask that question and to say if you are ok about it?
Mr. GClark please to tell us if the town and the council have make a reply to you of thses issue. Can you be open to a quiet jet but small and to only block the helicopter?
|
Ron S.
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 32 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 10:59 pm |
|
Bambi,
Pegasus has a limit as to how many aircraft it will eventually have. If you exclude a class of aircraft that typically create less then 60 db on takeoff but allow those that create 70 or more db then eventually the higher db aircraft will fill Pegasus and it will have more noise then if the jets were allowed. The typical jets that will use Pegasus will be small, meet stage three noise requirements, be under 12,500 LBGW, and be flown less then prop planes. For example the Eclipse 500 jet is only 54.9 db on takeoff, a Cessna 210 prop plane is 73. Look at that sound level comparison chart I attached on the other post. Conversational speech is 60 db unless you’re shouting.
The word jet makes people think of a 747 airliner so don’t let anyone tell you Pegasus could ever have anything that big. Gateway’s runway can handle a 747 loaded with enough fuel to fly from Phoenix to Tokyo so I would worry more about their traffic affecting the quiet area then Pegasus.
|
starleen
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 329 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 09:55 pm |
|
Bambi wrote: Besides Ron, it will spook the horses at the Equestrian Center, ,upon takeoff and landing.
Bambi, you must be on meds. Planes come in and out of that airpark right now and don't "spook" horses, especially clear over by Riggs and Hawes. Read the HOA information, it will answer your questions. These are small private plane owners. The runway is only 5000 feet. Please everyone, do your homework and don't get hysterical when you hear the words "jet" and "helicopter."
http://pegasus-airpark.com/index.html
"Pegasus Airpark is requesting a modification to the current stipulations that will allow jets and helicopters to be based and use Pegasus Airpark. This modification will have NO impact on the current noise constraints imposed by the stipulations today. Due to technological advances within the aerospace industry this modification will allow aircraft with acceptable noise signatures access to the airpark that previously did not exist."
http://www.pegasus-airpark.com/RZ_08_020.html
The noise study:
http://www.pegasus-airpark.com/AircraftNoiseLevelAnalysisPegasus_FinalReport.pdf
Last edited on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 10:16 pm by starleen
|
starleen
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 329 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 09:47 pm |
|
| The noise limits are not being changed. The aircraft size limit is not being changed. Modern small jets have powerplants that are quieter that piston aircraft. Jet-A fuel is less volatile that Av Gas. Did you read the HOA information at all? Do you think they are they lying? It is an airpark community! Rich people have rights too!
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3503 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 09:44 pm |
|
| Besides Ron, it will spook the horses at the Equestrian Center, ,upon takeoff and landing. Which way do you take off? East or West. Land? How long is your runway? Was it built to handle jets, and if so, how big. The Gateway airport has one of the longest runways in the state, as it was an Air Force base before, and is 10,000 ft. long to handle tankers. Plenty of room. Last edited on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 09:45 pm by Bambi
|
QC_Stop_The_Insanity
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 10 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 09:18 pm |
|
Ron
If you want to fly a jet or a helicopter more power to ya. But do your takeoffs and landings at a facility just a few miles up the road called Williams Gateway or Phoenix Mesa Gateway Airport that is already set up to handle the traffic with more buffering and less impact to your good neighbors. That would be the neighborly thing to do. Why should a few be such a big impact to many?
|
Bambi
Member
| Joined: | Tue Sep 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 3503 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 08:47 pm |
|
I have a daughter and son in law who live in the north neighborhood of Pegasus. They are very much against it. You will destroy the peace and tranquility that was promised to them thru their private property rights promised by the government. They will look to the government to stand behind them.
Do you understand that noise travels out here, great distances, as there is nothing to block it...no high density or large airports to buffer it. Did you read or experience like many of us, the San Tan Flats issue....noise issue? Do you understand how loud those jets will be on take off? And the Helicopters? Ten times louder than the music being played to all the residents around here by San Tan Flats. Too loud for anyone to put up with....there is nothing around to break up the noise, and I am not going thru another law suit to stop any of the unnessary noise from unnessary, frivilous causes. Is there not a noise abatement law that dissallows excessive sounds? Go to Gateway and use that for your jets and helecopters. But not out here please, in our rural atmosphere. Stick with the props. Thank you.
|
Ron S.
