At its planning retreat on Tuesday, Feb. 22, the Town Council agreed that staff should continue outreach and get more resident feedback on a proposal for development of Sunridge Park at Sunridge and Desert Canyon drives.

The Town owns the roughly five acres of land at the intersection and it has been included in numerous Town documents related to park development, including council-approved parks master plan and Community Services Master Plan as well as the voter-approved General Plan. The SunRidge Canyon HOA has, however, expressed firm opposition to the plan.

Town staff met with Sunridge residents at an HOA board meeting last summer. Those at the meeting generally opposed development of the park site but did agree to assist the town in a survey of HOA members regarding the park.

The survey did not ask directly whether the park was a desired amenity for the neighborhood, and the Town received HOA and some resident pushback because of that. Community Services Director Rachael Goodwin reported to the council that since the park plan was already approved in several Town planning documents they did not ask about the desirability of the park.

“The survey was designed to understand the desired amenities, layout and accessibility of the park,” Goodwin said. “This information is an integral starting point for conceptual park renderings, development of cost estimates and the progress phasing.”

The park was presented as a passive facility with picnic tables, walking trails, benches and possibly a ramada.

The survey also asked about the desired parking, lighting, operation hours and closing gate.

The survey was targeted to Sunridge residents, as they would be the most impacted as well as the most likely users of the facility. It would be a public park.

In working with the HOA in presenting the survey, staff said the association was unable to provide email addresses for the Town to use to distribute the survey. According to staff, the HOA was provided with a sample email correspondence with background information, project content, survey link, website link and contact information to use for outreach regarding the survey.

SunRidge Canyon has 775 residents; however, the HOA could not confirm how many residents received the survey notice. The HOA stated they did encourage residents to share the email and let neighbors know of the survey by word-of-mouth.

Staff reported receiving 208 responses to the survey, representing approximately 27% of the total homeowners within Sunridge.

Councilman David Spelich was perplexed and asked Goodwin how she could put any credence in a survey with such flawed distribution. Councilman Gerry Friedel supported the idea of going back to the residents to get additional feedback but told staff to include a direct yes or no, do you want the park?

Pushback

The Town and council members received numerous emails regarding the Sunridge proposal. In January Dale and Stacey Shaw expressed concern with the way the Town was approaching the residents in an email to staff and council members.

“We completed the requested Town survey on the proposed development of Sunridge Park,” The Shaws state. “Frankly, we’re frustrated. We can understand why many folks might not have wanted to fill it out. It wasn’t designed to solicit opinions, either pro or con. It seemed designed to shoehorn responders into accepting a foregone conclusion and opting for ‘improvements’ they may not want in the first place. That is not community involvement.

“We’re not scolding; we’re asking for genuine interaction with the surrounding homeowners this park is designed to serve. We truly believe staff and residents can devise beneficial projects if there is open, solution-oriented interchange.

“We hope that, as the town’s governing body, you will give staff clear direction on how to work with the community.”

In a response to the Shaw’s email, Town Manager Grady Miller said, “Town staff had always intended to have a citizen engagement process with SunRidge residents to obtain their input on the proposed neighborhood park. This included an open house or other public meetings to obtain public input and one or more surveys.

“This was jumpstarted several months ahead of schedule after staff members were invited to the Sunridge HOA board meeting last July to answer questions about the proposed neighborhood park.

“So, I would agree with you that the process you’ve observed was not ideal and one that the town would not typically follow.”

The Times received a letter from Sunridge resident Wendy Dachel, which included a copy of a letter the HOA sent to residents following an HOA meeting attended by Town staff.

The letter raised potential negative concerns someone might have for a park including traffic, loitering, pedestrian safety and homelessness.

“I could not be more ashamed or embarrassed by the stance the Sunridge Canyon HOA board has taken on my behalf in regards to the proposed PASSIVE (writer’s emphasis) park,” Dachel said. “The blatant classism, ageism and paranoia disgust me.

“It is obvious that the board was really grasping for straws with their list of concerns and embarrassed themselves with their attempt to keep out the townspeople who may fall short of upper-class status. To me it definitely shows short sightedness and elitism that do not represent me.”

One concern raised by the HOA letter was using the park as a jump-off point for trail access into the Fountain Hills Preserve. Miller told the council at the Feb. 22 retreat that without HOA consent the town could not access the Preserve and that a trail option was taken off the table long ago. He said he would be sending a letter to the HOA manager saying the Town would no longer be pursing that option.

The morning of the council retreat, Sunridge resident Boe James wrote Miller to state his concerns regarding the park. No public comment would be taken during the retreat discussion, and no official action was taken.

“To the survey results, I would like to add that the survey was very well written to solicit that members wanted items in the park,” James said. “Although I indicated by comments in my response that I did not want the park, I did respond to the question about use saying that I would use it if it were there. I and many others don’t want the park or see any need for it since there are plenty of walking trails in and around SunRidge Canyon, but if (the park) were there, I would probably use any hiking trail…to vary the routes taken.

“I strongly believe that this park should not be a Town priority while other areas of the town could better use a local park. SunRidge Canyon is close (adjoins) to Gold Eagle Park and has two of its own pocket parks in close proximity to the proposed Sunridge Park.”

Spelich also said he was a little taken aback by some of the emails he had received regarding this subject. He said one even suggested the park would result in drive-by shootings in the neighborhood.

“Give me a break,” Spelich said. He added that if he thought such a threat existed that he, a retired Chicago police officer, would personally intervene to prevent gang attacks.

Survey

The survey results presented to the council showed 61% commented in the “other” option on amenities. According to Goodwin most of those comments said they did not want the park.

Of the options presented by the survey nearly 43% said they would want walking trails in the park. A ramada or shade structure garnered more than 30% support. Overlook benches and water fountain or bottle filling station each received support from about 25% of the respondents.

Councilman Mike Scharnow, who led the Town’s Parks & Recreation Commission in the first days after incorporation, said he finds the situation disappointing.

“It is unfortunate that things got off on the wrong foot,” Scharnow said. “Now we find ourselves backing in.

“I’m in favor of getting more input, we are going to get pushback even for a small park. Is it really worth it?”

Staff will be working to send out a new survey to all SunRidge residents by mail.