alibi online

Free Will AstrologyAlibi's Personals
 
 V.17 No.29 | July 17 - 23, 2008 

Newscity

BMX Vexes

Neighbors sue the city over Albuquerque's bike stadium

The green blob is the velodrome, the yellow bricks are houses. (Wait, is it “veladrone” or “velodrome?”)
[click to enlarge]
cabq.gov GIS
The green blob is the velodrome, the yellow bricks are houses. (Wait, is it “veladrone” or “velodrome?”)

Noise and dust: three days a week, 11 months a year.

That's the major contribution the city's BMX stadium makes to the Clayton Heights/Lomas Del Cielo neighborhood, say several residents. "There's been constant noise from construction, repairs, the crowd and the announcer," says Clayton Heights resident Rosina Roibal. "It's really annoying."

The stadium is on the southeast corner of Buena Vista and Cesar Chavez and is less than a couple hundred feet from the area. Nine people, including Roibal, have brought a lawsuit, charging that the city broke its own ordinances when it built the Duke City BMX Track so close to the neighborhood. The residents filing the lawsuit against the City of Albuquerque say the noise from the PA system and the dust created by the open-air stadium's sand dunes are a tremendous nuisance. The suit, set for trial in the fall, also says the track caused housing values in the area to drop.

They figured we wouldn't complain because we're a bunch of working-class families that wouldn't raise a fuss. The city is taking advantage of poor people in that way.

Clayton Heights resident Rosina Roibal

Feeling Bamboozled

Roibal says the city tried to put one over on her neighborhood. "They figured we wouldn't complain because we're a bunch of working-class families that wouldn't raise a fuss," she says. "The city is taking advantage of poor people in that way."

The original plans for building the stadium, published in 2004, placed it next to Isotopes Park, farther away from the neighborhood. The design included a velodrome, or indoor cycling arena, that would be closer to the neighborhoods, buffered by a set of four tennis courts.

Those plans were OK'd by the neighborhood association, but where the stadium was built differs from what was approved. Instead of following the original plans, the city opted to swap the positions of the indoor cycling velodrome and the open-air BMX stadium. This put the BMX track next to the neighborhoods. The city also decided to remove the tennis courts, which did away with the buffer between the stadium and the neighborhood.

Reed Easterwood, who was one of the first to join the lawsuit [“Taken for a Ride,” June 14-20, 2007], says the stadium's alternate location was a major change that needed to be brought before the Clayton Heights/Lomas Del Cielo Neighborhood Association for its input. "They didn't give any notice," Easterwood says. "The city didn't think it would get caught doing this."

It Comes with the Territory

Assistant City Attorney Peter Pierotti says the city wasn't trying to trick anyone. He says as the planning process moved forward, it became clear that the velodrome wouldn't fit where it was originally supposed to be built. The city decided to swap the positions of the stadium and the velodrome but had to eliminate the tennis courts to make the new plan work. "We're talking about four sets of tennis courts," Pierotti says. "That's the main difference between the plans."

Pierotti says because the decision to alter the plans wasn't going to affect traffic, parking or how many people came in or out of the stadium, the city felt it was not a major change and so notice wasn't given. He also notes the people bringing the lawsuit all bought their houses next to an area zoned for sports facilities. "It's an interesting pocket of homes that have to contend with lots of different variables," Pierotti says. "Some people wouldn't want to contend with those variables, but others have no problem with it."

Bait and Switch

Sidney Childress, who is representing Roibal, Easterwood and three other clients in the lawsuit, says the city always planned to put the BMX stadium closer to the neighborhood. Childress says he has evidence, including several internal e-mails, that suggests city officials had been discussing putting the BMX stadium where it is now from the beginning of the planning process. "It was an outright, intentional sort of bait and switch," Childress says. "I have to assume that the Planning Department at the Mayor's Office didn't want to follow the rules. It was too much trouble to follow the rules and handle the complaints from the neighborhood."

City Attorney Pierotti shoots back that all options for where the BMX stadium would be built were always on the table. When the proposal was shown to the neighborhood association, Pierotti says, it was the best option. As the process moved forward, the current location of the BMX stadium was shown to be the better fit.

