A different sort of land-use debate is taking shape over the Edwards Aquifer — one bearing little resemblance to the standard fare of “grandfathered” development-rights claims or threats of Austin-bashing from the Legislature. This time the landowner, Temple-Inland Inc., is dangling a cheerful carrot that promises job growth in exchange for the City Council’s willingness to waive compliance with the Save Our Springs Ordinance.
The waiver would allow the corrugated packaging, lumber, and financial services company to expand its existing headquarters atop the aquifer — on South MoPac near Barton Skyway, north of Barton Creek Square Mall — by another 200,000 square feet, adding an estimated 800 jobs in the process. Temple-Inland, one of only two Fortune 500 companies based in the Austin area (Dell Inc. being the other), moved its headquarters from Congress Avenue to South MoPac in 1995. After selecting the environmentally sensitive site, the company built its new offices in strict compliance with SOS, and the environmental community lauded the project as proof that a development can survive under the strict 1992 ordinance. Since SOS was adopted, however, only one other large-scale commercial development has complied with the letter of the ordinance: the HEB at William Cannon and Brodie. Other landowners have either claimed grandfathering rights, negotiated development deals with City Hall, or both.
As Doyle R. Simons, chief administrative officer for Temple-Inland, explained in a statement to the Chronicle, the company’s streamlining of certain services in 2003 has forced a re-evaluation of its space needs. “Temple-Inland consolidated its corrugated packaging and corporate services operations into its corporate headquarters building. … This consolidation increased the number of employees on the campus from 1,200 to 1,600,” he said. “As we continue to grow our business and provide additional jobs for the Austin economy, we will need additional space at our 62-acre campus.”
The proposal — still being crafted to sell to the council — will require some politically delicate maneuvering from city officials who want to shore up the local economy without wreaking further havoc on the aquifer that feeds Barton Springs. The deal would require six council votes to amend the SOS Ordinance. Mayor Will Wynn, for one, appears ready to bite. Why? “First and foremost, jobs,” he says, adding, “It will be relatively easy to analyze the economic impact of those jobs.” The company has not specified exactly how it intends to boost the head count at its flagship office, but Wynn says his understanding is that many of the new jobs are executive and administrative positions coming from other Temple-Inland locations. “I do suspect that they are also hoping to grow their business sectors,” he said.
Wynn also says he likes the idea of Temple-Inland’s offer to also adopt the purchasing goals set by the city’s Minority/Women Business Enterprise Ordinance, which seeks to increase those businesses’ participation in city-awarded contracts. There have been “encouraging discussions” about the project’s compliance with city M/WBE goals, the mayor said, adding that if Temple-Inland moves forward on that front, “I’m told that it would be the first private construction project ever to do so. That benefit in dollars also can be analyzed, but personally, I would place tremendous value on the equity standard that that would set for the rest of our construction community.”
Regardless, environmental and nearby neighborhood activists are working to counter the message of economic benefit already being touted by the mayor and others. In a letter to City Council members in December, the Save Our Springs Alliance reminded the council of what now seems a long-forgotten policy called Smart Growth, which sought to steer major employers off of the aquifer, and pointed out that alternative locations exist — including the 8.5 million square feet of Austin office space currently vacant and on the market.
The SOS Alliance letter also mentions a possible $1 million land mitigation offer from Temple-Inland; sources say that money could go toward the purchase of one of two property sites, including a piece of property that Cypress Realty Inc. plans to develop in northwest Hays Co. Another scenario would have the city using the $1 million toward other water-quality improvements. But environmental opponents argue that no amount of money could mitigate the on-site pollution risks if Temple-Inland expands from 15% impervious cover to the 23% being proposed.
That argument extends outside SOS Alliance circles as well. Robin Rather, the former SOS leader who is considered a moderate voice in the environmental community, says balancing SOS compliance with jobs will be difficult to accomplish at the company’s current location. “We need to find a way to take care of the economic issues and the environmental issues without pitting them against each other,” she said. “So far, I believe Temple-Inland is committed to that goal. I just hope they are realistic about the limitations of their existing site and put as much energy into looking at other sites in Austin, off of the aquifer, as they are at trying — probably unsuccessfully — to engineer around the issues of trying to expand on the aquifer.”
So far, Wynn and Council Member Betty Dunkerley are fairly well sold on the Temple-Inland expansion. Do jobs and mitigation dollars outweigh compliance with SOS? “An objective analysis of the benefits would answer that question one way or the other,” Wynn said. “It’s my job to ensure that we have that objective analysis and not simply opine based on predisposed political positions.”
This article appears in January 9 • 2004.
