It's Official!

News Release

Media Contacts: Rob McCorkle, TPWD, (830) 866-3533 or robert.mccorkle@tpwd.state.tx.us

Corky Kulhmann, TPWD (512) 389-4590 or corky.kuhlmann@tpwd.state.tx.us
March 28, 2013

Franklin Mountains State Park to Grow by More Than 600 Acres
AUSTIN -- The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission at its Thursday meeting approved the acquisition of approximately 658 acres to expand a state park in El Paso that already ranks as the largest urban park in the continental United States.

The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department will purchase a parcel of land that straddles Loop 375, also known as Trans Mountain Road, to further extend the Franklin Mountains State Park’s western reach into the surrounding high desert country. The acquisition will bring the state park’s total acreage to more than 26,000 acres.

The El Paso Public Service Board offered the desirable property to TPWD at a bargain sale price. The tract of undeveloped land will provide a buffer from pending new city growth and increase public recreational opportunities through the possible future expansion of the park’s trail system.

After much land use discussion about the environmental impact due to encroaching development on the western flanks of the Franklin Mountains, the El Paso City Council this past summer agreed to the sale. The TPW Commission’s vote was the final action required to consummate the land deal.

Council Passes Scenic Corridor Ordinances

Unanimously, City Council this morning passed three ordinances which, in effect, establish the new NW Master Plan, the smart code re-zoning necessary, and the preservation of 55% of the open space by transferring 658 acres to the State Park and protecting key arroyos with smart code.  It was a major victory for environmentalists and conservationists and a win-win for all including the development community.  In addition, City Planners have begun to add the critical tool known as green infrastructure/low impact development to their planning.

Following presentations by Planner Carlos Gallinar and former City and now EPWU attorney, Lupe Cuellar, I had these words:


"Mr. Mayor and members of the Council

for the record, I am Jim Tolbert, the citizen who authored the petition to preserve land in the scenic corridor along Transmountain in northwest El Paso.  That petition was sponsored by the Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition. Along with others I coordinated and spearheaded a successful drive to collect enough signatures to bring the issue to your attention.

"When we began the task of preserving land in its natural state, I had no idea that our work would have such positive, far-reaching results.  Rather than insisting on one way or another, we chose to work together, to find accommodation, compromise and consensus. As citizens, City Planners, attorneys, employees and agents of the PSB/EPWU, State Park officials, environmentalists, conservationists, recreationalists and consultants we were constant in our effort to stay true to the spirit and conditions of the petition while maintaining the integrity of our various value systems and institutions.  We not only worked through our distrust of one another, but, there came a time, when it became apparent that all shared the same goal of making El Paso an even better place to live.

"Now we on the verge of preserving 658 acres of natural open space by transferring that land to the State Park.  We will protect precious arroyos through the use of smart codes as we more intelligently design a place to live that is livable, workable, walkable and in better harmony with the natural environment. The re-doing of the NW Master Plan, the utilization of smart codes, the new knowledge of a great tool called green infrastructure/low impact development will improve community and recreation and foster the value of natural open space.  It will make us a more productive, healthier and it will be a boost to our commerce.

"It has been said that following environmental principles is contrary to business.  That to be “green” is to be anti-business.  100 years ago if you favored separating residences from factories with new-fangled zoning rules, you were labeled anti-business. As we know now zoning fostered better business and living standards.  Back in the 60’s and 70’s if you favored cleaning our air and waterways, you were labeled anti-business.  However, improving the quality of our air and waterways has led to more productive communities and healthier and happier work and living spaces.  Today, one favoring modern development practices and green infrastructure/low impact development is often labeled “anti-business”.  The truth is that being green is not the antithesis of commerce – but the partner. Our care for the environment, our natural world and our eco-systems of which we as humans are just a small part, will only lead to better lives for us all.

"There are so many to thank for this day: those who worked so hard on the petition drive; the Dover Kohl team; all the citizens who participated in the charrettes: the Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition particularly Scott Cutler, Judy Ackerman, Pat White, Joyce Ford, Jane Fowler and Richard Teschner; City Staff particularly Matthew McElroy, Carlos Gallinar, Elizabeth Gibson, David Coronado and Lupe Cuellar. State Park officials: Deirdre Hisler and Dr. Cesar Mendez.  For the PSB/EPWU – Dr. Rick Bonart, Ed Escudero and Katherine Brennand and especially Pat Adauto and Risher Gilbert and ultimately John Balliew and Mr. Ed Archuleta. Thanks also to Charlie Wakeem and the Open Space Advisory Board for its hard work.  And I thank you on City Council for your patience and for allowing this work to be done deliberately and well even if it took more than a year; and I thank you, Mayor Cook, for your leadership and wisdom, and our city attorneys headed by Sylvia Firth. 

"Today in El Paso there are those who would divide us. There are those who want our city to be “us against them”, “my group against your group”.  But look what we accomplished together: a new vision that is pro-commerce as well as green.  We overcame our mistrust of each other and we happily discovered that we were working side by side and shoulder to shoulder.  To those who would divide who see only negatives let us respond together that we can be visionary and innovative.  We can grasp for our future.  Let us all remember that El Pasoans work best when we work together."

Scenic Corridor Petition Reaches Conclusion with Land Transfer

Tomorrow, 3 items on the City Council agenda (5A, B and C), if passed, will in essence finish the work begun with the Scenic Corridor petition. The actual language of the petition cannot come before Council until April.  If tomorrow's ordinances are passed, then the petition item for April will be deleted as a matter of procedure.

The Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition, which sponsored the petition I wrote and the petition drive that I spearheaded, sent out this notice:

"On Tuesday, 5 March, City Council will decide whether to transfer 658 acres of City owned land for inclusion in the Franklin Mountains State Park (FMSP).  Please plan to attend and contact Mayor Cook and all City Council members to express your support for our State Park.  Contact information is at the City website.

"Transferring 658 acres of City land to the FMSP (owned/managed by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department [TPWD]) unquestionably benefits our park and preserves some of the Transmountain Scenic Corridor.  Many El Pasoans demonstrated their support for conservation of this City-owned land when they signed the Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition (FMWC) petition, first circulated in August 2010.  Please encourage City officials to approve this transfer.

"The land transfer is agenda item 5C.  You can read the agenda and the detailed attachment on the city website:

http://www.elpasotexas.gov/muni_clerk/city_council.asp

You may sign-up to speak on any agenda item by contacting the City Clerk at  cityclerk@elpasotexas.gov."

The notice does not include the fact that, along with the preservation of 658 acres of land, additional land making up the arroyos will be preserved by smart code re-zoning in 5B. In addition, the entire process means that a vastly better Northwest Master Plan has been created using smart code. City Development will be adding GI/LID features - a new tool in their tool box because of the petitioners efforts. 

I plan to say a few words to Council following the presentation by City Planner Carlos Gallinar.

