• newsletters • best of austin • find a paper • submit an event • advertise with us • contact • jobs •
HOME: DECEMBER 8, 2006: NEWS
text size

Beside the Point: Their Northcross to Bear

Council wades into Wal-Mart's waters

BY WELLS DUNBAR

The lunchtime deluge of citizens communications brings many things at City Council – not all of them good. It's parsimonious charity to say that Jennifer Gale's semiregular dislocutions there are among the most well-reasoned and coherent. It was all the more surprising then, last week, that the noontime hour brought such an illuminating, eye-opening discussion.

Speakers from Responsible Growth for Northcross had signed in to speak to council. The ad hoc organization, composed of neighborhood association members surrounding Northcross Mall, formed to combat the Wal-Mart proposed at the ailing engine of commerce. It was their pleas to slow the process – one they maintain they were wrongly excluded from – that led to council's first major public discussion of the proposal. Speaking to their concerns, Council Member Jennifer Kim inquired as to the law surrounding their notification. Assistant Watershed Protection director Tammy Williamson said the plans first arrived in her office as an administrative site plan, meaning, due to its commercial nature ostensibly squaring with the mall's current use, "There was no public hearing associated with it." City Manager Toby Futrell further clarified that if a new site plan stays within the previous zoning category – if there's "no zoning change, no variance, and your site plan is code compliant" – the lesser notification is OK. Yet the expedited approval process didn't preclude any form of notice; Williamson said, "We normally catch everyone," but allowed that sometimes neighborhood associations "fall off of our list." No matter, she clarified, it would have been "a relatively generic notice" anyway.

During the discussion, Council Member Mike Martinez established that staff supposedly had no clue who the tenant would be until it was unveiled in the Austin American-Statesman. But when it came to Wal-Mart's secrecy, Council Member Brewster McCracken wasn't buying it. Having examined the site plan for the first time that morning, he said that its mammoth breadth "reflects a freestanding discount super store," before rattling off the tell-tale stats: The center alone would create 10,686 car trips as part of its "24-hour, two-way traffic volume ... [more traffic] than the entire amount of Northcross Mall currently." It also would create a footprint of 217,000-plus square feet, which, McCracken repeatedly declared, "makes it the largest retail establishment in central Texas outside of Cabela's and IKEA." (Actually, it's bigger than Cabela's, second only to IKEA's 252,000 square feet in Round Rock. The entire retail square footage of the Northcross redevelopment – of which Wal-Mart is only the anchor – is planned to exceed 400,000.) "We have a problem with our current code if this kind of massive expansion is going to happen on a neighborhood street, not a highway," said McCracken. "The notice to the neighbors needs to let them know that something more than a site plan has been filed. It needs to be something like, 'All hell is about to break loose, so let's get ready.'"

Kim asked about expanded notification for small-business owners in the area, moving the discussion toward the tools available to rein in Wal-Mart's worst intentions. McCracken inquired as how to keep the store from operating 24 hours around the clock – possibly via noise or light pollution constraints or its incompatibility with commercial design standards – but only a conditional zoning overlay could prevent it. "It's amazing to me that our zoning code is the only way we have the ability to say you can't be open at 3 o'clock [in the morning]," McCracken said.

Returning to commercial design standards, McCracken's own pet project, he lamented that "we were looking at this area as being a great opportunity for mixed urban use, [and] infill redevelopment," but the project narrowly skirted the standards' implementation date. "This apparently got approved between first and second reading [of the design standards ordinance], so it was deep, deep into the process when this started," McCracken noted. It wouldn't be the only serendipitous instance of suspect timing for Wal-Mart and developers Lincoln Properties either; a timeline issued by Supercenter opponents Liveable City outlines the city's months-long delay in initiating work on the upcoming big-box ordinance, raising troubling questions as to whether the delay was orchestrated to allow Wal-Mart to slide in under the radar. The coincidences have not gone unnoticed – going one better than the application chronology Futrell promised council members, Kim has called on city auditor Stephen Morgan to investigate the entire application process, and the impact on the surrounding area. (For more on the controversy swirling around the applications process, see p.30.)

