 | ||||||||||||||
  | 
permalink: http://alibi.com/blog/articles.html?desired_user=benrobertsabq
CommentsRe: Green as Gold
I've been reminded that at this point in the appeal process, City Councillors cannot take input from the public, they can only review information and comment received up until the EPC decision. So any comment on this matter will be placed on file but will not be read or used to decide the appeal.
What you're omitting, Chris, are some very important points about the development at 2000 Gold, which people should consider. 1) The neighborhood associations actually worked with Mr. Goldman for several weeks and at least three meetings which I personally attended to try and come up with a compromise plan that would allow the project to go forward with support from the neighborhoods. However Mr. Goldman was unwilling to compromise. 2) The building actually doesn't fit on the lot. Mr. Goldman wanted the City to give up public right of way in order to let him build his development. Right of way equal to a 10% increase in the size of his lot. Why could he not design a project that fits on the land he actually owns, and meets city zoning codes? 3) The 4 story size of the project is dictated by economics and a desire for profit, not by a desire to help increase density or help the City fight an environmental crisis. If Mr. Goldman hadn't used the existing parking lot to meet legally required spaces for his development at 2001 Gold, he likely wouldn't need to build a 4 story building to maintain those parking spaces and still be able to fit new housing and new parking for that housing on the site. 4) While you cite a supposedly small number of people in opposition, there were an even smaller number of people in support of the project, and many (though not all) of the supporters were people who either live in one of Mr. Goldman's current developments, or work in real estate and are likely to benefit from the project. Everyone opposing the project from the neighborhoods supports infill, and smart development for Albuquerque. They just don't support trying to use good concepts to greenwash a proposal that has a lot of legitimate problems, which the developer refuses to address. To anyone reading this comment, please urge your City Council members to look at the facts of the case, and not high dollar development using buzzwords and now appealing to the media as a sales tactic. Ben Roberts University Heights NA President, 2008 | 
| ||||||||||||