Money for Your Troubles

Childress says the amount of money his clients and the other four plaintiffs are seeking has not been determined. Roibal and Easterwood say they want compensation to cover the lowered value of their houses and for the aggravation the stadium causes. Pierotti says there's no reliable way to determine whether the stadium has caused housing prices to drop, especially because of the slumping housing market. "It's a matter of speculation," Pierotti says. "Some persons would contend that the houses have appreciated in value."

Childress says an appraiser told him the stadium damaged housing values, though a specific number hasn't been estimated.

Not Everyone's Unhappy

Liz Fernandez says she's talked to plenty of people in the neighborhood who love the fact that the BMX track is right next door. Fernandez is the president of Duke City BMX, the nonprofit organization that operates the stadium. "It's a very family-oriented sport," she says. "It shows kids how to compete, and I think it teaches them good sportsmanship."

Duke City BMX Board Member Les Smith says he's enjoyed watching his 9-year-old daughter and 6-year-old son excel at BMX. "Any kid can do it," Smith says. "Even a kid who isn't naturally physically talented can go out there and race against other kids that are close to the same proficiency. No one sits on the bench."

Fernandez says Duke City BMX has worked hard to remedy the complaints residents have had. Duke City BMX personnel place “no parking” signs around the neighborhood before races, and the stadium now has a quieter sound system, she says. "We're working diligently with the city to try to make it an area where it's not so loud," Fernandez says. "I think it's just going to take some time to get used to us."

Public Comments (10)
  • What about the kids?  [ Fri Jul 18 2008 11:29 AM ]

    Albuquerque and New Mexico in general is in dire need of positive activities for youth. We are currently faced with rising teen pregnancy, drug & alcohol abuse and huge high school dropout rates.

    I noticed that the track is a community facility unlike the neighboring Isotopes Stadium or the UNM Sports facilities. How great that any kid can take his bike over there and ride the track. You cannot just walk on over to the Isotopes field and say "can I pay on your field" and get access.

    Isn't BMX Racing an Olympic sport this year? We need more facilities and activities like this in central New Mexico… kids on bikes is not a bad thing. Are the neighbors really going to be happy if they get a cash settlement? It's a good idea for the attorney that will get paid if they win. The resident’s may be happy then they can finally get that plasma screen they have been wanting. Hmmm, I wonder if they will be watching the Olympics on it?

  • I hate it when  [ Fri Jul 18 2008 1:03 PM ]

    other people try to have fun. "The crowd and the announcer are really annoying" how about Isotopes park which is 100 feet away. No crowd noise, announcer or fireworks going on over there..............

  • sand in my eyes IN my house  [ Fri Jul 18 2008 11:29 PM ]

    The residents who live next to the BMX stadium have nothing against a BMX stadium in Albuquerque. The City chose to save a buck by building this monstrous atrocity in our front/back yards and didn't even tell us about it, let alone ask us for our input. NO, we will not be happy if we get a cash settlement. However, we will be able to fix up our houses so we have a better chance at selling/renting them and will be given what has been lost in property value drops from the stadium and will be paid back what we've spent on lawyer fees.

    We are fighting for what is right, and what the City did was not right.

    I guarantee that living next to a sandy loud BMX stadium does not compare to living down the street from a baseball stadium (which I knew about when moving here, unlike the BMX stadium).

  • "the kids" don't require the destruction of a neighborhood  [ Fri Jul 18 2008 11:44 PM ]

    It's kind of ridiculous to suggest that Albuquerque has to choose between "the kids" and the health and wellbeing of a long established neighborhood, even if it is just a lowly working class neighborhood. In fact...thats just a bunch of propaganda.

    The City can try to argue that they didn't try to pull a fast one, or that they didn't hurt the property values of those homes, all they want. But just have a look yourself...would you buy one of the houses across the street from that? It's an open air stadium aligned in such a way that a wall of sound washes over the homes less than 200 feet away.