Only a Conservation Easement Will Preserve the West Transmountain Scenic Corridor In Perpetuity

On Tuesday, March 20, the El Paso City Council approved a plan which called for preservation, in perpetuity, of the 837-acre Scenic Corridor land just west of the Franklin Mountains State Park. The motion, made by Representative Niland and seconded by Representative Robinson, amended the Public Service Board’s Westside Master Plan and specifically mentioned “authorization to process a Conservation Easement by a third [party]” for the Scenic Corridor. The previous month this plan had been approved by the City’s Open Space Advisory Board. On Wednesday, June 13, the Public Service Board itself unanimously approved this resolution, made by Mayor Cook: “To approve the [Technical Working Group’s] recommendations that if the [Scenic Corridor] reverts to the City [after having been transferred to the Franklin Mountains State Park], it will come back with conservation easement if that is legally possible.”

A conservation easement is simply a legal contract. It binds the parties to honoring the contract’s terms in perpetuity—forever. The terms of a conservation easement are negotiated by the land’s current owner, the land’s new owner if any, and a third party—typically a land trust organization. (The world’s largest land trust is the Nature Conservancy, preserving land through easement or ownership in over 30 countries and all 50 states.) The third party monitors the easement while the land’s owner manages it. If the Scenic Corridor is transferred to the Franklin Mountains State Park (a frequently-mentioned possibility), the park would manage the land and a land trust (yet to be named) would monitor it, making sure that the terms of the easement were honored.

It’s indeed possible for a land trust to hold a conservation easement on land that is owned by the City of El Paso or by the State of Texas. At the present time, El Paso’s Frontera Land Alliance holds the easement on the 26-acre Thunder Canyon on the upper West Side, owned by the City through 2037 as a Public Improvement District. At present, at least five Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) properties carry easements in full or in part, including the Black Gap Wildlife Management Area near Alpine and the famous Government Canyon State Natural Area to the west of San Antonio. But it’s also true that state- and city-park land can be disposed of. From 1995 through now, TPWD disposed of 57 parcels previously forming part of Texas state parks. Seventeen were sold, fifteen were transferred, eight were exchanged and so forth. In El Paso itself, parts of the Mission Valley’s Blackie Chesher Park were disposed from parkland use so that a police station and a municipal court building could be built on them.

A very important reason why an easement must be deployed on the Scenic Corridor can be summed up thus: “frontage roads.”

A very important reason why an easement must be deployed on the Scenic Corridor can be summed up thus: “frontage roads.” According to TxDOT’s plans for Loop 375, frontage roads will run about 300 yards to the east of the Paseo del Norte interchange, on Scenic Corridor land. Frontage roads provide access to stores, restaurants and other commerce. The temptation—15, 30, 45 years from now—to sell off part or all of the 837 acres will remain strong. But with a conservation easement, the 837 acres will be preserved in perpetuity, just as City Council and the Public Service Board want them to be.

I strongly urge that when it meets next Tuesday, the El Paso City Council renew its commitment to a conservation easement on the Scenic Corridor land by voting in favor of one. 

Dr. Richard Teschner

PSB Recommends Access and Animal Corridor into State Park

They've got to stop it. The PSB I mean. They are going to ruin my reputation - or theirs. We are agreeing too much. I was delighted when they endorsed a conservation easement. Today they recommended an access to the State Park that makes sense to me. 


Some background: With the widening of Transmountain, the current entrance and exit from the Tom Mays Unit of the Franklin Mountains State Park will become even more dangerous than it is today. Although the TxDOT plan to widen Transmountain does not address this danger, most people are reasonably concerned. Some alternative plans have been proposed.


Dr. Richard Bonart DVM, a member of the PSB recently gave a presentation with his suggestions:
Bonart Plan for Access to Tom Mays

His suggestion puts an access road alongside Transmountain to the north and takes into account planned hike and bike trails. (Slide 4) It also makes mention of existing culverts just to the east of the current entrance that could be retrofitted to become solely an animal corridor with use by hikers and mountain bikers as well. (Slide 5) The model for the corridor would be those used in Oregon (Slide 6). 

The alternative proposed today in a presentation given by Pat Adauto is similar to Dr. Bonart's. It provides an access road off of Paseo del Norte (as does Dr. Bonart's) and enters the park a bit to the north of Bonart's - using an existing trail that is the beginning of the southern route of the current Lower Sunset Trail. That alternative also has the advantage of following a road to be built to a "resort" as approved earlier by City Council. Indeed this route was also mentioned years ago by Dr. Bonart to TxDOT.


Too often some people see those of us in the conservation/environmental community as in lock-step singular agreement on all things. For example, I don't always agree with the Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coaltion and vice versa. I don't write for the Open Space Board nor am I affiliated in any fashion with Frontera Land Alliance, a non-political/non-profit land trust organization. I recently encouraged members of a neighborhood association to oppose a recommendation for a zoning change given by OSAB to the City Plan Commission. I was one of only two votes against this egregious recommendation - enough said at least for now. Obviously some in the conservation community take quite an exception to my views about the ballpark (more on that later). And the recent election put many of us in the O'Rourke camp and many in the Reyes camp. We have our differences and we aren't all the same though we share common goals.


One proposal from the conservation community for access to the State Park would build an interchange off of Transmountain about where there is an existing runnaway lane. That interchange would provide an underpass for safe entrance to and exit from the park. It could also be utilized by animals for nocturnal passage. Although this plan would provide safe access and egress for motorized vehicles and human beings, I have two serious reservations about it. First, the interchange would be a mini-spaghetti bowl blocking the view shed of the mountain. Second, I really don't want to mix vehicles with animals even if you expect no cars after 10 p.m. and animals only from 10 p.m. to 8 a.m. (Animals can be rather sloppy about their time keeping.) I've seen Mule Deer out during the day - many in those parts.

Dr. Rick Bonart (in red) explains his plan to (counter-clockwise from foreground) Dave Wilson, Borderland Mountain Bike Association, Ed Escudero, Chairman of the PSB, Brent Sanders, BMBA, and Dr. Cesar Mendez, Park Superintendent standing in culvert.

The PSB's Alternative 1 also means that a resort can become a grand entryway into the park - an encouragement to get people outdoors and an opportunity for eco-tourism and eco-tourist dollars for the City as well as places for retreats, strategic planning, museum space. Think of a place like Indian  Lodge in the Davis Mountains State Park. A mini-spaghetti bowl only eats up more natural open space. A simple access road tied into an Indian Lodge-type resort provides an opening into natural open space.


Not only did the PSB recommend Alterantive 1 but they recommended the Bonart animal corridor at the place where the culverts are now.


So stop it, PSB! You're ruining my reputation!


Actually, keep it up!

