Currently, there are no visible (?) sidewalks North of Pinnacle Peak road on either the east or west side of Scottsdale Rd. I often see people riding their bikes or walking in the road and cars in this area generally go 50-60 MPH. In an area of higher than average tax revenues we can afford curb and gutter similar to what was done on Pima Road. There is very beautiful nature up in this area and unfortunately our transportation system in the far North does not make it easy to "go for a walk" in the neighborhood. The desert scenes are beautiful but not transit-oriented and one needs a car to safely get 1 mile. The housing developments along Scottsdale Road should have paid in to have the curb and gutter finished properly at some point. When the road floods after a long rain, the street looks muddy and messy. We have to balance keeping the desert preservation area with legitimate need for sidewalks and curb/gutter. Dynamite Blvd is in a similar state, sees a high number of traffic most days, and needs to be widened and curbed/guttered/sidewalked properly based on what was said in the city's last general plan. How do we make sure we have the funds to "execute" the general plan?

2 Support this ideas Planned

The light rail could connect from the public transit center near ASU main campus and travel north up Rural Road through Scottdale Road. This would be an effective way to sustain valley tourism as well as give the local community an easy and inexpensive way to travel.

7 Support this ideas Created

Idea: Bulk Pick Up

Tom Blank almost 5 years ago

The majority of bulk pick up is recyclable yard waste, especially tree branches. Consider having a truck with a wood chipper go around prior to bulk pick up. Use the chipped wood for parks, playgrounds, etc.

3 Support this ideas Acknowledged

I am a daily user of facebook. The City's facebook access is impossible and very discouraging for citizens to post ideas. It takes too long to get to a comment page and the access itself is far too complicated. I would hope that this is not intentional.

2 Support this ideas Created

I would like to share results of my research about Wireless Towers:

 " Cell phone companies and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration assert that
cell phone towers don’t pose health risks to the public.  Some studies
support this assertion, but other studies suggest just the opposite.
Harvard-trained Dr. Andrew Weil at the University of Arizona’s medical
center recently observed, “In January 2008, the National Research Council
(NRC), an arm of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy
of Engineering, issued a report saying that we simply don't know enough about
the potential health risks of long-term exposure to RF energy from cell phones
themselves, cell towers, television towers, and other components of our communications
system. The scientists who prepared the report emphasized, in particular, the
unknown risks to the health of children, pregnant women, and fetuses as well
as of workers whose jobs entail high exposure to RF (radiofrequency) energy….Because
so much of cell phone technology is new and evolving, we don't have data on
the consequences of 10, 20 or 30 years worth of exposure to the RF energy they
emit,”  Weil concluded.  The report called for long-term safety
studies on all wireless devices including cell phones, computers, and cell
phone towers. A 2006  report issued by the World Health Organization (WHO)
offered some reassurance and found no scientific evidence that radiofrequency
signals from cell towers cause adverse health effects.  The report noted
that up to five times more of the RF signals from FM radio and television (than
from cell towers) are absorbed by the body with no known adverse effects on
health in the more than 50 years that radio and TV broadcast stations have
been operating. But an Australian study found that children living near TV and
FM broadcast towers, which emit similar radiation to cell towers, developed
leukemia at three times the rate of children living over seven miles away. If
you live within a quarter mile of a cell phone antenna or tower, you may be
at risk of serious harm to your health, according to a German study cited at  www.EMF-Health.com,
a site devoted to exposing hazards associated with electromagnetic frequencies
from cell phone towers and other sources. Cancer rates more than tripled among people living within 400 meters of cell
phone towers or antennas, a German study found.  Those within 100 meters
were exposed to radiation at 100 times normal levels.  An Israeli study
found risk of cancer quadrupled among people living within 350 meters (1,148
feet) of a cell phone transmitter—and seven out of eight cancer victims
were women.  Both studies focused only on people who had lived at the
same address for many years. Other studies have found that levels of radiation emitted from cell phone
towers can damage cell tissues and DNA, causing miscarriage, suppressing immune
function, and causing other health problems. Astoundingly, the federal government does not allow rejection of a cell phone
tower based on health risks, according
to a 2005 article
. A
Google search found no evidence that this situation has changed. Yet over 1.9
million cell phone towers and antennae have been approved nationwide without
federal studies to assure safety of those living nearby. How many cell phone towers and antennas are in your neighborhood?  Find
out at www.antennasearch.com.  I
plugged in my address on Mt. Helix, hardly an urban stronghold, and was astounded
to discover that there are 96 cell phone towers, 286 antennas and 2 proposals
for new towers within four miles of my home!  So how about Mom’s neighborhood, where an Evangelical church insists
a new tower is needed? Mom gets perfectly fine cell phone reception, and so
do the neighbors she’s spoken with—not surprising since there are
already 113  towers and 335 antennas within a four-mile radius.  Churches, schools, fire stations, and other buildings are increasingly erecting
cell phone towers or antennas because cell phone companies are willing to pay
rental fees of hundreds or even thousands of dollars a month—welcome
infusions for cash-strapped budgets. But at what cost to the public’s
health?  There are young children in Mom’s neighborhood, less than
one block from the proposed cell phone antenna site. In Sweden, the government requires interventions to protect the public from
electromagnetic frequencies.  Why isn’t the U.S. government paying
attention to this potential risk to public safety? If you wish to share your views on the T-Mobile proposed cell phone tower
at 5777 Lake Murray Blvd. (near Marengo Avenue), the La Mesa City Council will
hold a public meeting on Wednesday, November 5th at 7 p.m. in Council Chambers
at the La Mesa City Hall, 8130 Allison Ave., La Mesa. » "