But for now it'll have to wait. This week's council meeting contains another exceptionally light agenda, the sticky centerpiece being zoning approval of the St. David's expansion, reappearing from last week. Council has another week to mull all things Mart until the big-box ordinance comes before them, Dec. 14. On that, and with their own problem, neighbors are hoping they'll think outside the box. end story

"Point Austin" will return next week.

Share Digg Twitter Facebook Del.icio.us LinkedLn Email Print article
COMMENTS
16
 
BS, Brewster m1ek Dec 07, 2006 - 08:49 am
Anderson and Burnet aren't "neighborhood streets"; they're major arterials; and it's much better to have a big retail destination on CITY STREETS than it is to have it on a highway; because you can't efficiently run bus service along a highway with frontage roads. Think about the Wal-Mart _workers_ before you respond here.


marty Dec 07, 2006 - 01:52 pm
m1ek, currently the Walmart workers are the lowest on my list of concerns about this project, if not dead last. How on earth can you justify supporting a structure of this size at the Northcross location?

I'm sure I don't have to tell you that public transportation in Austin is not what anyone would call "good". I would dare to say that nearly everyone in the surrounding areas of Northcross mall have cars. So if the majority of the residents in that area have cars (like me), traffic impact is at the top of the list of our concerns with this project, not the Walmart workers.



neighborhood streets guest Dec 08, 2006 - 10:52 am
m1ek, you call burnet and anderson major arterials. they may be classified as such in a city like austin, a city that was never designed to deal with the high traffic demand (inner city) that a 200,000 sq. ft. walmart will require. honestly, do you really think that burnet and anderson will be able to handle the increased traffic? in my experience, no way. that intersection is already crowded and WILL BE a disaster if walmart moves in. additionally, i agree that workers transportation to the site is not the reason to justify building a walmart at the site. do you use the bus? i doubt it and most walmart employees don't either.


m1ek Dec 08, 2006 - 02:38 pm
How do I justify this location? It used to be a SHOPPING MALL. And it's far better than a location on a freeway, because, again, you can't deliver good transit service along a freeway.

These roads are major arterials, period. There aren't any bigger roads until you get out to exurbia; so unless you're saying No Big Boxes Ever, this is a primo spot on which to put one.

And as for you and the coward after you, yes, workers will arrive on the bus. And yes, I ride the bus; I used to take the 98x series express buses out to the Arboretum area almost every day, and almost every day I'd watch as a few UT students got off to go to their jobs at retail stores there.



m1ek guest Dec 08, 2006 - 03:51 pm
m1ek, do you work for armbrust and brown, or maybe lincoln properties?


Irony is... m1ek Dec 08, 2006 - 03:59 pm
being queried for your employment by somebody posting as "guest".

No, you jackass, I don't work for any developer of any kind, unless you mean "software developer".



m1ek guest Dec 08, 2006 - 04:07 pm
You are a volatile person and, I'm sure, a real pleasure to be around. Oh yeah, I'm sure you're real tough too.


Hypocrisy is . . . notcuteguest Dec 09, 2006 - 12:07 am
calling it ironic for someone to query when posting as "guest" when YOU go by m1ek - a true identifier if I ever heard one. And while we're on the subject, irony is saying one thing when you mean another - so I don't really follow. While avoidance is responding with "irony is . . ."

Why is it any more cowardly to post as guest than m1ek? Anonymous posting is anonymous posting. If any of us were so brave we would all be using our real names.



Dear notcuteguest m1ek Dec 09, 2006 - 09:23 am
Look on the internet for M1EK, you genius. I've been blogging about Austin (mostly transportation) for years.


m1ek . . . pecksniffian guest Dec 10, 2006 - 01:00 pm
Look it up.


Wal-Mart at Northcross Bike friendly Ben Dec 11, 2006 - 11:35 am
This location for a Wal-mart is great for a cyclist like me. Maybe some of those low wage Wal-Mart workers will also commute on their bikes.



thoughts me Dec 13, 2006 - 04:22 pm
1. m1ek is ALWAYS being accused of working for "the man"...check the Austinist.com...ha ha.