Why a Conservation Easement Still Makes Sense

Frontera Hugs Its Cactuses but Also Lugs Its Load

Many people think of the Frontera Land Alliance as just another little cactus-hugging group. “Oh those people mean well, but …” It’s true of course that the current members of the Frontera Board of Directors—Mike Gaglio (president), Richard Teschner (vice president), Scott Winton (secretary), Charlie Wakeem (treasurer), Scott Cutler (at large), Doug Echlin, John Moses and Kevin von Finger, and our Executive Director Janaé Reneaud Field—never forget to hug their front-yard ocotillos as they head for work each day. But Frontera itself is somewhat more than passing prickly hugs. Thanks to the generosity of our donors and the wisdom of our investments, with $100,000 in the bank we are not “broke” (as our critics have contended). Thanks to on-going supplementary donations we routinely consult with our traditional law firm and also hire attorneys from smaller firms as the need arises. We are engaging in partnership with the Texas Land Conservancy for “back-up” and continuity in the hyper-unlikely event that Frontera blows away in the winds of April. Our fees for managing a conservation easement are not “exorbitant”; in fact, and as Janaé pointed out at one of the meetings of the Joint City-PSB Committee she was invited to speak and interact at, easement management costs depend entirely on the details of the easement, which she is asking the City to provide—such things as appraisal, survey, title, Environmental Phase One and so forth. To quote Janaé, “the direct cost to Frontera to hold a conservation easement is just the annual site visit, which on the average is $500. And if any violations occur then we’re also dealing with legal fees and staff time.” Janaé continues: “If Frontera were to manage the Scenic Corridor as a park for public use, the City must tell us what it wants—restrooms? Parking? Trails? Campgrounds? Picnic sites? Barbeque grills? Swings and slides, sandboxes and teeter totters? The City hasn’t told us that. That is why a partnership with Texas Parks and Wildlife is best: Frontera holds the conservation easement (thus guaranteeing that the 837-acre Scenic Corridor property remains conserved in perpetuity), while the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) manages and/or owns the land.”

And in light of the report (presented to OSAB just yesterday—June 6—by staffer Carlos Gallinar of the City Development Department) from the Joint City-PSB Committee, that’s what Frontera supports: a combination of Plan One (whereby the City enters into a partnership with the TPWD, dedicating and/or selling the 837 acres to TPWD for incorporation into the Franklin Mountains State Park) and Plan Four, which deploys a conservation easement to Frontera [the El Paso area’s only 501(c)3 non-profit land trust] so the land can be conserved in perpetuity. The problem with not deploying a conservation easement is that TPWD has sometimes sold its park land to private concerns, and this would set a bad precedent for the 837 acres. The problem with the Joint City-PSB Committee’s fall-back recommendation—that the land be dedicated as a city park—can be summed up in just two words: “Blackie Chesher.” That city park’s history is well known. Gifted to the City in the early 1960s with several deed restrictions, the Blackie Chesher Regional Park (of the City of El Paso) is now the home to several uses that the deed restrictions don’t permit. Had a conservation easement been applied to Blackie Chesher, none of that would have happened. Instead, the land would be preserved in perpetuity. As we insist the 837 acres be.

--Richard Teschner

The Petition, Transmountain and the Rio Bosque

Left alone, the natural environment provides us with many benefits including cleaner air and water, carbon sequestration, better soil, greater biodiversity which promotes human health as well. All of these benefits are called ecosystem services – one good reason to preserve open space in its natural state. Other reasons for preservation/conservation include human health and recreation, eco-tourist dollars, and quality of life. Natural open space is good for us mentally, spiritually and emotionally. So where do things stand with three key open space issues in El Paso – the Transmountain West project, the NW Master Plan and the Rio Bosque?

I get more phone calls about the Transmountain West TxDOT project currently than anything else. The extensive and quickening bulldozing is very disconcerting to say the least. So far the Judge overseeing Sierra Club’s lawsuit against TxDOT has not ruled on an injunction to stop work. The contractor plows ahead and many of you have reported the wide devastation including the removal of some foothills.

The NW Master Plan is a separate but related matter. The new plan is the direct result of trying to find a “compromise” with petitioners who seek to preserve in perpetuity 780 acres in the Transmountain Scenic Corridor along with keeping arroyos in their natural state and preventing any major road construction through the area (Paseo del Norte). I authored the petition and coordinated efforts to get the necessary number of signatures to bring it to City Council.  Where do things stand with the petition? Simply put: on-hold as City Planning and Attorneys work out further details of the City Council approval of a Dover Kohl scenario. Understand this: there is no time limit as to when to gather signatures to put the petition language to voters if what the City Council ultimately does is unacceptable. So far, there have been benefits as the City wrestles with the Master Plan so there is reason to be patient.

What are the benefits? First and foremost that a new NW Master Plan was even undertaken with smart growth/smart code in mind is a big benefit. However, smart growth/code is not enough when it comes to preserving arroyos in their natural state. Nature has created ways for water to flow “historically” through arroyos while still maintaining the ecosystem. Any kind of development near or along a development increases that flow rate.  Unless accounted for in some way, the velocity of stormwater can become quite destructive. We all know that rainwater washing off our roofs, sidewalks, asphalt and other impermeable surfaces races downhill. Our urban development has removed many features that can soak-up and otherwise handle stormwater: plants, natural ground, natural swales in the landscape and so forth.  Just like the development that has created urban sprawls of cul-de-sacs and strip malls, smart growth development (although it addresses density and quality of life issues while preserving more natural features) does not address stormwater management. So, whatever the development may be along arroyos, that development impacts water flow in the arroyos and engineers will all tell you that arroyos need to be modified in some way to provide flood control.

A tool for preserving natural features such as arroyos in their natural state is green infrastructure/low impact development which employs more pocket parks and linear parks and shallow depressions to manage stormwater rather than one big drain – the arroyo itself. Such a tool makes all the arroyo modification unnecessary. A benefit of being patient as the City works out issues: the City (at least the Planning Department) is learning about green infrastructure/low impact development. They are learning (as we all are) that before you can Master Plan and long before you can plat, you have to do a drainage study and you have to use your gi/lid toolbox.

Another benefit for waiting before considering moving the petition forward to the ballot is that the City is learning about conservation easements. The internal conversations have been happening. Unfortunately, elpasonaturally has heard that top City officials are still hoping to find a way to do a so-called “conservation covenant” which would ultimately give them an out with preserving natural open space in perpetuity. In the minds of petitioners, that’s the biggest deal breaker and the one that will send them back into the streets. The fox guarding the chicken coop?! Let’s hope the City gets real.

Seeing a potential for possible City equivocation, many, many petitioners have begun asking whether there shouldn’t be a whole new petition – one that calls for preserving all City owned lands on the west side including the NW Master Plan area and all properties north of it.

So, for now, the petition effort waits. There are benefits to waiting. Nevertheless, with the TxDOT behemoth moving closer to the State Park, pressure is being felt to take the next step with preserving land in its natural state.

