What's going on, Albuquerque?

Come Find Out How the Face of Your City Could Be Changing Forever...

I was going to write about property development in Albuquerque, and how I've seen the face of the City change, in many ways for the better, over the 15 years or so I've lived here.

Instead let me start by saying this: The City is changing the zoning codes for Albuquerque, this process is going to affect you regardless of who you are and where you live in the city, and I encourage you to get involved. This weekend.

This Saturday, December 8th, there will be a Public Meeting to discuss the new Form Based Zoning Code which was approved by the Albuquerque City Council on November 5th. And you should show up!

Why do you care? Lets face it, Zoning Codes are, in general, horribly boring things. But they affect all our lives in subtle, and sometimes unsubtle, ways.

Zoning codes affect what you can build on your property, if you own property.
Zoning codes affect what other people can build on the property next to you. And even if you don't own your own home, everyone lives somewhere and most of us care what's next door. Whether it's a shed, an addition, or a 4 story condo block right behind your back fence that blocks the sun from your yard 8 hours a day in Winter.
Zoning codes affect what kind of businesses can go into an already existing building in a particular location, whether its a coffee shop, a clothing store, a porn shop, gun shop or a bar.

In short, Zoning Codes affect what our City looks like, how we as citizens interact with it, and the kinds of uses that different parts of the City can be put to.

Changing the Zoning Code for the City is a big deal. It will affect you.

I'll be the first to admit, I've read a little about the different types of zoning codes in use throughout the US, and I still don't fully understand the impact of a Form Based Zoning Code.

A lot of the impact will depend on how the code is implemented. So I'm not writing to decry the evils of form based zoning. In fact I would support a change to zoning that encouraged growth and development in a way that is beneficial to the communities that make up the Albuquerque metro area, while maintaining some degree of autonomony for those communities.

I simply don't know enough about the Form Based Code. And I suspect a lot of other people don't either.

But a few things make me nervous about the way the new code is being moved through City government:

I haven't seen a good explanation of why we need this change, other than the overly simplistic list of points "Form Based Code Compared to Existing 'Euclidean' Zoning" on the City's Page about the Form Based Code. Hopefully the public meeting will provide that explanation, but to be honest I am expecting spin. That list smells like spin. I want to know who benefits from these changes and how?
The Form Based Code is moving very rapidly through City government. Council approval on November 5th, Public hearing coming up on December 8th and then hearing before the Environmental Planning Commission (EPC) on December 20th is insanely quick for legislation that will affect the entire City. That's less than 12 days between the public hearing and the EPC hearing on approval of the new code. 12 days and only one round of public input is simply not enough time for a change of this scope.
The Form Based Code is coming up for discussion and hearing during the busiest time of the year for most people - between Thanksgiving and Christmas. This isn't accidental. This same time of year is when any contentious plans for development, or other legislation, generally manage to get themselves heard because they are guaranteed to get less public opposition, or input. This isn't my cynicism, this is an observation of fact by myself over the last 4 years, and others who have had as much as 20 years working on zoning issues in the City. People are busy around the holidays. Who wants to take a day off work to sit in a hearing 5 days before Christmas?
There was very little public notification about the public meeting on December 8th. The only notification Neighborhood Associations received about it was a flyer in the Office of Neighborhood Coordination newsletter. Anyone asking for a variance for a single property in a neighborhood has to notify the surrounding NA via mail, usually a certified letter, but the City doesn't have to do the same when they're changing the entire zoning code for the entire city? Makes me suspicious.
Finally, there was no collaborative process in discussing the draft code with Neighborhood Associations across the City. NAs are the voice of their neighborhood, and while these voices are subject to the same flaws and errors as any other form of representation, they are a recognized part of the City's policy for addressing development and zoning. Why were they omitted so blatantly from this process?

Taking Neighborhood Associations or their representatives out of the mix is a bad sign.

There's too much money in development dollars flowing into the City and politicians pockets for there to be a fair balance between the financial and community interests unless there's a commuunity group involved to oversee the process and have input. Remember the whole checks and balances thing we liked so much about our democratic system of government?

So, we as citizens have our chance to get informed and have our input on December 8th.

Please attend the public meeting:

When: Saturday, December 8, 2007, 9 a.m. - 12 noon.
Where: Albuquerque Convention Center, Taos-Cochiti Room.
Who: All neighborhood associations in the City and members of the general public are invited.
Why: To learn about the Form Based Code and have an opportunity to ask questions.

For my part I agree we need to encourage smart development, increase density along our transit corridors and in general, like it or not, we need to find a way to grow our City infrastructure and economy to support the influx of new residents that are coming. Because they are coming people, believe it.

But unless I see something amazing at the meeting I am probably going to ask that the issue be deferred and there be another round of public comment later in the year.

I urge you to do the same. Ask for the issue to be deferred for anothe couple of months. Ask for a 2nd round of public input to give people who attend the first meeting time to get the word out to their friends and neighbors who can attend a second meeting.

Waiting another few months for a change which will affect the city for years to come is not going to harm anyone, and can only benefit us as a community by allowing greater public participation.

But I'd like to hear other people's thoughts on the issue.

Know something about Zoning or Form Based Codes?