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 32 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 08:05 pm |
|
When Ellsworth goes to 6 lanes the noise problem will be resolved because the Orchard Ranch residents will no longer be able to hear the traffic at Pegasus Airpark. The average street traffic (85db) and heavy truck noise (90db) will block any sound of quieter aircraft over ½ a mile away. See Sound Level Comparison Chart DNL_Average_Noise_Level.pdf attached.
Ron S.
Pegasus Lot Owner
Attachment: DNL_Average_Noise_Level.pdf (Downloaded 6 times)
|
starleen
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 329 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 05:26 am |
|
CSI_QueenCreek wrote: starleen wrote:
As for Pegasus, The place is hardly occupied. The rationale in the letters makes good sense to me. I wish I could afford a place in Pegasus!
The standard for the town to drop their standards shouldn't be based on the occupancy rate of Pegasus. Just because Pegasus looks like a ghost town doesnt mean we throw all the Orchard Ranch neighbors under the bus. I guess under the jet would be more applicable in this case. The standard must be higer such as what is the benefit to the overall town? Who will benefit and how if this were allowed? Tell us something other than how it will fill up Pegasus ghost town.
One noticies you have only talked about jets on this and the topic is quite clear to say helicopters too. You don't say anything about helicopter noise. Is it less than 65DNL? What is DNL? I know a plane or helicopter must be louder than 65 db which most people know.
I don't see it as dropping standards, I see it as upgrading qualifications due to technology improvements. The noise standard remains the same.
Some helicopters have piston engines, some have jet powerplants. The noise from the blades - no different. Noise restrictions - no different.
I drove by there this evening. So many empty lots, but the existing homes are beautiful. Capitalism at its finest! Couldn't hardly see Orchard Ranch from there. If Pegasus was fully occupied under current standards with bunches of small fixed wing piston engine aircraft going to and fro - what would Orchard Ranch have to say then? If the rules are changed to allow high end private aircraft in there, it will benefit not only Pegasus but the surrounding neighborhoods and TOQC reputation as a whole. If you can refute any of the HOA statements regarding the proposal, let's hear it.
|
CSI_QueenCreek
Member
| Joined: | Tue May 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 142 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 02:24 am |
|
| http://www.broward.org/airport/pdfs/noise_faqs.pdf But I still dont get it.
|
CSI_QueenCreek
Member
| Joined: | Tue May 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 142 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 02:23 am |
|
starleen wrote:
As for Pegasus, The place is hardly occupied. The rationale in the letters makes good sense to me. I wish I could afford a place in Pegasus!
The standard for the town to drop their standards shouldn't be based on the occupancy rate of Pegasus. Just because Pegasus looks like a ghost town doesnt mean we throw all the Orchard Ranch neighbors under the bus. I guess under the jet would be more applicable in this case. The standard must be higer such as what is the benefit to the overall town? Who will benefit and how if this were allowed? Tell us something other than how it will fill up Pegasus ghost town.
One noticies you have only talked about jets on this and the topic is quite clear to say helicopters too. You don't say anything about helicopter noise. Is it less than 65DNL? What is DNL? I know a plane or helicopter must be louder than 65 db which most people know.
Last edited on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 02:26 am by CSI_QueenCreek
|
starleen
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 329 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 01:44 am |
|
But what's good for starleen is good for everyone, don't you understand that!?! 
Hey, I wasn't the road planner who made Ellsworth a major north south road. That evolved over many years and was influenced by many different things. But it is what it is. I think Power and Ellsworth should be wide but not Sossaman or Hawes. I think the freeway should not blaze through existing neighborhoods if nearby state land can be used. I think there is a middle ground, but some people want no growth and all the roads to stay the same and everyone to go back where they came from (NIMBY) - and that's not going to happen!
As for Pegasus, I hate to see it become the victim of knee-jerk airport prejudices. The place is hardly occupied. The rationale in the letters makes good sense to me. I wish I could afford a place in Pegasus!