Oh – one last goodie about the TxDOT project before moving on. An alternative entrance into the Park that would not create the huge interchange that TxDOT favors would cost $2 million. The TxDOT proposal is $7 million and TxDOT is already saying that is what they will have to spend – no modifications. Why should our government spend $2 million of our money when they could spend $7 million?

So what is happening with the Rio Bosque, a City of El Paso wetlands park managed by UTEP’s Center for Environmental Resource Management with huge eco-tourism potential (not to mention its value as a provider of ecosystem services) that only gets a paltry $10,000 from the City’s Parks and Recreation Department budget?  The Rio Bosque is a wetlands area drying up as Water District #1 pumps more water adjacent to the park while denying the park any access to effluent from the EPWU’s Bustamante Treatment Plant.  Possibly two good things are happening now. First, thanks to Rep. Eddie Holguin in whose district is the Rio Bosque, the City Council next Tuesday, June 5^th, will take up this resolution (Item 10A on the Agenda):

Discussion and action that the Mayor be authorized to send letters on behalf of the El Paso City Council to the President/Chief Executive Officer of El Paso Water Utilities/Public Service Board, (EPWU/PSB) the members of the Public Service Board, the members of the El Paso County Commissioners Court, and the General Manager of El Paso No. 1 expressing the City of El Paso’s appreciation for the efforts of each entity to help find a solution to meeting Rio Bosque’s water needs during the growing season and expressing the City’s strong desire that each continue to work diligently until such a solution is found and fully achieved. 

 Secondly, at the next OSAB meeting, Mr. Rudy Vasquez will present the EPWU’s timeline from a feasibility study that would provide a long-term, sustainable supply of water to the Rio Bosque. That meeting will be held this Wednesday, June 6^th, at 1:30 p.m. in the 8^th Floor Conference Room at City Hall.

Two more things about the Bosque:

I have learned (but have not had confirmed from MCAD/Public Art) that the Heath Satow sculpture intended for the Bosque will now go to the Zoo. The Zoo is a better place to showcase this artwork and, perhaps, it bodes well that the City wants to spend money on the Bosque that will truly benefit the wetlands. As elpasonaturally pointed out before, the City was willing to pay $170,000 for a public arts project but nothing to help with the real issue of water at the Bosque.

Secondly, if you care about the Bosque (and other open space issues), plan to attend one of two public meetings Thursday and Saturday (June 7^th and 9^th) of next week regarding the updating of the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan.

Not on our discussion list today but certainly worth mentioning now and later is the space definitely worth preserving: the Vista Del Aguila National Wildlife Refuge Proposed for El Paso, Hudspeth and Culberson Counties. See Ramón Rentería’s El Paso Times story about the gathering support for this critical refuge just east of us. 

More later on the newly appointed and what seems to be conservation and environment-unfriendly PSB Land Policy and Revenue Sharing Blue Ribbon Committee in response to City Council’s wanting to review its relationship with PSB as its land manager/land designer.

Note one big thing (and I’m sorry it’s at the bottom of the letter):  Ed Archuleta, the CEO/President of the PSB/EPWU is really doing some good things regarding preserving open space. The El Paso Times editorial alluded to it today.  Elpasonaturally has been a critic of some of his policies and leadership style.  It’s time for praise and all I can say at this time is: “Thank You, Mr. Archuleta!”

Finally, although all of us have different religious convictions or none at all, I do think that you will find the Kabarak Call for Peace and Eco-Justice inspiring. I hope you will take just a moment to read this short but powerful statement.

TxDOT Plans Animal Corridor Not Meant for Animals

Party for the Planet at the El Paso Zoo this Saturday and Sunday, April 21-22. (Map)

Want to see what a TxDOT wildlife corridor looks like? I’ve posted the plan. It’s 600 feet in length and I have it on so many good authorities that no animal is going to traverse this tunnel. Of course, I’m talking about the corridor which is going underneath their Transmountain Freeway. TxDOT did tell the public that they had communicated with the Texas Parks and Wildlife. However, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Urban Wildlife Biologist for El Paso, Lois Balin, said: "I have never seen this design before nor discussed anything even close to a 600 foot culvert." Another wildlife expert told me: “TxDOT is only trying to placate outraged citizenry who do not know much about wildlife and might think that a tunnel is a good faith effort to show that they care about our wildlife.” What is the tunnel for really? Really?

Many of you have noticed how quickly contractors are obliterating a wide swath of natural landscape on both sides of Transmountain on the west side of the mountain. Keep in mind that the Sierra Club is suing TxDOT and asking the court to order a more thorough environmental study. In fact, last week Sierra Club asked the court for an injunction to stop the work and we are still waiting for that result. The faster the land can be cleared, the more an injunction or the study becomes moot. In fact, the easier it becomes for TxDOT to argue that too much has been done already and too much money has been spent. A threat of a counter suit by the contractor, Sundt Construction, becomes a greater possibility as well. Their argument will be that they have too much time and money into the project now. The genii, as they say, is out of the bottle. Stay tuned.

On the other side of the mountain on both sides of Transmountain is Castner Range. Attempts to preserve it have been going on for a much longer time than efforts to save the Scenic Transmountain Corridor on the west. The Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition has been working for a long time with elected officials and Fort Bliss to save the Range as natural open space. Many of you are most familiar with Castner Range during the annual Poppy Fest. This year the poppies were more dazzling than troupes of edelweiss in the Austrian Alps. (El Paso didn’t have Maria von Trapp but we sure had our Native American drummers.) You can see at today’s elpasonaturally post pictures of this year’s poppies along with information and background about the Range and why it is critical that it be preserved. There is also an announcement of an upcoming meeting on Wednesday, April 25^th, of the Fort Bliss Restoration Advisory Board at 6:30 p.m. in Chaparral, NM just off the tip of NE El Paso. RAB needs to see more and more and more El Pasoans who want to see Castner Range preserved as natural open space once it is wiped clean of any still unexploded ordnance (the reason for all those “No Trespassing” signs around the perimeter of the range).

UTEP Engineering Professor, Dr. John Walton, gave a presentation about passive rainwater harvesting in the El Paso region to members of the City’s Parks and Recreation Advisory Board last week. You can see the slide show from that presentation.

Speaking about water, you are probably keeping up with the serious situation regarding the early release of large amounts of water from the Rio Grande to Mexico meaning less water now for Texas farmers. “State officials are taking a stand against the binational International Boundary and Water Commission over the release of Rio Grande water to Mexico. They say the water payments will cause substantial losses to U.S. crops and run counter to the 1906 pact governing water shares in the West Texas and New Mexico region.” Read more from MySanAntonio.com: Tempers boil over border water battle.

It’s not just nations vying over water: stakeholders along three Texas rivers are unhappy with a TCEQ ruling.

Get used to water wars but know that the public needs to have a greater voice about its water. That is why the Rodriguez bill last year was so egregious. You can get more background from three El Paso Times stories from earlier years here, here and here.

