Click this link to optimize Flagstaff Community Forum for screen readers Skip to Content
Flagstaff Community Forum
Opengov

What did you think of the six growth ideas that were presented during the webinar?

7 registered responses


Please be as specific as possible and note which growth ideas you are referring to in your response.

Answered
7
Skipped
0

Please be as specific as possible and note which growth ideas you are referring to in your response.

Answered
7
Skipped
0

Are we missing anything we should consider as we develop and model scenarios?

Answered
7
Skipped
0

Are you affiliated with any of the community organizations listed below? (Select all that apply) If you are affiliated with an organization not listed, please enter the name in the "Other" response option.

Response Percent Response Count
La Plaza Vieja Neighborhood Association 40.0% 2
Southside Neighborhood Association 20.0% 1
Flagstaff High School - Native American and Hispanic Heritage Clubs 20.0% 1
Other 40.0% 2
Name not available inside City Limits
June 30, 2023, 3:35 PM
  • Please be as specific as possible and note which growth ideas you are referring to in your response.

    Growth Ideas 3, 4, and 5 compliment each other and are good. It's best for the environment and our fiscal health that we emphasize (re)development in urbanized areas within city limits. Urban areas use less resources per capita, less land per capita, drive less per capita, and are far easier to protect from wildfires. Infrastructure is also easier to provide for geographically concentrated areas.

  • Please be as specific as possible and note which growth ideas you are referring to in your response.

    Growth Idea 1 (Rural Activity Centers) is irresponsible. Building infrastructure (roads, water, electricity, broadband, etc.) for rural communities is extremely expensive because of how dispersed they are, so pushing more residents into these areas is fiscally irresponsible. Also, it'd be an environmental disaster. Rural areas use more resources per capita, more land per capita, drive more per capita, and are far harder to protect from wildfires.

    Growth Idea 5 (Prioritize Conservation / Avoid Hazards) sounds great but I'm concerned that it doesn't discuss land use. This idea needs to be paired with more growth in urbanized areas, otherwise growth will be squeezed out into commuter hubs like Doney Park, Williams, Bellemont, etc. And that sprawl would be terrible for the environment!

  • Are we missing anything we should consider as we develop and model scenarios?

    Emphasize development & redevelopment in urbanized areas within city limits. It's more environmentally friendly & fiscally responsible (via reduced infrastructure costs) and vacancy data indicates this is where the demand for jobs & housing is highest. It will also advance the city's climate change & walkability goals.

  • Are you affiliated with any of the community organizations listed below? (Select all that apply) If you are affiliated with an organization not listed, please enter the name in the "Other" response option.
    No response.
Flagstaff Community Forum is not a certified voting system or ballot box. As with any public comment process, participation in Flagstaff Community Forum is voluntary. The responses in this record are not necessarily representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials.

Your answers will NOT be saved

This is the form that was used to collect responses. It's here so you can try it and see how it worked when the topic was open.

The topic is now closed, and anything you enter into this form will not be saved.

What about these growth ideas intrigues you?


Check out our guidelines for civility
Back to Intro  
  Page 1 of 4