NM inFOCUS: Ep 141 - Green Building Issues
The Gold Street Project was the direct result of a challenge issued by Mayor Chavez to developers for high density, "green" buildings in the city's main traffic corridors. But some area residents say the proposed project is just too massive for their neighborhood. This week on NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS, Gene Grant talks to residents both for and against the project, as well as developers and city planners. Then THE LINE panelists take an in-depth look at the role sexism played in Hillary Clinton's lost bid for the presidency, and discuss New Mexico's ranking in the new National KIDS COUNT Data Report.
...
NM inFOCUS: Ep 141 - Green Building Issues (Intro)
NM inFOCUS: Ep 141 - Green Building Issues (The Gold Street Project)
NM inFOCUS: Ep 141 - Green Building Issues (inFOCUS)
NM inFOCUS: Ep 141 - Green Building Issues (The Line)
NM inFOCUS: Ep 141 - Green Building Issues (Outro)
...
NM inFOCUS: Ep 141 - Green Building Issues (Intro)
NM inFOCUS: Ep 141 - Green Building Issues (The Gold Street Project)
NM inFOCUS: Ep 141 - Green Building Issues (inFOCUS)
NM inFOCUS: Ep 141 - Green Building Issues (The Line)
NM inFOCUS: Ep 141 - Green Building Issues (Outro)
posted by Kevin McDonald at
9:17 PM
1 Comments:
I am disappointed that in preparation for this important forum that considers growth issues and quality of life issues for neighborhoods that you didn't do your homework.
First, the Silver Hill Historical District includes my house in the 2100 block of Lead SE; it is not just the well-known Silver Avenue with its open space median. Indeed, the boundary of the historical neighborhood runs down Gold Avenue and zigzags to exclude the 2000 Gold site because it was, and still is, a parking lot. If there had been structures on that site when the neighborhood received the national designation (and state designation) as a historic neighborhood, without doubt that real estate would have been within the historic boundaries. Admittedly, within the historic neighborhood, the individual homes such as the Tingley house that have separate designations on the historic trust lists, are on Silver Avenue. The house immediately adjacent (across Buena Vista) to the east, the house adjacent to the project to the west (across Terrace) are in the historic neighborhood. The Silver Avenue homes across the alley to the south are "nicer homes" within the historic neighborhood.
Silver Hill is not a post world war II neighborhood; 1928 is when my little house was built on Lead. The local elementary school, Monte Vista ES, opened in 1931 to meet the population of the Sycamore and Silver Hill neighborhoods as Nob Hill and to the north of Monte Vista was just starting to be developed.
No one prepared for the inFocus show by finding out the details of the extensive process of mediated dialogue that was engaged in for more than 8 months by the developers, architects and neighborhood (association and individuals). I'm not going to detail the specifics; they are on record. But the neighborhood associations in the University area (Silver Hill, University Heights and Sycamore) and neighborhood residents not belonging to the associations, have a long history of working with developers to achieve infill that recognizes the context of the neighborhoods (ie Bricklight on Harvard SE) to everyone's satisfaction. These neighborhood associations are not "NIMBY" people. These efforts date back to the infill projects that started after WW II to provide density for student housing. That's why existing density in the neighborhood already exceeds the density considered necessary for LEEDS certification; and the Gold Project calls for 3 times the existing density! These people, associations and individuals, have been intensively involved in sector planning efforts.
The upshot of the mediated meetings between the neighborhood and Sheffield developers of 2000 Gold is that the neighbors' request for scale adjustments that would bring the project closer to the architectural and typical residential lot features were met with minimal changes (from 53' to 47', 51 units to 46 units, some terracing). This is not a significant change to the massive 47' 10" scale of the project that will tower over 18' neighbors to the south, east and west.
Your show did not begin to address the parking issues that have been well documented in the record.
It disturbs me that this developer has pushed the 'green' of the project, although LEEDS certification is awarded months after the completion of the project and there are no guarantees that the developer will indeed implement the green aspects or receive certification. Scheffield wants everyone to gloss over the Sector Plan, other legally adopted zoning policies, AND the extensive record of the process with the community and within the EPC decision-making process. It's now being sold to the public as a 'solution to global warming.' The issues deserve a deeper consideration of the facts and the record of the process to date.
I see greed using the rhetoric of 'green.'
Sandra Simons-Ailes
Post a Comment
<< Back to Main Blog