Finally, want to find out how walkable your neighborhood is? Go to walkscore.com.  Be sure to read what makes a neighborhood walkable and the benefits of living in such a neighborhood.

TxDOT's "Wildlife Corridor"

You will recall that TxDOT said that it would construct a wildlife corridor to provide safe passage for animals underneath the Transmountain West Freeway that they are now plowing ahead with in spite of a lawsuit in court by the Sierra Club. Never mind the fact that the corridor was to be west of the Paseo del Norte interchange so that animals would have to walk through developments to find the corridor to begin with. Well, never mind the corridor because, the 600 foot long culvert that they are constructing, no animal will ever traverse.  The diagram for the corridor came to light from the court hearing. Here it is:


Wildlife Corridor Excerpt From 2552-01-033 Contract

Of course TxDOT officials have claimed working with Texas Parks and Wildlife. However, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Urban Wildlife Biologist for El Paso, Lois Balin, said: "I have never seen this design before nor discussed anything even close to a 600 foot culvert."


The maximum length for non-predatory species is 120 feet.


This isn't a culvert. So, what is it? It would seem that it functions best for stormwater and nothing else. 


TxDOT is noly trying to placate outraged citizenry who do not know much about wildlife and might think that a tunnel is a good faith effort to show that they care about our wildlife.


They don't.

Bulldozing.

Working as fast as they can.

Can't get much wider.

3 images above by permission of Bob Geyer, Vice-Chair, 

El Paso Sierra Club

City Council Chooses Scenario 1

Click to enlarge.

Today El Paso City Council chose the first of three Dover Kohl proposals for developing the NW, preserving the Transmountain view shed, and reaching a compromise between the old 2005 PSB master plan and the petitioners request for preserving nearly 800 acres in perpetuity. Representative Niland made the motion and Representative Noe seconded it. The motion also carried four Open Space Advisory Board caveats:

1. A conservation easement be used to preserve open space
2. Bridges not box culverts be used to cross arroyos
3. More pocket parks considered and not large neighborhood or regional parks
4. Encroachment into arroyos be minimized to the extent possible by lining with linear parks and that arroyos not be lined with concrete.

A fifth caveat added by OSAB at its special meeting last week (that Paseo del Norte not be connected to Transmountain provided that the Fire Department can provide safe access to the neighborhood without that connection) was not included.


A no-build option was the favorite of most of the people at Council from the environmental community. Scenario 2 was seen as an acceptable compromise by many of them and was the preferred option by Representatives Lilly, Byrd and Ortega. In fact, Ann Lilly courageously championed 2 or a hybrid of 1 and 2 for this land which is in her district. In the end by a vote of 5 to 3, the motion for 1 with the caveats passed.


Many leaving Council today were unhappy. Struck by that reaction I told a KFOX reporter that I believed that the petition will probably go forward. No-build or at best Scenario 2 were the only real options.  The Board of the Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition will meet tomorrow evening and, no doubt, decide whether to go forward with a petition to put the matter before voters in a referendum. 


As a member of the environmental/conservation community, the author of the petition and co-Chairman of OSAB, here are my initial reactions:


I too would be very happy that all land is preserved or just a bit developed with nothing developed north of Transmountain. For many reasons (preserving the beauty, encouraging eco-tourism and recreation, preserving more natural space and habitat, gaining the benefits (services) of natural open space, sustaining our water future - the most important and more soon on that), no-build or Scenario 2 made the most sense to me. 


However, I also think that we petitioners should declare victory and go home as they say. All 3 plans preserve the view shed. The motion called for a conservation easement. Smart growth prevailed. We wouldn't have even gotten to where we did today without the petition. Besides, development above Transmountain and the extension of Paseo del Norte may never in fact occur. Future action can curtail it.


Which means, of course, we can't really go home. Vigilance is always, always necessary. First, there is a need to be sure that all of the i's are dotted and all of the t's crossed on today's decision. Second, animal corridors must be secured as well as safe access to the State Park. As Dr. Bonart rightly pointed out today, an access road  above Transmountain as clandestinely (and we found that out today) planned by the PSB in concert with TxDOT cannot be a reality for 15 years! In less than 2, people will have to cross freeway type traffic to enter or exit the park! Another access must be found and there are alternatives. Finally, we must stay vigilant about development north. 


There were many other positives about today and about the process which led to today. City Planning Director, Matthew McElroy, said to me after the meeting that the debate today was among 3 smart growth plans. A year ago the debate would have been about conventional development. Conservatives such as Carl Robinson voted for a smart growth plan. Representative Lilly really stepped up to the plate and the environmental community should not only thank her but reconsider (as I did months ago) our stance on this past election. Ann is just a fine, fine lady.


The entire process has made Council members realize that they must re-evalutate their relationship with the PSB and that probably the City and not the PSB should do land planning. Without going into detail, the EPWU leadership and the PSB (which has no accountability to the public) has lost a great amount of capital with this one. Eyes are opened. Things won't be the same. A non-accountable PSB is not good nor is it good that the zeitgeist of that Board is typified by the pompous arrogance of Dr. Schoephoerster's stance that those with a difference of opinion from his own should be disenfranchised. It was this arrogance that Lilly mentioned at Council today. (My Quaker forebears could not serve in Parliament because they were non-conformists; women once could not vote; people of color were enslaved.)


Representative Byrd is right. People just don't want to build there and it is the voice of the people that should count. This is an issue that won't go away. Nobody could state today any advantage for building north of Transmountain. Many pointed out the disadvantages - higher taxes and rates for additional City services and infrastructure maintenance . . . scarcity of water and the threat that only a few will control supply of water in the future - a particularly nasty threat without a PSB that is either accountable or has a clue. So, vigilance means watching any attempts at future development north of Transmountain in the future. A plan and a scenario are just that - a plan and a scenario. It will be good to declare all the land inexpedient so the City has total say about a Conservation Easement and not the EPWU/PSB.


I'm counting blessings.


I'm also thinking about the rest of the City owned land north of Transmountain. 

OSAB Recommends Plan to Preserve Scenic Corridor

In its latest report on the NW Master Plan and Scenic Transmountain Corridor, Dover Kohl and Partners suggested three scenarios for development. In an earlier draft proposal, a no-build option became a de facto fourth scenario after El Pasoans gave input at a January charrette.  (See the Dover Kohl report embedded on an elpasonaturally post.  The scenarios are shown on pages 24 and 25. A map of the 2005 master plan is on page 5.) OSAB yesterday voted nearly unanimously to recommend to City Council the no-build option; and, of the 3 scenarios suggested by Dover Kohl, to recommend Scenario #2 since OSAB members wanted to respond to Council’s request to find a resolution between the differences of the old 2005 NW Master Plan and the area prescribed for preservation in the successful petition.

