|
Diverse detractors duel with Wal-Mart
Diverse detractors duel with Wal-Mart
Austin American Statesman
Sunday, July 6, 2003
There's something about a Wal-Mart Supercenter that brings people together.
Several very different interest groups -- from suburban homeowners to environmentalists -- have started to bond in opposition to a 24-hour Wal-Mart planned for a wooded tract across the road from the Circle C Ranch neigh- borhood.
The groups have always focused on development issues in environmentally sensitive areas of Southwest Austin, but seldom with so much unanimity.
Neighbors complain about the traffic that the store is sure to attract. Environmentalists argue the tract at the corner of Slaughter Lane and MoPac Boulevard (Loop 1) should at least meet the city's regulations on water quality and development intensity.
The opponents convened in the Bowie High School auditorium last week to vent their feelings. About 500 people attended the meeting, which was moved from the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center to accommodate the crowd.
"We feel this 24-hours- a-day aspect of Wal-Mart is the absolute worst marriage between a retail development and a neighborhood," said Ron Urias, president of Sendera Homeowners Association, which represents residents who live behind the site.
Other neighborhood groups, including the Circle C Homeowners Association, have declared their opposition to "a massive big-box structure" without direct highway access and the potential for recreational vehicle parking, outdoor fertilizer storage and excessive lighting, traffic and noise.
Officials for Wal-Mart and Endeavor Real Estate Group, the Austin company brokering the deal, say they already have volunteered to make the project friendlier than it needs to be.
Development levels will be lower than what is allowed under a 7-year-old lawsuit settlement with the city, though they're far more intense than current city regulations call for.
Endeavor also is donating $720,000 to buy preserve land that might mitigate the project's effects.
The standard blue-box design has been scrapped for an unspecified facade more appropriate for the Hill Country. Building materials will be environmentally friendly and trees will be protected. Traffic -- prohibited from flowing directly between the property and MoPac -- will be directed away from houses to Slaughter and Davis Lane, a thoroughfare that bisects neighborhoods on both sides of the freeway.
"There are people who have very legitimate concerns," said Wal-Mart spokeswoman Daphne Moore. "We always want that feedback."
Chris Ellis, a principal at Endeavor, added, "We are trying to do the right thing." But, as with many Austin environmental fights, there may be little room to compromise.
Opponents say they don't want a Supercenter on that corner. And asked whether Wal-Mart might consider looking for another site, Moore replied, "No."
Lawsuit past, future?
It's unclear how the Wal-Mart fight should be fought.
The project already has most necessary city approvals by virtue of a 1996 settlement over a past landowner's development rights.
The settlement covers almost 600 acres in the area, most of which have been developed. Endeavor controls 43 acres there, 29 of which would be used by the Supercenter. The deal also avoids any sort of vote by the City Council, the traditional venue for such disputes.
The 1996 settlement allows as much as 65 percent of the property to be covered with buildings or pavement. Wal-Mart would reduce that to 51 percent, though that's not enough for opponents.
"Now it is entirely up to Wal-Mart to make the right choice and locate the project elsewhere," said Mayor Will Wynn, announcing his opposition to the project and noting the city's inability to stop it. "The City of Austin must honor and abide by the agreements it makes."
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is charged with regulating development in the Barton Springs watershed, the zone in which water percolates into the Edwards Aquifer and pours out at Austin's iconic Barton Springs Pool. An endangered salamander species lives in the pool, and the Fish and Wildlife Service analyzes new projects to see whether they'll harm it.
But federal regulators don't typically block developers altogether, said Bob Pine, supervisor for the service's Austin Ecological Services Field Office. He said the agency's mission is to gauge the threat from a new project and work with developers to reduce the pollution or mitigate its effects.
There remains the possibility of a lawsuit, though it's not clear what the grounds might be or even who would be sued.
That leaves overt public pressure to persuade Wal-Mart to look elsewhere. Last week's meeting closed with the announcement of contact information for Wal-Mart and Endeavor officials, and organizers passed out pre-written post cards to help people log their opposition.