2. If the neighbors want to develop the property, as Paige Hill says, (birds start to twitter, happy music plays in back ground) "We, the neighborhood, envision a development with ALL local tenants." then why don't the neighborhoods BUY the property, thus entitling them to PROPERTY RIGHTS...???

If not...why don't they stop whinign about the "low class people coming through their neighborhood?"

Don't let 'em confuse you...they don't care if white, middle class yuppies go there, just not people "east of IH-35."



What they want guest Dec 13, 2006 - 04:46 pm
What the yuppies in Allendale really want is to continue to have sole uncontested use of the under-utilized roadways in the area so that their commutes remain quick and painless. If you add a big store to the *existing* (and essentially dead) mall, then the roads might start working at planned capacity and the neighbors might have to face the same traffic that exists everywhere else in Austin.

Most of the time I sit at the intersection of Anderson and Burnett staring at a red light and debate whether to just go because there's no cross-traffic. The only time that there is any traffic here at all is at rush hour.

Currently Northcross might generate a handful of car trips a day for the few unfortunate tennants and the even fewer (and more unfortunate) customers. Putting in new stores will certainly increase traffic flow - but ten times zero is still zero. Something like a walmart might actually bring the old husk of a mall back to life.

So basically it's just self-serving rhetoric from the self-righteous "neighbors" who want it all for themselves.



regarding thoughts guest Dec 13, 2006 - 04:54 pm
Indeed.

If this was about the neighborhoods fighting to keep a resident of a particular ethnicity out of Allendale, the ACLU would be suing so fast our heads would swim.

But it is apparently OK for the neighborhoods to discriminate against potential tenants despite them following the correct legal processes - as long as the tennant is Walmart.

What a bunch of hypocrites you people are.



Wal-mart is freaking evil people! bakunin661 Dec 14, 2006 - 02:24 am
I live near to the Northcross Mall. I make crap for pay, but I'd still rather this thing not come in here.

I have no idea what people are saying about property values and traffic. I'm not too concerned about either since I'm not a property owner.

What I am concerned about is that Wal-mart is freaking evil folks. I'm against the thing because their profits are based on destroying small business and exporting manufacturing jobs to authoritarian countries with no real labor protections. Mainly China, you know, Tiananmen Square China? Remember?

They're devils, plain and simple. They should be turned out of the country, let alone resisted in this area.

Why on earth are ya'll turning this into a class thing? Wal-mart is a freaking slaver company, the base of their business is barbarism. I'm broke too, but Jesus, don't bother defending the devil, he can afford his own lawyers.
View Postmark thread



re: bakunin661 me Dec 14, 2006 - 10:36 am
Then. Don't. Shop. There.

Capitalism and the freedom of choice are beautiful things.





POST A COMMENT

(optional):
:

Permission to Print. Letter to the editor.
 
See our
Elections
page

for more
coverage.

FURTHER READING
Keywords
for this story
city council
jennifer kim
brewster mccracken
wal-mart
northcross mall
responsible growth
toby futrell

Really White Vigilante

BLOGS
East Riverside
Countdown to L-G-B-T
What's Your Mobility Fix?

History in the Making
Wanted: Chief Sustainability Officer
Rodney Reed Case Back in Court

ARCHIVES
More from
December 8, 2006
News
Arts
Books
Food
Screens
Music
Features
Columns
Sports

Browse the
Archives by
Issue
Author
Column
Review
Section

Recently In
Beside the Point
Trust Us, We're the Water Utility October 23, 2009
AWU's vows to deliver on WTP4 and conservation just don't wash

Pray for Drought August 28, 2009
The unexpected blessings of global warming

Solid Waste: Willie Rhodes Slides Sideways June 5, 2009

Beside the Point
archive


Short Story Party
Sound Wars
Mind Over Music
Online Contests
Chrontourage
Chronicle Merch

 

Ads of the Day