A packed crowd attended the OSAB meeting and a number of citizens voiced their desire to keep the land preserved. In my last e-letter, Plan El Paso Passes, I reported that, sadly, Richard Schoephoerster, a member of the PSB and the Dean of Engineering at UTEP, had marginalized the group of citizens who participated at the charrette because they were, in his words, “against construction”. In a post today, I point out that this group is not anti-construction per se, but has, for the past ten years, called for preserving the unique scenic beauty of the Transmountain corridor as it abuts the state park. It is dismaying that someone who sits on a public board should have a dismissive attitude toward those with opposing views. Moreover, I am shocked that a Dean of Engineering should have so little regard for facts and details as he revealed when he declared a dirty vacant lot in the middle of development to be natural open space.  You can watch a video clip of his declaring that those who want to preserve open space in northwest El Paso as a group with a conflict of interest.

To see the great value of natural open space, watch this excellent promotional video for El Paso.

Upon adopting Plan El Paso, kudos for the City began coming in. Do watch ABC-7’s Maria Garcia interview of Representative Steve Ortega. Past Council Representative and candidate for U.S. Congress, Beto O’Rourke, played a large role in bringing smart growth to El Paso. But the real unsung hero is Representative Susie Byrd.  She has been a true visionary on El Paso's City Council on Smart Growth and sustainable development. As the Representative of a great deal of El Paso’s traditional core, she understands the qualities that go into building complete neighborhoods and how suburban sprawl is a poor substitute. She also understands that as a city, the traditional core cannot continue to lose over 1,000 residents per year.  It is this mix of design understanding and the transition facing the core that makes her such a gifted advocate.

Much of the City's progress on building better places can be traced to Byrd’s insistence on better design. She pushed for the adoption of the Smart Code, a new Rapid Transit System, incentives for smart growth, smart code planning for PSB land and land sales, the ITE manual for Walkable Urban Thoroughfares, and a bold new urban comprehensive plan (Plan El Paso) already being called the best smart growth plan in America. The end result will a more sustainable, economically competitive city with a quality of life that rivals any other place in the Southwest.  Thank you, Susie Byrd!

City Council will take up the NW Master Plan and Scenic Corridor on Tuesday (March 20^th). It is Item #10B on the Agenda.

The new Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition newsletter is available online with information about the upcoming Poppy Fest, Party for the Planet at the Zoo, the calendar of events at the Museum of Archaeology and an appeal by the Sierra Club of El Paso as it does legal battle with the behemoth, TxDOT.

Two events this Sunday afternoon:

Awakening the Dreamer, a program about “the acceptability of a sustainable and just world” takes place March 18, from 2:30 to 5:00 p.m. at All Saints Catholic Church Parish Hall, 1415 N. Dakota. (Map)  The presenter Kathleen Erickson is a long-term border activist, founder of the Women's Intercultural Center in Anthony. She now works on a national level, but is back on the border this week, leading a delegation of university students. 

Also on Sunday March 18^th, "El Paso's Hueco Tanks" TV documentary premiere and fundraiser begins at 2 p.m. at  the Scottish Rite Theater, 301 W. Missouri. You will tour Hueco Tanks like never before on TV and see El Paso's oldest and  largest art gallery.  A $3 minimum donation at the door will go to Hueco Tanks Legacy Fund,  Scottish Rite Theater, and the El Paso County Historical Society.   Filmed over 8 years, this 52-minute TV documentary is called "El Paso's Hueco Tanks."  This film takes a new approach to the many groups, such as hikers, Native Americans, rock climbers, the picnic and party set, and the State of Texas, who all claim Hueco Tanks as theirs.  A professional artist looks at the 3,000 rock images, and artist Debra Cool-Flowers draws new conclusions that impress Ph.D. anthropologists who welcome her findings.  For more information, call 533-3603. By the way, the documentary is the work of Newman Park Legacy, Jackson Polk. This film will also be shown for free at the Poppy Fest on March 31, 2012 at the Archaeology Museum at 1:15 p.m.

Finally, you may want to consider getting outdoors for some yard work,  gardening or a romp in the park. Getting dirty may be great for your mental health.

Special OSAB Meeting Called for Thursday

The Open Space Advisory Board has called a special meeting for tomorrow, Thursday March 15th, at 2:00 p.m. with one key item on the agenda: a reconsideration of the Northwest Master Plan. The special meeting has been called so that OSAB can have the opportunity of being on record for recommending a more conservation/natural open space friendly scenario to City Council rather than having their previous decision assumed by Council members as their final recommendation. That decision was based on a draft and not the more detailed presentation given to the PSB.

Why reconsideration? It was best said by a citizen at the special PSB meeting last week: “Why did OSAB choose a plan that develops more open space!?” Here’s what happened.  Not long after the NW Master Plan and Scenic Transmountain Corridor design charrettes in January by Dover Kohl, OSAB jumped the gun and endorsed the draft proposal of a scenario that developed land south and north of Transmountain! This was a draft proposal without all of the facts and not a more complete report from Dover Kohl.  OSAB did place some caveats on that recommendation: the arroyos had to be preserved, there could be no large parks in any development, animal corridors had to be built, no major roads (e.g., Paseo del Norte) through the arroyos – there had to be bridges and no box culverts. PSB selected the only scenario that the top brass of EPWU (Ed Archuleta and his lieutenants) let them see: Scenario #1 which has development north and south of Transmountain. The PSB also said "no" to all of the OSAB caveats and Mr. Archuleta made it clear that arroyos would have to be hybridized and concreted. 


Although 3 scenarios are shown in the presentation (embedded below), some EPWU representatives said that they only saw #1. However, these same people were present and saw Dover Kohl's Work In Progress presentation in January. All scenarios were given at that time. Why then did the top brass of the EPWU choose not to reveal this information to members of the PSB?

There were 3 scenarios presented by Dover Kohl in their latest NW Master Plan document. However, they have stated that, in fact, no-build is an option - scenario 4 if you will. Here is the presentation that Dover Kohl gave to the PSB on March 5 which is more detailed than the draft that is currently available at Plan El Paso:

PSB 3-6-12 in Progress


Particularly look at the scenarios on pages 24 and 25. It will be these scenarios along with the option for no-build that OSAB will look at tomorrow. Note the number of protected acres versus developed acres in each case.

Here's an email that I just sent out to some of the natural open space advocates many of whom took part in the NW Master Plan charrettes in January. Remember this group was labeled by PSB member and UTEP Engineering Dean, Richard Schoephoerster, as having a conflict of interest. One attendee at the special PSB meeting when Schoepherster made this condescending remark said that the group was labeled biased "because they did not want any development, and that they were therefore unreasonable and their input should be disregarded."