But what the heck, I think I'll move to Coolidge instead. They don't even have a newszap blog; maybe it is a contented place.
|
CSI_QueenCreek
Member
| Joined: | Tue May 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 142 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 01:03 am |
|
| Look at all the previous posts from Starleen who seems very in favor of protecting Rancho Jardines where he or she lives. Starleen also wants to protect Pork shop and pinal areas from freeway. Protect Sossaman road around Rancho Jardines to protect Starleen. Also to help protect Starleen he or she wants to widen Ellsworth to as many lanes as possible to take traffic off of Rancho Jardines. I see how it is.
|
GClark
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 10 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 12:55 am |
|
| The fact is when we moved in the area of Pegasus we understood that no jets or helicopters were allowed, now they want to change the use to fit the needs of a few and ignore the rest of the community. I would argue that this would increase values it would in fact have the opposite affect and drive values lower. If it help anyone it will only help Pegasus not anyone around them. You also need to ask the question; is it safer (environmentally and physically) the way it is permitted now or would it be safer with the change?
|
CSI_QueenCreek
Member
| Joined: | Tue May 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 142 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 12:45 am |
|
starleen wrote:
starleen wrote:
starleen wrote: jrenae wrote: Is this a "remembrance" celebration? Because I can't recall much of a rural area that is left to celebrate.
Maybe you need to get out and about more often, or maybe you need to recalibrate your defintiion of "rural."
I live in Rancho de Jardines, have you driven those roads lately? Don't just drive trhough the Chandler Heights and Power intersection; go into the neighborhoods north and south of Chandler Heights. Hundreds of families, living the quiet life, regardless of their choice to own horses or small livestock, celebrating their lifestyle every day - even though it is not on your way to work so you can observe. We're happy that the Sonoqui Wash is near completion. We hope Sossaman can be preserved as two lanes through this area. We have looked at For Sale signs for years on the properties near the Power/Chandler Heights intersection - as well as along Chandler Heights. There is obviously no market for the areas near the intersection - who wants to buy a residential horse property across the street from a retail center? With increased population comes increased commerce - and commerce needs a home. Properly managed with buffer zones, this intersection could continue to evolve as a great neighborhood center.
starleen wrote: luv2garden wrote: I agree we need to protect what's left. And that means not rezoning rural lots that were in subdivisions to commercial!
Protect what is left? That should be left up to the market, the community mix. You want the town to subsidize the dairies or the farms or the equestrian properties or the agricultural related commercial businesses so the thousands of people who bought cheap but say they moved out here for "dark skies" can make a drive by and enjoy a rural view on there way home? Do you really know what rural involves? Train tracks, dust, transient workers, smells, tractors on the roads going 5 mph.
Anyone who wants to protect my "rural" lifestyle can volunteer for the hard labor it takes to keep the animals and sustain the land so they can maintain their drive-by view.
It also seems you would work to protect some neighborhoods in Pinal County from wide roads. See below.
starleen wrote: QCVillager wrote: there are four corridors/allignments/alternatives under consideration. each alternative is about 1 mile wide. (so the study area is effectively 4 miles wide)
when built, the actual freeway spur would require 300 feet of width.
i don't intend to offend anyone here, but just want to highlight the fact that (looking at the map) regardless of which alternative is chosen, it won't be the entire shaded area that is in the way... indeed, only 300 feet of width within whichever shaded area is chosen is needed. (it would be like taking the red line on the map labeled Loop 202 and putting a similarly thin red line inside of any of the shaded study areas/alternative corridors)
It is not like a 300 ft wide ribbon of cement will be peacefully winding its way through the area - the secondary commerical and industrial impact on either side of it will be tremendous, as it has been along the 202 San Tan, and I think 1/2 mile is actually conservative. Save the Pork Shop! (It's not too soon for T-Shirts!)
Take a walk south on Gilbert Road starting at Riggs, down past the San Tan Motor Complex, across the 202 bridge, and past the power retail center to Germann - I think it is about a mile wide at that point. I imagine developers as well as munincipalities, residents and business owners will be trying real hard to shape how this new corricdor turns out.
