The beautiful land that should be preserved as Natural Open Space
Again, here are the basic points by a mere handful of El Pasoans who oppose rezoning land in the Transmountain corridor as Natural Open Space. This handful includes an out-of-control Ed Archuleta and his tight aristocracy at the EPWU who have launched with your money a public relations campaign against the City Council direction to staff to rezone the scenic Transmountain corridor as NOS. He is joined by John Cook and bobbing heads on the Public Service Board.
Please see the video created with your money to oppose saving the scenic corridor. Look at it very carefully because it shows some beautiful land that should be preserved and sprawl to the south of that land that did destroy much of the scenic vista of the Franklin Mountains - a sprawl that the PSB wants to repeat no matter how much they protest to the contrary.
They argue that they spent (you spent) $700,000+ for the NW Master Plan and the plan is a good one that preserves open space. The fact is that it isn't a good plan and it will need revising even if there is no NOS re-zoning.
The plan was not as Christina Montoya says in the PSB video you paid for created with "tremendous amount of stakeholder input and support." The truth is that it was a plan forced on stakeholders and stakeholders have since changed their minds. Many, if not most, El Pasoans oppose destroying the scenic corridor which is what will happen if it is not rezoned NOS.
The plan was developed in 2005 which pre-dated the 2006 flood. URS, the same company that helped El Paso formulate its stormwater plan, revisited the NW Master Plan as a result of the 2006 flood. They made 8 specific recommendations for the Northwest Plan including updating the hydrologic and hydraulic modeling. (Their recommendations also spoke about concrete lining channel segments of some of the FEMA flow paths (read arroyos!)). Currently, the PSB is reviewing the NE Master Plan in light of the smart growth. They will need to do the same with the NW Plan and include Green Infrastructure/Low Density Development principles. Doing so will cost money. So plan on spending more than the $700,000 no matter what. Besides, a bad and outdated plan is a bad and outdated plan no matter how much it cost.
The PSB says that they have preserved much of the vista. I ask you to view the videotape you paid for that is on the EPWU web site. It well shows the sprawl that creeped up the mountain south of the NW Plan and they want to continue that ugly sprawl all the way across. Where Ms. Montoya stood in the videotape is where they would zone commercial so that Wal-Mart, Lowe's and a Golden Arches can greet everyone - not a natural vista.
They continue to say that we will lose $20 million if we rezone this land as NOS. That is $6 million short of the first figure Ed A. gave to City Council because he added $600,000 as if it were $6million - just a bit of a mistake. (He made the correction after I pointed out the "mistake" publicly.) Many still believe that the $20,000,000 is way over inflated. Nevertheless, it really amounts to little return for ratepayers. In fact, over the past 10 years, PSB has sold 4,182 acres for $37,648,720.06. That comes out to a whopping $9,003/acre. Divide that by 177,000 rate payers and you get a great nickel back in your pocket. Perhaps that nickel should be minted with an image of Ed A. rubbing his hands over the BIG DEAL he has gotten for us. The fact of the matter is this: rate payers fund just about the entire budget of the EPWU. Land sales are not really significant and their telling us that they help keep our rates low is just one big bunch of HOOEY.
They keep saying that by developing all of the NW land, that we will gain $12,000,000 in tax revenue. Of course, they don't mention all that we will pay in additional taxes and fees for additional services such as police, fire, schools and so forth. They don't mention that we will pay more in our water bill for maintaining the added infrastructure. Ever see your rates go down? Hmmm?
They argue that, if the land is zoned NOS, they won't be able to build necessary reservoirs, water tanks, dams and so forth for adjacent land. NOT TRUE! The NOS Ordinance is already being revised to allow for major and minor utility structures in land zoned NOS.
John Cook keeps telling people in his letter that Transmountain Road can't be widened to 4 lanes in the area if the land is rezoned NOS. NOT TRUE! The PSB already gave right-of-way to TxDOT in exchange for some corridors under the highway. It can and should be widened and nobody favoring preserving the scenic corridor as NOS is opposed to widening the highway from 2 lanes to 4. Ed A., his bobbing heads, John Cook and the rest of the mere handful who spend your money opposing what you want are just not being straightforward.
One other thing and it has to be told over and over and over: We keep hearing this is "PSB land". By Texas law, they can't own any land. The City of El Paso (all of us as the City) OWN the land. The PSB merely manages it and City Council can direct that the land be managed differently when the occasion arises. It has arisen.
No comments:
Post a Comment