West Mesa CPA Assessment Report Full Draft

The map Shows Parks and Open Space, the Shooting Range and boundaries of the Petroglyph National Monument. Children still need areas to play in their neighborhoods. These days, subdivisions are much more dense with very small lot sizes, with very little space to play. It is my understanding that the City is not doing any new public parks. Therefore, we need to ensure that there is a space for children to play.

Coors Views: Views are one of the greatest assets Albuquerque has, due to the Rio Grande Rift which provides its unique topography. Coors Boulevard especially is known for its fantastic views. The 1984 Coors Corridor Sector Plan was developed to preserve these views along Coors with strong Community support!!! People enjoy these beautiful views of the Bosque, the City, and the Mountains on their commute every day. It makes life worth living!

Visual Relief is usually from the Urban Environment, which parks and open space provide.

Maintenance is a big issue. We need help in trying keep our parks, open space, streets, neighborhoods and arroyos free of trash and weed free. Once an area is scraped or disturbed, to put in utilities for instance, goat heads and tumble weeds take over. There needs to be a requirement to re-vegetate with native vegetation. Otherwise, tumble weeds pile up. We also need more people on the ground crews. Using big heavy trucks will cause more damage by running over the natural vegetation, or using herbicide will also destroy the native vegetation. We need skilled workers who know how to maintain the natural environment.

This is not the type of comments west mesa residents would have promoted. This is an Up-zone from single family to multi family, which can have negative consequences, and create conflicts within the community. The IDO has already up-zoned our prior zone code in 2018 with zone districts that allow multi-family, townhouses, and duplexes. As a result, a lot of apartments are already being built, especially on the west side. Unfortunately, none of the 2018 IDO zone changes have made things affordable. Up-zoning single family to Mixed use does not mean it will be affordable, either.

A good place to add a comparison to the City as a whole

A good place to show comparison to the City as a whole?

Could be good to show total number of crashes and timeframe (maybe below the title?)

Could be good here to show the total number of crashes and timeframe (below the title?)

This data is available for 2023 I think... seems very outdated.

This is very cool information. Wonder how these shares compare with the City?

Spelling

This is awesome that you have housing + transportation costs, great metric!

Bus in caps?

This is now called the "Transitions 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan" and the link is correct.

Would be great to see an age comparison to the city for major age groups; <18 (youth), 18-65 (working ages), 65+ (seniors).

While this statement does consider West Mesa residents' desire for more affordable housing, it does not speak to the parameters necessary for that to happen. For most residents, the costs of infrastructure necessary to add housing to an existing lot are so high as to preclude such rentals from being marketed below 30% of median income. In order for residents to better assess the impact of infill proposals, it would be helpful if the term "affordable housing" be defined in terms of actual dollars. What would it cost to add housing and what dollar amount is 30% of income?

The data show that up-zoning of R-1 is highly correlated with increased rents, decreased affordability, and significant external private equity manipulation of local real estate, accompanied by gentrification and displacement of lower income and historically disadvantaged resident populations. Item 14 seems to be driven by developer-funded disinformation campaigns and should not be included as an action item.

The City needs to rely on accurate and more objective population and economic histories and projections when creating housing policies. For the two decades I lived on the West Mesa, City planners typically rely on realtor- and developer-sponsored studies to argue for housing and development policies that are biased toward breaking citizen-endorsed zoning and planning goals while seeking new forms of crony capitalism. This lack of good information and good forward thinking has encouraged spot zoning, piecemeal planning to suit developers and other private interests—usually well-funded national corporate interests that do not support existing local business interests that do not receive IRBs and large public grants. The City and County need to rely on census data and publicly-financed projections of population and economic trends when devising economic and land use policies and determining how to implement them. Too often, private national real estate organizations and national corporations provide the information that planners utilize to advocate for land use and economic policies. Planners, and politicians, should cite and rely on publicly-sponsored studies when making projections. Currently City Planning is relying on industry-provided figures when projecting 2 percent future population growth for CABQ well into the future, even though Census Bureau figures have shown Albuquerque losing 0.7 percent of its population each of the last four years. This disinformation will encourage sprawl and corrupt carefully devised comprehensive planning. Gentle density, smart growth, sustainability, and economic viability start with accurate and unbiased information.

Our West Mesa neighborhood, especially south of Namaste and along Coors, has lousy and intermittent pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Sidewalks are developed in piecemeal fashion, according to each property owner’s whims. Sidewalks stop and are not coordinated across properties. And there appear to be few if any landscaping requirements adhered to around those on-again, off-again sidewalks. In short, there’s nothing that makes a pedestrian or bicyclist want to use these for access to West Bluff, Riverside Plaza, any schools, and the small businesses along Coors. A neighbor has written: “40 years ago, The City developed the Coors Corridor Plan that envisioned the length of Coors Blvd as a gateway to the Northwest and a model for urban transportation, including Pedestrian Access/ facilities, bike infrastructure, wide landscaping along Coors Blvd, and building setbacks and height limitations. It will take some planning, and cost some money to fix the many issues, but I think it is worth the investment.” In this sense, my neighbors and I agree that the pedestrian aspects of that plan need to be followed, as well as the general spirit of the plan itself.

