Don't build by airport, Mesa says

    Mesa Mayor Keno Hawker has expressed strong concern over a proposed Queen Creek general plan amendment that would still allow residential development, although less than in the old plan.

    Mesa, Phoenix, Queen Creek, Gilbert and the Gila River Indian Community share ownership of the airport and preside over its governing board.

    Earlier this week, in a letter to Queen Creek Mayor Art Sanders, Hawker noted that the proposed plan still shows medium- and low-density housing, which is within federal compatible noise limits, but could hinder airport operations.

    Mesa’s position is that no new residential uses should be approved in two earmarked airport overflight zones for the airport to “reach its potential for passenger activity and job creation.”

    Mesa District 6 Councilman Scott Somers also said the objective should be to keep housing out of that area.

    Somers said it’s a chance for Mesa and Queen Creek to avoid the situation Phoenix finds itself in, spending “tens of millions of dollars to purchase residential property on the west side.”

    Somers said there’s political pressure to keep space for residential, but the sale of homes for short-term gain would be detrimental in the long term.

    Unlike Queen Creek, Mesa has been able to completely avoid having any housing in the airport’s arrival and departure routes, Hawker said, adding that the area directly in the flight path is of utmost concern to Mesa.

    Instead, he suggested that Queen Creek could redesignate some of its industrial area outside the flight path as residential.

    According to airport spokesman Brian Sexton, different development restrictions apply depending on how close an area is to Gateway’s flight paths.

    The closest area is most restrictive in terms of housing, followed by an area slightly farther away in which housing is allowed but prospective buyers would have to be informed about the potential for noise. There would also be certain noise and deed restrictions in the area. Even farther away from the flight paths is a low-noise area in which Mesa does not oppose residential development, but the city doesn’t want houses any closer than that.

    Queen Creek is propos- ing to change some residential designations to light industrial within the area bordering the two noisiest zones, but some housing would be allowed.

    Queen Creek consultant Wayne Balmer, a former Mesa employee, said it’s easy for Mesa to say Queen Creek should forbid housing in those areas, because Mesa doesn’t have much land there that would appeal to homebuilders. What Mesa would like is more jobs, he said, and wants Queen Creek to likewise push for more commercial development.

    But Balmer said the challenge for Queen Creek is that it’s a fairly small town, and setting aside too much land for employment uses might not be financially viable.

    Plus, Mesa has natural advantages because the airport and nearby Santan Freeway stretch of Loop 202 are within its borders, he said, along with other commercial assets.

    “So chances are most development would want to go to Mesa,” Balmer said. “How long does Queen Creek have to wait to get economic development?”

    The letter also states that Queen Creek’s proposed future land use plan shows a northsouth, four-lane arterial street intersecting with Germann Road about one quarter-mile east of Ellsworth Road. Hawker said Mesa has already invested recently in road improvements to Ellsworth north of Germann and that relocating Ellsworth to the east “just won’t work.”

    “You can’t change alignment and not connect it to Mesa,” Hawker said. “What will we tell people with commercial interest along that stretch? ‘Oh, gee guys, the road moved?’”

    Hawker said a meeting with Queen Creek is inevitable to come to some resolution.

    “We’ve been terrific partners, and I don’t anticipate problems working this out,” he said. “It’s not a win-lose situation.”

    Sanders said he has stated his concerns to Mesa regarding traffic as Queen Creek develops and the town’s goal of connecting its traffic to area freeways without hurting Mesa or the airport.

    Sanders also noted that Queen Creek is working toward encouraging industrial development instead of residential in the area.

    But he said there are always financial pressures from landowners to build homes in some parts.

    “If we’re not on our toes, those things could slide by,” Sanders said. “We’ll do whatever we can but if the landowners decide to go into a different direction it will be hard to manage and control them.”

    He said the town can’t just change things all at once.

    Sanders said the letter notwithstanding, he considers Mesa and Queen Creek to be partners, “not competition.”

    Hawker also mentioned Mesa’s ongoing concerns about Queen Creek’s inclusion of state trust land in its planning area — land also in Mesa’s planning area.

    But Sanders said that isn’t an issue.

    “I don’t think either of us are interested in annexing it as much as protecting it from encroachment,” he said.