[Neighbors] New building height allowances along Central in "upper" Nob Hill

Sat Mar 11 18:37:23 MST 2017

Hi all, 

I, too, wish to support the height restrictions described
by Tandi. The question I have is this - while we are all agreeing with
each other, how does that voice get beyond our group email to influence
those who guide this process? 

I don't want to have to write a letter,
I'd be more than happy to sign a petition ..... or would it be
reasonable to think that Pat Davis is monitoring these talks and taking
down some helpful data? 

Hoping to hear back, and hoping that all these
great voices and ideas lead us to wonderful living in Nob Hill! 

Karen
at Hermosa/Marquette 

On Mar 10 2017 11:55 AM, SARA via
Neighbors_nobhill-nm wrote: 

> We also agree with the height
restrictions described by Tandi. 3 stories is enough! 
> Sara & Ron
Friederich 
> Grand & Amherst 
> 
> -------------------------
> 
> FROM:
"Wendy Barker via Neighbors_nobhill-nm"
<neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com>
> TO: "Flora Silva"
<silva_f65 at yahoo.com>
> CC: "neighbors nobhill-nm"
<neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com>, "Tandi Hufnagel"
<tandiwe76 at gmail.com>
> SENT: Friday, March 10, 2017 7:56:01 AM
>
SUBJECT: Re: [Neighbors] New building height allowances along Central in
"upper" Nob Hill
> 
> Thank you Tandi, 
> Yes. I agree. 65 feet is way
too high like Flora said. 
> 
> Have a great day, 
> Wendy 
> 
> On Mar
9, 2017, at 3:24 PM, Flora Silva via Neighbors_nobhill-nm
<neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com> wrote:
> 
>> Well said, Tandi.
This was discussed at the NH Board Meeting. Sixty-five feet is way too
high! 
>> 
>> Flora 
>> 
>> -------------------------
>> FROM: Tandi
Hufnagel via Neighbors_nobhill-nm
<neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com>
>> TO:
neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com; patdavis at cabq.gov 
>> SENT:
Thursday, March 9, 2017 1:24 PM
>> SUBJECT: [Neighbors] New building
height allowances along Central in "upper" Nob Hill
>> 
>> HI Pat and
neighbors,
>> 
>> I've been attending some of the recent zoning meetings
that are planning new codes for the Central corridor, specifically
relating to the new ART line and the stations. My concern is building
heights being proposed nearby the stations, specifically the Solano
station.
>> 
>> The new height allowances would be 45 feet as a standard
zoning height along Central, plus a 20 foot bonus for being near a
station, equaling a total of 65 feet. This would apply to the old Aztec
motel lot for example. That height is incredibly out of place for the
surrounding neighborhood and the current commercial structures. 65 feet
would allow for a FIVE story building - the idea of a five story
building looming over Central as well as being an eyesore for many
blocks in all directions is completely not in sync with historic
preservation, community desires, or even basic aesthetics. The three
story condo at Central and Silver is already pushing the limit of what
many neighborhood residents feel is an acceptable building height.
>>

>> I've been to the business meetings and listened to the developers,
and the neighborhood meetings and listened to residents. As both a
resident and Nob Hill business manager I understand both sides. I agree
that more density will benefit the neighborhood, adding vitality, more
foot traffic, and increased business support. However, this needs to be
done within reasonable growth limits, and 65 feet is way, way above what
is appropriate.
>> 
>> The current restrictions of 39 feet from Carlisle
to Aliso, and 54 feet from Aliso to Washington, are the maximum that
should be allowed, including near stations. This would allow for
consistent building development without creating glaringly irregular
massings of "old" vs "new" developments that would not flatter this
historic neighborhood. These existing building heights restrictions are
plenty high enough for a retail ground floor or wrap around a parking
structure, and residential units above. 
>> 
>> Pat, since it sounds
like you have a key hand in writing the new zoning for our district, I
urge you to reconsider the 20 foot "bonus" proposed near the stations,
and near the Solano station in particular. 
>> 
>> Thanks, Tandi
Hufnagel 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>>
Neighbors_nobhill-nm mailing list
>>
Neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com
>>
http://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/neighbors_nobhill-nm
[1]
> 
>> _______________________________________________
>>
Neighbors_nobhill-nm mailing list
>>
Neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com
>>
http://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/neighbors_nobhill-nm
[1]
> 
> _______________________________________________
>
Neighbors_nobhill-nm mailing list
>
Neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com
>
http://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/neighbors_nobhill-nm 
>

> _______________________________________________
>
Neighbors_nobhill-nm mailing list
>
Neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com
>
http://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/neighbors_nobhill-nm
[1]

Links:
------
[1]
http://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/neighbors_nobhill-nm
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.swcp.com/pipermail/neighbors_nobhill-nm/attachments/20170311/88fed744/attachment.html>