Have an opinion on Development that's more complicated than "I don't like these ugly buildings..." ?

Think I'm full of crap?

Post a comment.

0 members like this

Next Post >

Comment by jeff on December 5, 2007 at 11:24am: to a certain degree, i think the change from euclidean to form-based is ideologically driven - DPZ and others organized through the CNU have been pursuing this agenda for what, 20-25 years now?

i understand and agree with many of the values a form-based code can enforce, but i've always been hesitant (resistant really) to see the nostalgia of new urbanism driving the forms.

perhaps the best justification of a form-based code over euclidean is that it acknowledges that city form is in many ways more important than use. it represents a basic infrastructure and building stock that can be utilized according to mass-transit goals and utilities. single use zoning results in conditions that daniel solomon has summarized by saying (i hope i'm right - i'm quoting this from memory), "life in the land use map dooms us to hours each day in the vacuous torture of moving from one colored blob to the next."

i don't know enough about ABQ's version, i still need to read it, but i find their comparison chart to be simplistic and over-confident.

navigating the current zoning code can be an incredibly confusing adventure though.

i'm not sure that neighborhood association input is necessary or desirable at this level, except as a means of organizing or disseminating information. NA's tend to be reactionary (by definition really) and the balkanizing of the city according to their boundaries doesn't reflect the totalizing nature of this code.

Comment by Ben Roberts on December 5, 2007 at 11:48am: Thanks for your insightful and concise comments Jeff.

As I said, I'm not opposed to the form based code in principle, I'm mostly wary about the seeming rapidity with which it's been pushed through City government, and the lack of transparency to the process so far.

As to NAs being reactionary, I can't disagree there, but I do agree with your point that at the very least there should have been contact with the NAs for disseminating information, which other than the flyer in the ONC newsletter at the start of this month, really didn't happen.

Hope you can attend the meeting if you're around, sounds like you could have some valuable questions on the FBC.

Comment by Jessie on December 5, 2007 at 12:10pm: I'm a babe in the woods here with most zoning terminology, so bear with me...

If we move to a "form over function" sort of code, which I understand the proposed system to be, would it still have ridiculous land-use regulations in it such as the one that got the Guild into hot water this past week?

Comment by jeff on December 5, 2007 at 1:11pm: jessie,
you are really asking two questions.

the answer to the first is that any code is susceptible to mis-reading or worse, mis-application.

in the case of the guild, my opinion is that some aggrieved prude thought they were being clever by interpreting the zoning code. they stepped on a seriously slippery slope with that decision.

the answer to the second question is that it appears to not yet be determined.
one could conceivable have a pure formal code, controlling nothing but the physical form and dimensions of buildings. one can argue that is enough to secure a natural and satisfactory separation of uses (won't have stockyards next to residences - which is how zoning codes got their start in the first place). my guess is that simply isn't enough to satisfy the majority of landowners in a sprawling western city so i doubt we'll see it in that form.
i suspect we'll see a form code with prohibited use overlays.
the city doesn't yet know what process they'll use to adopt this new code...they may even let it be nothing but a series of recommendations to be applied to sector plans.

Comment by Ben Roberts on December 5, 2007 at 1:20pm: Jessie - I assume you mean the issue that came up with regard to "Pornotopia" ?

I'd argue the issue there isn't the type of Code in place, but the specific details of the code - that an adult-amusement establishment is prohibited in that location.

According to the City Attorney, Bob White, "The issue is, does having this festival make them an adult-amusement establishment under the provision of the zoning code?" I'd be fairly confident that the answer to that is No. The Guild isn't an adult entertainment establishment because it had one adult film festival. I think the Guild's fest was perfectly harmless BTW and would be very sad if it was punished as a result.

But the question boils down to a fundamental issue - are there certain uses that are appropriate in a given area, and if so, how does one prevent those uses while allowing other possibly similar uses in the same area? Not to mention who decides what uses are acceptable, and so on.

Comment by Ben Roberts on December 5, 2007 at 2:28pm: In followup to my original post, Neighborhood Associations today received direct notification about the Public Meeting, via email.

Three days before the event.

So I have to retract my previous claim there was no direct notification. Just no direct notification in a timely manner. Public participation implies the ability to notify the public, and if the NAs are supposed to be doing that, they weren't given much of a chance.

Comment by Ben Roberts on December 8, 2007 at 10:53pm: Alright so after today's meeting, some of my concerns were answered, and some are still outstanding. Primarily that this is not a blanket replacement of the entire ABQ zoning code, but rather an optional zoning to be applied as an alternative to existing codes. The means for making that change is another (as yet fuzzy) matter.

I'll try and crank out a new post about what I saw, and what was said, but for now I've got to get some sleep.

Let me know if anyone else made it to the public meeting about the Form Based Code today?

What are your thoughts after hearing a bit more about it?

Comment by jeff on December 9, 2007 at 12:07pm: i wish i could have attended; looking forward to your synopsis.

Comment by Ben Roberts on December 17, 2007 at 11:53am: It took longer than I hoped, stupid rest of my life got in the way, but I put up a followup post. http://www.dukecityfix.com/profiles/blog/show?id=1233957%3ABlogPost%3A23580

Comment