From the city of Mesa website:
Santan Corridor
The Santan Corridor area is approximately 1,320 acres along the proposed Santan Freeway corridor between Southern Avenue and the power lines. Theportion of the Santan Corridor between the power lines and Power Road is included in the Williams Gateway Growth Area. The width of the Santan Growth Area is approximately ½ mile on either side of the proposed freeway right-of-way. The area provides excellent transportation linkages in terms of freeway access to both the Santan (Loop 202) and Superstition (U.S. 60) Freeways, as well as to Williams Gateway Airport. There are excellent opportunities for employment and commercial growth in this area because of the potential for using the multimodal transportation systems in this area, as well as the large amount of vacant land. Development and redevelopment of land in this area provides great opportunities for sales tax enhancement.From the town of Gilbert Website:
Santan Corridor
The Santan Corridor is generally bounded by a line ½ mile wide following the Santan Freeway layout on both sides, Gilbert Road on the west, Pecos Road and the Eastern Canal on the north and northwest and the Railroad on the north east boundary.
The Santan Corridor will include a regional mall site, several retail power centers, and a hospital campus. This area is capable of supporting concentrated development comprised of a variety of land uses including commercial, high rise office and residential uses, tourism and business parks. The Spectrum at Val Vista, a major mixed-use project, and undeveloped business park and Light industrial lands east of Gilbert Road complete the corridor.
starleen wrote: Bambi,
Welcome back!
If the impact of corridor 4 on existing residences is as stated, I agree other corridors should be considered first.
Good point that TOQC would benefit most from corridor 4 yet the impact of all the corridors is outside town limits.
And, if TOQC wants to maintain a country feel, they should prefer the corridor furthest away.
Last edited on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 12:50 am by CSI_QueenCreek
|
starleen
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 329 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 12:17 am |
|
http://www.pegasus-airpark.com/Neighborhood_Meeting_Notice_Letter.pdf
I read the attachment and also found this HOA letter, and I can't see what your problem is, since the noise level limits will not change (65 DNL) and in fact newer smaller jet powered aircraft (under 12,500 lbs) can have noise levels less than many types of similarly sized piston aircraft, and they are safer. (http://www.eclipseaviation.com/eclipse_500/features/)
It is still a 5000 foot runway; John Travolta's not coming to visit in his 727 anytime soon!
It also says that Jet- A fuel can be used not only by jets but by some diesel powered aircraft and also some propeller type aircraft, such as the Pilatus PC-12, have jet engine powerplants. Pegasus is a struggling community and deserves every chance to add amenties to increase sales - and if Pegasus can acheive its potential it will be good for everyone's property values.
As for Ellsworth, the amount of traffic on that road won't increase or decrease if it is 6 lanes, 8 lanes, or 4 lanes. It is a major north south viaduct and should be widened for safety all along its length, as should Hunt. The improvements shoud include noise berms, landscaping, trails and sidewalks.
Last edited on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 12:39 am by starleen
|
wscampbe
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jun 17th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 45 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 08:10 pm |
|
here2day_gone2morrow_qc wrote: Please Mr. Greg Clark to keep post here if you get someone there to return your telephone or make a email.
 Did someone take your telephone?Last edited on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 08:13 pm by wscampbe
|
here2day_gone2morrow_qc
Member
| Joined: | Tue May 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | Queen Creek |
| Posts: | 101 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 07:03 pm |
|
I am found in the past to have not gotten a reply to my emails to them councils. Now I am make a ballot for some new people who won the election and am hope they will not be same of no response. Please Mr. Greg Clark to keep post here if you get someone there to return your telephone or make a email.
Some excuse in prior has been of not having a email in town but to use a hotmail or gmail or some msn mail. I have been mad of this since it seems sneaky to me.
|
GClark
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 10 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 06:27 pm |
|
Stop the Jets and Helicopters Now!!!
The Town of Queen Creek is “inclined to approve” the request from Pegasus Airpark Flight Association to allow the use of jets and helicopters at the airpark and to build an on-sight Jet fuel storage tank.
The people living in Orchard Ranchettes or surrounding communities did not move out to Queen Creek to be next to a noisy airport with jets and helicopters. When we bought here, we were told that we would be living next to a private airport that would only allow small, single-engine aircraft. There was no allowance for jets or helicopters at all. Now, years later, after we are in and settled, they want to change the use plan.