"Please make every effort to attend a special Open Space Advisory Board meeting this Thursday, March 15, at 2 p.m. in the 8^th Floor Conference Room of City Hall. There is one key item on the agenda: a reconsideration of the Northwest Master Plan. Let me explain why it is critical for you to be there if you can and also plan on returning to City Hall next Tuesday morning, March 20^th. Why reconsideration? It was best said by a citizen at the special PSB meeting last week: “Why did OSAB choose a plan that develops more open space!?” Here’s what happened.  Not long after the NW Master Plan and Scenic Transmountain Corridor design charrettes in January by Dover Kohl, OSAB jumped the gun and endorsed the draft proposal of a scenario that developed land south and north of Transmountain! This was a draft proposal without all of the facts and not a final report from Dover Kohl.  OSAB did place some caveats on that recommendation: the arroyos had to be preserved, there could be no large parks in any development, animal corridors had to be built, no major roads (e.g., Paseo del Norte) through the arroyos – there had to be bridges and no box culverts. PSB selected the only scenario that the top brass of EPWU (Ed Archuleta and his lieutenants) let them see: Scenario #1 which has development north and south of Transmountain. Not only that, but the bobbing heads of the PSB said “Nyet” to all of the OSAB caveats and Mr. Archuleta made it clear that arroyos would have to be hybridized and concreted. They also proposed an option for conserving the land by some means other than a conservation easement – a means yet to be fully worked out but one that would give the PSB/EPWU more control with the flexibility to tear up natural open space in the future. This coming Tuesday, City Council will begin the process for the new NW Master Plan. They will have four scenarios to choose from: ·         Build north and south of Transmountain·         Build only south of Transmountain in limited areas (2 options)·         No Build The special meeting of OSAB has been called so that OSAB can have the opportunity of being on record for recommending a more conservation/natural open space friendly scenario to City Council rather than having their previous decision assumed by Council members as their final recommendation. OSAB and City Council need to see you – many numbers of you – and hear from many of you.  OSAB should choose a plan that develops less not more open space! Please, please try to come on Thursday. Wouldn’t it be great if the 8^th Floor Conference Room is packed with people who want to save the Scenic Corridor, preserve arroyos, rescue animal habitat and corridors . . . keep open space open? Just as soon as I have more details about next Tuesday’s City Council meeting and agenda, I will email you again.  Do me a favor now: forward this message out to all your friends and all you know who love natural open space! Let’s pack the conference room on March 15^th at 2 p.m."

Meetings for your calendar:


March 15th, 2 p.m. Open Space Advisory Board
March 20th, City Council
April 10th, City Council ordinance introduction
April 19th City Plan Commission hearing
May 1st, City Council public hearing

Action Nears on Plan El Paso; Preservation of Scenic Corridor Next

We are down to two meetings about Plan El Paso, the City’s Comprehensive Plan Re-Write:

Public Service Board (PSB)

Monday, March 5, 2012, 5:00 p.m. 1154 Hawkins Blvd. (Map)

Not only will they discuss the Comprehensive Plan Re-write (Plan El Paso) but the NW Master Plan/Scenic Corridor issue.

City Council

Tuesday, March 6, 2012, 8:30 a.m., 2^nd Floor City Hall

Some final tweaking is going on but it looks like final passage by the City Council is better than just a good bet.  Still it is very important that supporters of new urbanism for El Paso attend the PSB meeting this coming Monday and then the City Council meeting on Tuesday morning. It is very important to attend Monday evening’s PSB meeting because they will, along with taking action on the Comprehensive Plan, recommend a course of action for the NW Master Plan and the preservation of the Scenic Transmountain Corridor. (Monday’s PSB Agenda)  More on this in a moment.

Plan El Paso should be adopted because there are clear economic advantages to be had by all El Pasoans including developers.  Additionally, the Plan favors the preservation of natural open spaces and encourages downtown revitalization and infill over sprawl. Simply looking at building vacancies in El Paso makes the argument for infill over sprawl.  There is some question about language added to the document that suggests that the PSB is Trustee rather than just a land manager. The overwhelming evidence suggests that the PSB not only is not a Trust but, under Texas State Law cannot be a trust. Trust or No Trust – that is the question.

City Council will probably take action to adopt Plan El Paso at its meeting on Tuesday. Unfortunately, it is Item #13 on the Agenda so it is hard to predict exactly what time Council will get to it.  Nevertheless, those who favor the new plan should plan to attend if able. Nothing should be taken for granted. If I hear anything new before Tuesday, I will post it at elpasonaturally.

A tentative schedule for taking action on the NW Master Plan and the Scenic Transmountain Corridor is now available. Mark your calendars. That schedule includes Monday’s special PSB meeting – a critical/must attend meeting beginning at 5 p.m. Elpasonaturally has learned that Mr. Archuleta has been actively opposing preservation and wants to build, build, build on both sides of Transmountain. One can only hope that PSB members will keep just a few things in mind. No-build was clearly the unanimous choice of those who participated in January’s hands-on session led by Dover Kohl. This is no small group. The PSB itself contributed one-half of the cost for Dover Kohl to do an update of the NW Master Plan and to recommend scenarios that include preserving the Scenic Transmountain Corridor. That was a significant but well-made investment. Members of the PSB are bright people. They can see that land sales are a tiny portion of revenue and really have nothing to do with rates. They can also see what the elephant in the room really is: El Paso has more land than water and conserving land along the Scenic Corridor will only tend to increase the value of the lands that they will continue to manage.  The land in question is inexpedient. It is not useful to the functions of the utility namely water and/or waste water. El Pasoans do not gain by further sprawl – in fact, they lose financially because of the ongoing expenses that they will be burdened with: maintenance on infrastructure, essential services such as fire and police, schools and so forth. Adopting a plan that preserves the Scenic Corridor in perpetuity makes good sense.

Bottom line: keep your eye on the ball. As we transition from action on Plan El Paso to action on the NW Master Plan and Scenic Corridor, stay positive and vigilant.

Finally, not really a brag but a word of humble gratitude: I was given the Conservation Award by the Trans-Pecos El Paso Audubon Society. I received that award because I stand on the shoulders of/and cheer lead for giants who tirelessly work for conservation: John Sproul, Charlie Wakeem, Richard Teschner, Judy Ackerman, Phil Goodell, Maria Trunk, Chuck Kooshian, Lois Balin, Helen Bigelow, Peter Best, Wynn Anderson – and others who have received the award.  These are the real heroes and I am so proud that I may call many of them friends.

Dates Set for Action on NW Master Plan and Scenic Corridor

As we approach the end of action on the City's Comprehensive Plan Re-Write, Plan El Paso, a schedule of meetings to finalize action on the NW Master Plan and the Scenic Transmountain Corridor has been tentatively set:


March 5 - Presentation to PSB for final development scenario
March 20 - City Council presentation of final development scenario
April 10 - City Council Ordinance Introduction
April 19 - City Plan Commission hearing
May 1 - City Council Public Hearing


Remember that the PSB at their special meeting on Monday, March 5, at 5 p.m. will also be considering Plan El Paso (Agenda) and that City Council takes up the matter the next morning after 8:30 a.m. (Item #13 with attachments - See Agenda.)

