We, the residents of Sandy and neighbors to the 53 acre park oppose field lighting of any kind. We oppose ruining the park\'s ambience with distractive glare. We oppose further light light polluting the city. We strongly oppose attracting noise, crowds and traffic into this residential neighborhood during the school calendar.
No comments yet.join the discussion
Forrest WIlliams, United States7 years ago Comments: The whole idea of yet another grass-covered 50-acre park is a BAD IDEA. Conservative estimates are that such a park will need AT LEAST 125 acre-feet of water per year (probably a lot more). By comparison, the standard family here in Utah consumes 0.25-0.5 acre-feet per year. We live in a desert people - let's start acting like it!
Frances Zaccardi, United States8 years ago Comments: Dear Sandy City, I am opposed to a park of any kind in my neighborhood. I do not want increased crime, noise, street traffic. In addition to the concerns mentioned above, there is increased danger to the children in the area due to the street traffic and the park will decrease property values in the area. The homeowners did not pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for their homes just to see the values dramatically decrease due to the increased noise, crime, and street traffic due to Sandy City building a park. THIS PARK IS A BAD IDEA AND FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY SHOULD BE DONE BEFORE ANY USE IS PLANNED FOR THIS SPACE!!!!! This plan to build a park is a horrible use of tax payer money and it is an ill-thought plan.
Sharon Broeking, United States8 years ago Comments: I am opposed to the lights. I'm also very concerned about the traffic.
There are no highlights yet.