This is absolutely unjust. If this were allowed, our property values would plummet even further than they already have, our noise levels would increase, and the potential for an accident would be far greater.
What is the benefit to the Queen Creek community of allowing jets and helicopters at Pegasus? With Williams Gateway Airport just a few miles away, there is already a place for these types of aircraft with a complete, fully staffed and operational facility, including fuel. When questioned, Dave Williams, the planner assigned this case, could not come up with any benefits for the people of Queen Creek. He admits that noise levels would likely increase due to helicopter traffic and that the town would implement no restrictions regarding flight patterns or hours of operation. In other words, helicopters and jets could be flying directly over our houses at 3am. He anticipates a large increase in flight traffic into and out of Pegasus in the next few years if this plan is approved.
In fact, it appears that the only people that would benefit from this change would be those trying to sell lots at Pegasus and potential homeowners in that neighborhood who wish to fly jets and helicopters into the area.
I can only see negative impacts from allowing this to go through, and if the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission are willing to approve this, they have not done their job of representing the people of Queen Creek. This proposal benefits the few but would have a negative impact on the rest of the community.
We need your help and support to stop this Amendment (Case #RZ08-020). A public hearing scheduled by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Town Council is set for July 9th at 7:00 PM at the Town of Queen Creek building. We need as many people to show up as possible. We also need to send as many letters as possible to the Queen Creek Planning and Zoning Commission (attention: Dave Williams, Planner, email: dave.williams@queencreek.org) and the Town Council: (art.sanders@queencreek.org, craig.barnes@queencreek.org, jeff.brown@queencreek.org, joyce.hildebrandt@queencreek.org, gordon.mortensen@queencreek.org, jon.wootten@queencreek.org).
[size=There will be a Petition signing for Wednesday and Thursday the 2nd & 3rd of July at the ][size=Orchard][size=][size=Ranchettes][size=][size=Community][size=][size=Park][size= from][size=6:30 p.m.][size= to about][size=8:00 p.m.][size=]
We need Volunteers! Please contact us if you can help:
Greg Clark: 480-570-6426, greg@itaska.com
or Tom or Nancy Henkel: thenkel@cox.net
Thank you,
Greg Clark
[size=But wait, there’s more].
Maricopa County Department of Transportation (MCDOT) is holding an Open House Meeting at the Queen Creek Town Hall on July 8, 2008 from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. to present plans to widen Ellsworth Road to 6 lanes; yes, that’s right, 6 lanes (3 travel lanes in both directions). The proposed road improvements would be from just North of Hunt Highway all the way up to Cloud Road.
I am all for roadway improvements, but 6 lanes is a little much. I think a 4 lane road would be sufficient and that 6 lanes is unnecessary and is overbuilding. Where is it going to anyway?.. Hunt Highway, a 2 lane road, and to the North of Cloud, again a 2 lane road. I think that how they have completed Ellsworth Road up by the GM Proving Grounds is as much as is necessary, 2 lanes in each direction with a center turn median.
These are just my thoughts, but I enjoy the semi-rural feel of Queen Creek and I think that the proposed 6 lane road seems to be quite excessive. Your input is needed if we are going to have any effect on the proposal. We need as many voices as we can get. There is an email contact for MCDOT: Nariman Zadeh at narimanzadeh@mail.maricopa.gov or by phone at 602-506-8623. An alternative contact number for more information is Roberta Crowe 602-506-8003.
Again, the more people that show up at the open house the better, and remember to send in those letters to the email address listed.
Thank you,
Greg Clark
We need the community to come together to stop this proposed amendment in its tracks. I have attached a flyer that we have been handing out and are asking for everyone against the proposed amendment to show up to the meeting scheduled at the Town of Queen Creek Wednesday July 9th at 7:00 PM. We are also holding a Petition signing to oppose the proposed amendment at the Orchard Ranchettes Community Park Wednesday and Thursday evening the 2nd and 3rd at 6:30 p.m.
Please pass this information on to all of you neighbors. We want to keep Queen Creek quiet, safe and enjoyable.
Attachment: PegasusNarrative(001).PDF (Downloaded 4 times) Last edited on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 06:28 pm by GClark
|
Current time is 09:39 pm | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 |
|