    That a site is zoned for sports doesn't mean its OK for the City to willfully neglect its neighborhoods. We have an Environmental Planning Commission and a Development Review Board so that these types of things don't happen. But Albuquerque's planning department willfully subverted those two entities, and the documents in this case bear that out. They give planning a bad name.

    There are people who live in a house directly across the street from that stadium who've lived there for 40 years. They moved there before there was ever even a thought of a sports complex in that neighborhood. What responsibility does the City have to them? If you think nothing, then you better be looking over your shoulder because your neighborhood might be next.

    And you know, when I say "city" ...I really mean "us."

    [link]

  • Destruction of a neighborhood? You might have to prove it first.  [ Sat Jul 19 2008 1:40 AM ]

    I have seen that Neighborhood, there are convenience stores, a bus depot, vacant commercial lots & buildings, run down rental houses, a poorly maintained cemetery and package liquor stores and homeless people. I have a hard time believing that the new facility solely is the reason for a suspected decline in values of homes there. On one hand the issue is residents that have been there for 40 years and at the same time others want to "fix up" their houses & sell? The other suspect opinion is that the neighborhood is not able to rent? I find that hard to believe being that close to the University. Have you ever considered that the location for some would be considered a premium location? Perhaps you should sell it may be better for everyone? The noise from the busses, airplane noise, the late night sports games & tailgating activities, the flashing police lights and crowd control are just fine with the current residents? Exactly how many people that live near this facility actual have a problem with it? Some of these comments seem extremely inflammatory.

  • Go have a look at the houses actually across the street  [ Sat Jul 19 2008 9:22 AM ]

    The houses directly across the street are not rundown...they're well maintained lower income housing, some with nice landscaping, and they're largely owned by the people who live in them. You're attempt to paint this neighborhood in such terms in order to justify this action by the City planning department not only doesn't fly, its pretty gross.

    I like urban living and have spent a lot of time in one of those houses over the years. The distant roar of the isotopes really wasn't that bad. But the BMX stadium opening is literally under 200 feet from the houses. There's no nice wall to create a buffer. It's loud and dusty. No city that truly cared about residents would have done that.

    Think about the arena that is being considered downtown. The City Councilors have already assured everyone that there will be a buffer between that arena and the neighborhood across broadway. Why? Because everyone is watching. In the case of this BMX stadium, no one was paying attention to the fact that a stadium was built that wasn't anything like the plans approved by the Environmental Planning Commission, which were approved with a pretty good buffer intact. That's why the term "bait and switch" is a good one.

    It appears the City isn't going to put a wall or landscape on that end of the stadium to make it better, so yeah, they've hurt those property values. The BMX rep quoted in this story can claim they're good neighbors all she wants but that doesn't change the actual physical reality of that site. And she wouldn't live across the street.

  • Ok I looked at the houses acrross the street and they have bars on the windows  [ Mon Jul 21 2008 10:13 PM ]

    The houses you are referring to are not lower income houses they are old small houses, I did not see any for sale signs on any of them. Probably because if they did go up for sale they would sell in a minute. Still look like a prime university rental properties to me. I also noticed there is a block wall, landscaping and closed gates to the parking area of the BMX track. I saw no dust on the streets & surrounding area are clean. No need to justify any so called action, more so look at the situation for what it is, those poeple live accross from property that is zoned for non residential use. As long as the noise stops at 10pm they really have no crime to speak of. These are not view properties or a gated community, it's an older urban mixed use nieghborhood. I went the the website of the track looks like they only operate like 11 hours per week. You may be able to full some of people some of the time but the rest of us are watching. The track looks like a nice facilty I think I will go down there & see if I can join up.

    The owners of the homes that have an issue also have the right to put up a wall on thier own property like many others do accross the country.

  • it's about constitutional​ protections  [ Tue Jul 22 2008 9:22 AM ]

    It is scary, but typical, that American/N.M. citizens would not look at a situation like this and raise it one level of abstraction:

    i.e. the issue is holding government accountable to constitutional protections under state and federal law which ABQ is obliged to follow.

    In this case, it is the denial of procedural due process.

