Gems and Junk: Albuquerque's Big Box Ordinance

We all know what a "big box" is... that place with the insufferable traffic, the long hours, and the low prices. They're places like Wal-Mart, Costco, Home Depot, Lowes, and Sam's Club. Most of us (except for the VERY ideological) will spend at least some money at one of these stores. In fact, most of us love their selection and their low prices.

They are our blessing and our bane. We choose to spend money with them making them successful, but we would hate to live next door to one. Out of this conundrum come the many "Big Box" ordinances that are spreading from city to city.

Not to be outdone, Albuquerque has come up with its own extensive Big Box Ordinance courtesy of Councilor O'Malley. Like the Big Boxes themselves, this ordinance is filled to the rafters with all kinds of disparate stuff; some of which is pretty good, some has no value at all, and some is down right dangerous. It has everything from gems to junk.

The original objective of the ordinance was to increase neighborhood involvement, address the concerns of the surrounding area, and provide remedies for those who are directly impacted by the new development (i.e. traffic calming devices). Everyone involved, developers included, benefit from a clean straightforward approach. Neighborhoods know what options they have and what suggestions they can make. Developers understand the range of costs associated with neighborhood demands and can factor those costs into their development plan.

The problem is the City got hold of this ordinance and put a whole bunch of other junk in it, some of which is contradictory. For example, buildings are required to be energy efficient "green" buildings. No problem right? Wrong. The New Urbanists threw in a requirement that dictates 30% glazed windows along the outside. Most big boxes have a couple of entrances, but very few actual exterior windows. The reason is energy efficiency and the costs associated with heating and cooling buildings of that size. Windows make the costs higher because the building is less energy efficient. The two objectives are therefore incompatible.

Another glaring problem is the number of developments the ordinance will affect. The baseline square footage for ordinance activation is 60,000 square feet of "Net Leasable Area." Sounds ok... except that it includes your neighborhood grocery store. One grocery store chain has already indicated that if this "box" makes it through Council and becomes law, they will not be building any new stores. Think about that for a second West Siders... NO NEW GROCERY STORES! (That clanking sound you hear is your property values dropping.)

These are just a couple of the examples of junk in this Big Box Ordinance. This thing is HUGE, cumbersome and will have consequences well beyond the scope of the original need. Some of those consequences will be unintentional; some will be intentional as the New Urbanists down at city hall take an opportunity to throw more junk into this big box.

(Sidebar)
For those of you who have no idea what a "New Urbanist" is... New Urbanism is a theory that says in essence, we all would be better off in high density developments (See New York City) and that our desire to own our personal patch of paradise (single family detached home) is bad for society and for the planet. Mass transit is one of the corner stones of the New Urbanist orthodoxy, which is why we see such a determined push for a 19th Century Streetcar by its acolytes (Councilors Benton, O'Malley, and Heinrich).
(End Sidebar)

We'll be keeping an Eye on this as it works its way through EPC, and we'll have more on the ordinance as it stands (We really like our readers and couldn't put you all through the blog equivalent of War and Peace). There are bound to be many changes (hopefully fixing some of the more idiotic junk that has been thrown in). If you would like to read the original draft (or are having trouble sleeping) you can download it here.