Downtown Alive — or Dead?
I just finished reading your Las Cruces Downtown Mall comments ("Where All the Lights Aren't Bright," July), which I thoroughly enjoyed. I sense that you have some apprehensions about the success of the current plans for its revival. I'm afraid I share those apprehensions — squared.
I moved here when the original Main Street was intact. I felt bad when St. Genevieve's Church was destroyed, but not being a native, I was not disturbed by the street becoming a pedestrian mall. Had I known at the time that there was no one in city government with any idea about aesthetics, architectural design, landscaping and so on and that they would simply accept whatever Urban Renewal threw at them, I might have become involved in the project. There was not even the expertise to have the contract require that businesses had to keep up their properties, keep them looking attractive, front and back, so although the city owned the Mall property, they didn't own the shops there and hence had no control over their gradual deterioration.
With some know-how, our pedestrian mall could have been lovely, vibrant, a showplace. All over Europe are pedestrian malls. In fact, in Cologne, Germany, an entire long street is closed to traffic, filled instead with shops, people, baskets and pots filled with flowers, sidewalk cafes. Ever been to the 16th St. Mall in Denver, or the pedestrian mall in Santa Cruz? There are numerous others around the country. Las Cruces leaders have been erroneously led to believe that streets with traffic are the only way to attract people.
There never has been any real effort to promote the mall, at least not that I or anyone I know was aware of. In fact, there has been no effort to maintain it. Once there were flowers in the planters, but they were left to struggle on their own and soon many died. One large circular planter ended up being a super-size kitty litter box.
I truly hope that Heather Pollard and Downtown Alive are successful, because this project is gobbling up a horrendous amount of our money. As an environmentalist type, I have trouble accepting a plan to increase traffic at a time when nationwide the goal is to cut down on vehicular traffic. Here we had a chance to encourage walking, easy parking behind the shops, and instead, we're creating a situation where eventually there will be stop-and-go traffic, auto emissions polluting the air, and the customers having to walk from wherever it is decided to have hi-rise garages.
Tamie Smith
Las Cruces
Xenophobia No Joke
I received the following email from a dear friend in LA this morning — right after I read your "Coming to America" article (July). I suppose the email was supposed to be funny. It just didn't strike me that way. I've included my response it:
"Jose and Carlos are panhandling at the freeway off-ramp. Jose drives a Mercedes, lives in a mortgage-free house and has a lot of money to spend. Carlos asks Jose how he can bring home a suitcase full of $10 bills every day. Jose says, 'Look at your sign. It reads, "I have no work, a wife and six kids to support."'
"Carlos looks at Jose's sign. It reads: 'I only need another $10 to move back to Mexico!'"
Yes, this would be funny were it not for the inference to be drawn from it. Xenophobia is doing well in the good ol' USA. If undocumented Mexicans had blue eyes, blonde hair and spoke unaccented English, we wouldn't be having this discussion about illegal immigration. We've yet to hear about undocumented Irish, Canadians or English folk being deported.
I agree our borders have to be controlled. But, as an employer most of my work life, I've yet to see (have) better, more hard-working employees than Mexicans. Think about it: When did you EVER see a Mexican panhandling anywhere? The ones I've seen were always looking for work. This malarkey about employers underpaying hard-working Mexican employees is one more specious argument spewed out by said xenophobes. As an employer, if a Mexican is doing an excellent job for you — and making your business successful — wouldn't you pay him/her a fair wage?
Obviously, there are many other issues to contemplate regarding immigration. But if we can bring xenophobic propensities out in the light, where they can be discussed, perhaps the immigration dialogue will be more civil and everyone will benefit.
Robert Parra
Silver City
Cavemen or Concerned Citizens?
I don't know who Harry Lightcap is, but he is totally ignorant of the annexation problems in Las Cruces. His column (July) is the worst example of "caveman writing," to use his pun. It is an insult to those Las Cruces residents who are concerned about rational growth.
Why are citizens concerned about the new developments? It is because there has been no citizen participation. Mr. Philoppou, the land developer, and his staff constantly tout that they adhere to Smart Growth principles in planning their 30,000 housing development. The Smart Growth Network was formed in response to increasing community concerns about the need for new ways to grow that boost the economy, protect the environment, and enhance community vitality. One of the most important basic Smart Growth principles is that planned development requires "strong citizen involvement." Smart Growth states that master plans for development without community participation "will be used to create unhealthy, undesirable communities. When people feel left out of important decisions, they will be less likely to become engaged when tough decisions need to be made. Involving the community early and often in the planning process vastly improves public support for smart growth and often leads to innovative strategies that f
it the unique needs of each community."The developer has not practiced one of the most essential principles. There has been no public involvement regarding concerns about schools, open spaces, parks, water, traffic patterns, etc. — but I'm sure Mr. Lightcap thinks that is OK. I think Mr. Lightcap has been in some cave too long and is used to seeing the world in shadows of unreality. Mr. Lightcap, please do your homework before you start writing diatribes — skip the cocktails.