    Protecting individual rights such as procedural due process really is "our values," both nationally and at the state level-- it is not making the city baby proof, or that which is only fit for juvenile consumption.

    For poltical reasons govt. reps, city planners (our mayor in this case) often seek to capitalize on mob rule mentality such as seizing upon the common sentimentality afforded children in order to effectuate a commercial agenda at the expense of individual rights--conklr's support for BMX in this instance.

    But that level of "our values" might bite coneklr one day, and i bet at that point he/she might be able to tear away from American Idol and start reading the U.S. and N.M. constitutions.

    Our city, however, isn't planning on it.

  • Does the city  [ Tue Jul 22 2008 2:02 PM ]

    HAVE to get approval from the neighborhood if the area was already zoned for sporting event construction? I guess since there is a lawsuit then yes. Hopefully the city can build a wall around the facility as a noise buffer.

  • just because you're working class doesn't mean you're dirt  [ Wed Jul 23 2008 3:53 PM ]

    The houses you are referring to are not lower income houses they are old small houses,

    ...ummm..."ok, then"

    I did not see any for sale signs on any of them.

    Maybe the people who've lived in that neighborhood forever actually want to stay in their "home"

    I also noticed there is a block wall, landscaping and closed gates to the parking area of the BMX track. I saw no dust on the streets & surrounding area are clean.

    Anyone with half a brain can see there is no buffer between the BMX stadium and the houses. The Alibi should post a picture.

    No need to justify any so called action, more so look at the situation for what it is, those poeple live accross from property that is zoned for non residential use.

    Coneklr/Duke City BMX/whoever you are...

    you should do some research into city planning ordinances before you speak as though you know what you're talking about. Zoning is simply one aspect of the criteria that is supposed to be in order before a project is developed. There are all kinds of physical design criteria--including landscaping--that simply weren't followed in this case. Bigger picture, these sorts of projects require approval from the EPC, which considers all kinds of factors, including whether or not there is neighborhood opposition.

    In this case, EPC minutes show that commissioners commented that there was no neighborhood opposition. That's because the site plan shown to neighbors was substantially different--most saliently, it provided a substantive buffer between the sports complex and the houses.

    The EPC approved the site plan with conditions, and six months later the DRB approved the same site plan. The City planning department that very week switched the site plans, and documents surfaced in the lawsuit show they had been planning to do so for a long time.

    In this way, neighbors were never given an opportunity to let the EPC know their objection to such an egregious project. And I like to think that regardless, the EPC would not have approved such a monstrosity. It is truly not right to build such a stadium facing houses like that--and the city should be ashamed.

 
Join our mailing list for exclusive info, the week's events and free stuff!
 

  • Select sidebar boxes to add below. You can also click and drag to rearrange the boxes; minimize, maximize and close using the little icons on each box. To re-add a box you closed, return to this menu.
  • Because you are not logged in, any changes you make to these boxes will vanish as soon as you click to another page. If you log in, the boxes will stick.
  • alibi.com
  • Latest Posts
  • Most Active Stories
  • Latest User Posts
  • Highest-Rated Posts
  • Most Active Users
  • Web Exclusives
  • Latest User Blogs
  • Latest Chowtown Reviews
  • Recent Rocksquawk Discussions
  • Recent Classifieds
  • This Week's Alibi Picks
  • Albuquerque
  • Duke City Fix
  • Albuquerque Beer Scene
  • What's Wrong With This Picture?
  • Reddit Albuquerque
  • ABQ Journal Metro
  • ABQrising
  • ABQ Journal Latest News
  • Del.icio.us Albuquerque
  • NM and the West
  • New Mexico FBIHOP
  • Democracy for New Mexico
  • Only in New Mexico
  • Mario Burgos
  • Democracy for New Mexico
  • High Country News
  • El Grito
  • NM Politics with Joe Monahan
  • Stephen W. Terrell's Web Log
  • The Net Is Vast and Infinite
  • Slashdot
  • Freedom to Tinker
  • Is there a feed that should be on this list? Tell us about it.
    "The Best is Yet to Come"
    "The Best is Yet to Come"6.22.2013