1 Support this idea Acknowledged

Jeffrey Blank almost 5 years ago

I'm not sure if Scottsdale has seen this, but I thought I'd pass it on:

http://codeforamerica.org/cities/

We recruit fellows who demonstrate a networked, web-centric, and open approach to problem-solving. Attaching the fellows to the city for the year and helping them build relationships with a wide variety of city workers is an effective way to introduce this kind of thinking and help it spread.

  • Solve complex issues in your city with custom-built tech.
  • Encourage experimentation with a new tool set.
  • Collaborate with other innovative cities.
2 Support this ideas Created

When driving east on Camelback the welcome sign into Scottsdale is blocked by a huge pipe and can be barely seen unless your looking for it. Many of the main streets have better signage than the one now be represented.  The signage should be representative of the great city Scottsdale is.  A joint venture even with Phoenix in designing a overhead sign with Scottsdale on one side and Phoenix on the other.  I believe it is important to provide a great first impression when entering a city.

3 Support this ideas Acknowledged

We are a tourist destination, so anything that offers them something to do will appeal.Select an architect that can design a destination building to house it, tie it to the zoo and the botanical gardens and wait for the hordes of sightseers. This will lead to redevelopment all along McDowell as they cater to the attendees.

It will be expensive but should pay off over the years

1 Support this idea Acknowledged

Elevated Trail on McDowell Road – Bad Idea 

Building an elevated trail on or near McDowell Road is a terrible and costly idea. Using New York City’s unused elevated train tracks to create a landscaped path was a great idea because the track were already there and would have cost more to remove. The urban density of New York is twice that of Scottsdale.

I have lived here for over 30 years and urban sprawl is the reason that areas decline in use. Attempting to jumpstart and area with an elevated walkway, which is not a destination, is incomprehensible. Phoenix has been redeveloping its downtown for over 20 years with limited success. Unless there is an event at one of the large venues the streets are empty. The big department stores and grocery stores left in the 1970s and 80s and probably will never return.

People drive from place to place they do not walk like in New York. The Light Rail is nowhere near. Connecting Indian Bend Wash to a little used Papago Park would not be used as a walkway. People drive to the Zoo and the Desert Botanical Gardens they would not walk from McDowell Road, let alone, from Indian Bend Wash.

Finally, making comparisons with this walkway to the McDowell Mountains is not comparable. The mountains have been there for tens of thousands of years; Scottsdale chose to pay so they were not developed with homes and buildings. Trails were improved or built so people could enjoy the natural wonders of the desert. The Discovery Center in the Preserve would also be a bad idea. Transporting the desert to a concrete structure under a noisy polluted thoroughfare is beyond comprehension. Please drop this costly and pointless endeavor. 

9 Support this ideas Acknowledged

Paul Townsend about 5 years ago

Approach the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian community regarding the land that borders McKellips Road south and Hayden Road east . . . currently that piece of land is vacant and farmland.  How about Legend City 2020?  Reintroduce Valley residents to our original theme park built with 21st Century technology for ride safety and summer cooling.  Right next to the Tempe Marketplace.  Could be very large tourist destination shared with Scottsdale and Tempe . . . new hotel development on the vacant MDowell Motor Mile. New sales tax revenues from the park and new surrounding businesses . . . would create LOTS of jobs in the Valley.  Good for schools . . . perhaps we could get a loan from gaming revenue to put this on the front burner and pay it off quickly with monies from advertising.  Better than Skysong or a Coyotes arena!  http://www.legend-city.com/

7 Support this ideas Acknowledged