Greg Lennes
Las Cruces
Well, Mr. Lightcap, if you were trying to be funny while insulting the "stringy-haired weirdos" who are demanding real leadership from the Las Cruces City Council — you failed. I didn't even smile. And, by the way, I have my white hair trimmed every six weeks and no one has ever called me a "weirdo." And I do have a strong sense of humor — just didn't need it while reading your column.
Why do you insult concerned, intelligent, educated citizens for asking questions of their city politicians and paid staff? Many of the people who joined the protest against the massive annexation had quite legitimate concerns about water availability, about flooding issues and about reserving open space. And, by the way, not one of the City Council or the Mayor has a civil engineering degree. They are politicians and as such should be answerable to their constituency. Isn't that the way a democracy works? I, along with many of the people who attended Council meetings pertaining to the 6,000-plus annexation, were astounded at the almost complete lack of informed questions from City Councilors and the Mayor.
What really puzzled me about your column was that you branded everyone who questioned the massive land-grab as members of left-leaning and wilderness advocacy groups. How did you come to that conclusion? Runaway growth impacts all of us, lefties and righties and independents.
Our group(s) advocate "smart growth," a concept that will benefit ALL of the residents in this fast-growing county. Those of us who joined together are still here, Mr. Lightcap, and our work is not over. Perhaps you should read up on "smart growth." Perhaps you could become enlightened as to what the fuss was truly about by the "stringy-haired weirdos."
Violet and Ronald Cauthon
Las Cruces
In two recent annexations, approximately 12,600 acres were added to the city of Las Cruces, which now stretches for about 25 miles, east to west. The East Mesa developer envisions 40,000-80,000 new homes. The West Mesa will mostly be office and light-industrial projects.
Which brings us to the long-range planning issue. Why would our city fathers (and mothers) agree to mostly housing on the eastern edge of this 25-mile-wide span and mostly jobs on the western edge? In this town, every east/west transportation corridor has to cross one river and two interstates, so we have few of those.
What will happen when some of the 40,000 new residents on the east side try to get to their jobs on the west side? Don't our elected officials know that traffic congestion is a politician's worst nightmare?
And who will pay for the schools and infrastructure for this new development? Are tax dollars from existing neighborhoods going to the new development instead of being used for maintenance and upgrading in existing neighborhoods?
How have other cities handled these problems? When the city of Tucson annexed a large piece of mostly state trust land, they took time to plan and, two years later, produced the Houghton Area Master Plan (www.trustland.org/challenges/hamp.cfm). In Albuquerque, a similar annexation resulted in the new suburban community, Mesa del Sol, a collection of sustainable villages. Even better, it will not take money from existing neighborhoods; it's a "no net expense" project (www.mesadelsolnm.com).
We could learn a lot from our friends in Tucson and Albuquerque. They understand that people want community, not sprawl. In the Southwest, people have always gathered — in pueblos, in villages and in small towns. They have erected homes, and plazas, and places of worship. To this day, they continue to emphasize what is unique to their area, from adobe and western ranch to Victorian and New Age. Who wants endless mazes of mass-produced, look-alike houses that stretch without interruption across the desert? Who wants to live in a development without a center, with no places to gather, without any sense of community, without a soul?
Both Mesa del Sol and the Houghton Area will provide small communities with village centers, neighborhood schools, walkable connections, nearby employment, mass transit options, and sustainable building requirements.
In Albuquerque, now that new sprawl can no longer suck revenue out of the city, the city is upgrading and pursuing infill redevelopment in existing neighborhoods. They are adding some higher-density residential development in vacant areas of the city, fostering mixed development along selected corridors, and providing incentives for infill employment projects so that people can live, work, play, learn and worship in their community, without the cross-town commute.
And the rehabilitated neighborhoods are attracting scores of new residents. The high school turned into apartments on Central Avenue in downtown Albuquerque sold out in a week. And new businesses, cafes and shops are rapidly moving into the area.
Quality growth means planning communities that are inviting places for people to live and work and raise their families — both in rehabilitated older neighborhoods and well-planned new ones. It's time to discard sprawl and build community.
Sharon Thomas
Las Cruces
Let us hear from you! Write Desert Exposure Letters, PO Box 191, Silver City, NM 88062, email letters@desertexposure.com or fax 534-4134. Letters are subject to editing for style and length. Deadline for the next issue is the 15th of the month.