Clarifying Three Major Issues

There are several items on the table now and it can get confusing. Keep these three things separate: Plan El Paso Comprehensive Plan (the City’s Comprehensive Plan re-write), Transmountain Road (Scenic Corridor) and Northwest Master Plan (sometimes referred to as the Westside Plan), and the TxDOT Transmountain West Project and the Sierra Club Lawsuit.

First, the most pressing item on the table now in terms of time is the Plan El Paso Comprehensive Plan. You can review Volumes One and Two of the Draft document online at Plan El Paso. Read the letter from the City’s Planning and Economic Development team. It  points out the level of participation and the time spent in concert with Dover Kohl & Partners developing this very forward thinking plan:

“Over the last 18 months, the City of El Paso has been engaged in one of the most exciting and publicized planning processes in over a generation–Plan El Paso, a rewrite of the City’s Comprehensive Plan.  During this time, the City partnered with Dover Kohl & Partners, one of the country’s top planning firms (www.doverkohl.com).  We met with over a thousand residents and many of you were active in giving us recommendations, drawing ideas, and expressing your hopes for a more prosperous, sustainable, and vibrant El Paso.  Nearly 20 separate community-wide meetings took place in all parts of the City.  We met with seniors, families, young professionals, developers, college students, military personnel, realtors, homeowners, and even held several “hands-on” design sessions with elementary age children.  We had over one-hundred face-to-face meetings with stakeholders and neighborhood associations, and formulated an advisory committee comprised of your friends, neighbors, and colleagues  to provide guidance.”

Know that there are some powerful El Pasoans who would like to jettison or water down the plan that all of us together helped to write. There have already been some delays in the schedule to approve the plan but it looks as if all is moving forward now.  Several meetings are coming up that will lead to a final approval of Plan El Paso. But approval is not a sure thing. Please mark your calendars for the following meetings and attend as much as you can. I will alert you prior to each meeting.

Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee

Monday, February 20, 2012, 10 a.m. to Noon, 10^th Floor City Hall

City Plan Commission

Thursday, February 23, 2012, 1:30 p.m., 2^nd Floor City Hall

Legislative Review Committee

Thursday, March 1, 2012, 1:30 p.m., 2^nd Floor City Hall

City Council

Tuesday, March 6, 2012, 8:30 a.m., 2^nd Floor City Hall

The Plan El Paso Comprehensive Plan Rewrite is steeped in the values of smart growth, walkable and sustainable communities and placemaking – making livable neighborhoods, communities and cities. We all know the existential angst we all experience: alienation from each other and our natural world, vast separations of our homes from where we work and where we shop, expansive streets and highways that are congested, our finances drained as a result of driving these distances to work and shop, our air polluted by long waits bumper to bumper, red light to red light, and our canopy of native trees and shrubs is quickly disappearing. The current designs of our communities have drained our wallets, robbed us of joy, shut us off from each other, and plagued us with a plethora of maladies – obesity, diabetes and heart disease being the leaders.

Our communities can be designed better so that we are closer to where we shop, more apt to interact with our neighbors, able to walk or drive easily, connected with our natural open spaces, and have a sense of place.

Do some homework. Read Plan El Paso. Check out the smart growth FAQs.  Read more about placemaking from Project for Public Spaces.  Google smart growth economic advantages and surf and read.

Send your comments to Carlos Gallinar, Comprehensive Plan Manager  and go to one or some or all of the meetings above and let them know that you want Plan El Paso.

One more meeting is critical. The PSB is apparently having a special meeting on March 5 at 5 or 5:30 on the 4^th floor of their building at 1154 Hawkins Blvd. (Map) Mark your calendars now because you won’t find this meeting published on their web site until the last possible moment for you to know. They will discuss the Comprehensive Plan and the NW Master Plan. They really need to hear from their public. (Weren’t we talking about firing our trustee?)

This brings us to the next issue: the Transmountain Road (Scenic Corridor) and Northwest Master Plan. My understanding is that dates for discussing this item are under discussion by the City and the PSB currently. I don’t know the next step  but I do know that the charrette work in progress presentation is now available online. An elpasonaturally post reported that the no-build option was the unanimous favorite of participants at the charrette. Still, when further meetings are set, plan to go – that’s when the bigwigs, backroom movers and shakers attend. These are the meetings that count just as the meetings listed above are the ones that count.

Some of the confusion between the Comprehensive Plan and the Northwest/Westside/Scenic Corridor plan stems from the fact that Dover Kohl has been the consultant in each. Information about the NW Plan are at Plan El Paso also.

The impetus for re-doing the Northwest Master Plan was the success of a petition guide asking that land in the Scenic Corridor be preserved and no major roads built through that land. I can tell you that all petitioners are adamant that the land be preserved and arroyos and habitats be preserved from the devastation of bulldozing and asphalting to make more of those wide and congested roads. The petition is still quite alive if preservation isn’t guaranteed. Simply put, the City Charter allows for petitioners to seek a referendum on a ballot should City Council fail to pass the ordinance prescribed by the first petition or pass an ordinance different from the first one. There is no deadline to start a second petition. At this time, both the City and petitioners have agreed to the process now facilitated by Dover Kohl. Nevertheless, a decision must be reached by the City and the PSB. If no preservation, if destruction of natural habitat and animal corridors, then expect round two of the petition to begin. All hope for agreement on the preservation of the Scenic Corridor which can come as part of a new plan developed with the help of Dover Kohl.

Thirdly, there is the TxDOT Transmountain West Project and the Sierra Club Lawsuit.  Expansion of Transmountain Road on the west side has always had some strong proponents even among those who want to preserve natural open space around it. The trouble comes from the fact that the project grew from a simple $15 million improvement to an $85 million super-freeway with an extra unneeded overpass (Plexxar) and without any practical animal corridor and any safe provision for entry and exit to the State Park. (Safe entry into the Park is yet another permutation of this issue which we will discuss later.) The El Paso Times already reported that “TxDOT officials worked closely with developers as they planned a strip of big-box stores on Trans Mountain near I-10. And when public meetings were held in February [2011], ‘plans for Transmountain had long been completed,’ according to an email Texas Transportation Commissioner Ted Houghton sent to a City Council member.” Who cares what you want.

If you want to contribute to the Sierra Club’s lawsuit, then make your check payable to “El Paso Regional Sierra Club Group” with a memo that reads “Franklin Mountain Legal Defense Fund”. Mail your check to the El Paso Regional Sierra Club Group, P.O. Box 9191, El Paso, TX 79995.

Finally, I’ve published before the benefits of trees in the urban setting. Unfortunately, U.S. Cities are losing 4 million trees each year. I’ve sat in enough City Council and Parks and Recreation Advisory Board meetings now to know that the leadership of El Paso is much more concerned about the image of being a Tree City USA than actually valuing trees – native trees. It’s just window dressing. A ribbon to hang on a wall and not the substance of a soul.