Albuquerque is actually losing population over the last several years.

60-foot buildings should not be allowed in these overlays.

The shielding of mechanical is also required in VPO-2.

VPO standards are neither understood or enforced by the city. It could be so easy during the permitting process and before issuing a certificate of occupancy.

The city needs to publish a list of acceptable colors (between 20 and 50 percent light reflective value) and make it readily available to homebuilders, architects, stucco and paint suppliers. Colors need to fall into certain light reflective values and the city does not own a meter to determine this. Also, VPO-2 specifies not to mimic the basalt rock and there is a dearth of dark gray to almost black homes going up in the VPO-2 areas. Bright white houses roughly 80% reflective value are popping up all over VPO-2 zones,

VPO also specifies that mechanical on the roof is required to be shielded. Very few homes comply with this.

The VPO zones are great and fantastic ideas that city needs to get behind and support with information and enforcement.

Industries that make sense for this area and respect the sacred view shed from the volcanoes to Mount Taylor are to be encouraged.

No development should be allowed in the runway protective overlays.

Every day one can see vehicles with license plates driving around. I've seen them stopped next to police cars at intersections with no consequences. What benefit is a license plate reader if so many cars are not tagged?

The weeds are a particular problem to those of us who live across the park. We have had our yards filled with weeds that are grown at the park. It is insulting to not only having to rounding up the weeds, and carting them to the city dump, but to have to pay the city to dispose of the weeds they are growing. The weeds are also a fire hazard and dry fuel for a gas-powered remote-control vehicle. There has been one fire in recent memory on the mesa started by a remote-control airplane.

Once again, potential danger to neighbors and liability for the city.

The safety of this park is compromised by 24/7 accessibility. While the posted hours are 7 am - 5 pm, people begin using it before 7 am and after 5 pm. Drones, aircraft, ultra-lite aircraft and partyers use the park because the gate is never locked at 5 pm.

There is also a concern of liability for the city. If a flying machine goes off course and damages one of the homes across 81st street, how is the liable person held responsible if there is no record keeping of who is using the park at any given time.

Not sure what the yellow loop is. There is no transit service on Unser.

Not sure why urban sprawl is considered an "opportunity". This box could have been labelled challenges - the challenge to responsibly further develop existing vacant land, the challenge to minimize he negative effects of the rapid "sprawl".

I'm all for protecting views from people's homes, but it is absolutely LUDICROUS how much people in these spaces talk about *a view from a road where the speed limit is 40 mph.* And that's setting aside the fact that people are regularly driving that road at 60 mph. Maybe if people were looking at the road rather than the fricken view while they were driving, fewer people would die on Coors every year. Call me crazy, but I'd rather have more living neighbors than "breathtaking views."

I strongly disagree that this plan should de-prioritize native vegetation. The idea that local plants are predominantly "weeds" is wildly wrong-headed and ignores that actual realities of our natural environment. The plants that grow wild on our landscape should be prioritized-- they will be the most water efficient, require the least care, and will be the most aligned to the needs of local pollinators and other biodiversity. The landscaping "aesthetics" of a few people who don't think the outdoors should be "messy" should not trump the environmental or economic realities of living in the high desert.

Access to parks and open space is a public good that ABQ should celebrate and protect.

Coors absolutely needs more frequent transit; service at peak times every 40 minutes is not functional transit. Without the T, ie transit, TOD is inappropriate and there is no evidence that ABQ Ride has the capacity to increase transit on Coors in the near future.

Riverside Plaza is a good example of context sensitive design which follows the protection overlay provisions and creates an attractive and apparently successful retail space. It contains a number of small, locally owned businesses.

As streets are repaved or otherwise redeveloped, traffic calming measures like roundabouts should be incorporated and streets should be re-striped using Safe Streets principles. Currently, speed bumps can only be requested when a roadway contains a minimum number of homes on that roadway. Yet, neighborhood streets with no or few homes areleft with no measures to slow vehicle speeds.

I think it would be more accurate to use the term open space or MPOS rather than undeveloped land. The latter sounds like the objective is to develop it or build on it. In fact this land represents a public good, open space for all to enjoy and to protect the natural and cultural landscape.

Great description of the west side. Appreciate it mentioning the west side's stunning views, its significant historic/cultural landmarks, as well as having one of North America's largest petroglyph sites. Thank you!

Thank you for including this! There is not enough housing in our city and the West Mesa can do its part by allowing different types the gentle density in our restrictively zoned neighborhoods. These changes will enrich our neighborhoods and make the west side community stronger and more accessible. Proud to voice support for these zoning changes that will allow 'missing middle housing' options to be legal to build in our community. Duplexes, triplexes, multifamily, and mixed use are needed and wanted here on the west side!

10 and 11 are duplicated. Suggestion - remove one

Thank you for including these. More housing options at varying price points and cluster development will make the west mesa more accessible to more families.