"Right now it is in the court of public opinion," said Colin Clark, communications director for the Save Our Springs Alliance. He told the crowd at Bowie, "Ultimately Wal-Mart will have to respect what the people of this community want."
Pollution fear
Austin City Council Member Daryl Slusher, who criticized Endeavor and Wal-Mart at the Bowie meeting, said the Supercenter compared unfavorably with the controversial Circle C-area development deals that Austin approved with developer Gary Bradley in 2000 and Stratus Properties last year.
The two deals each come much closer to meeting city regulations, and Austin officials have said the construction allowed under both should not pollute the aquifer.
"I think most people would be happy if Endeavor/Wal-Mart did what Gary Bradley and Stratus did," said Slusher, who supported both deals.
Endeavor had representatives at the meeting, but they did not speak. Wal-Mart officials there reiterated that the Superstore would exceed the requirements outlined in the 1996 settlement.
But they did not commit to making sure the project would not pollute the aquifer.
"We know what is required for this location, and we will meet or exceed every single requirement for this location," said Moore, the Wal-Mart spokeswoman.
Stratus chief executive Beau Armstrong said he thinks Endeavor could find relatively easy ways to make sure development there will not degrade the environment or harm Barton Springs.
"They're good guys. They're going to do the right thing," Armstrong said. "Nondegradation was not that difficult to achieve, and I feel a lot better having done it."
Ellis said Endeavor is doing more to protect the aquifer than another developer might under the settlement agreement. He also said the company "will continue to strive and look for options" to trap pollution on the property and keep it out of the aquifer. Moore said Wal-Mart is trying to maintain a good image in Austin -- in part because the company plans to build three or four other Supercenters here in coming years.
"We know we're going to be in Austin for years to come," she said.
The name on the building alone may be galvanizing opposition. Urias, the Sendera association president, said he would be more comfortable with a Target or another large store that would be less of a regional draw. But Lori Erickson, who represented the group on the podium, and others at the meeting said they oppose any big-box stores on the property or in the neighborhood.
Erickson said the neighborhood would support development scaled for the surrounding community: "Businesses that provide needed services for us, not the western half of Travis County and Hays County."
Copyright (c) 2003 Austin American-Statesman
Austin American Statesman
Sunday, July 6, 2003
There's something about a Wal-Mart Supercenter that brings people together.
Several very different interest groups -- from suburban homeowners to environmentalists -- have started to bond in opposition to a 24-hour Wal-Mart planned for a wooded tract across the road from the Circle C Ranch neigh- borhood.
The groups have always focused on development issues in environmentally sensitive areas of Southwest Austin, but seldom with so much unanimity.
Neighbors complain about the traffic that the store is sure to attract. Environmentalists argue the tract at the corner of Slaughter Lane and MoPac Boulevard (Loop 1) should at least meet the city's regulations on water quality and development intensity.
The opponents convened in the Bowie High School auditorium last week to vent their feelings. About 500 people attended the meeting, which was moved from the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center to accommodate the crowd.
"We feel this 24-hours- a-day aspect of Wal-Mart is the absolute worst marriage between a retail development and a neighborhood," said Ron Urias, president of Sendera Homeowners Association, which represents residents who live behind the site.
Other neighborhood groups, including the Circle C Homeowners Association, have declared their opposition to "a massive big-box structure" without direct highway access and the potential for recreational vehicle parking, outdoor fertilizer storage and excessive lighting, traffic and noise.
Officials for Wal-Mart and Endeavor Real Estate Group, the Austin company brokering the deal, say they already have volunteered to make the project friendlier than it needs to be.
Development levels will be lower than what is allowed under a 7-year-old lawsuit settlement with the city, though they're far more intense than current city regulations call for.
Endeavor also is donating $720,000 to buy preserve land that might mitigate the project's effects.
The standard blue-box design has been scrapped for an unspecified facade more appropriate for the Hill Country. Building materials will be environmentally friendly and trees will be protected. Traffic -- prohibited from flowing directly between the property and MoPac -- will be directed away from houses to Slaughter and Davis Lane, a thoroughfare that bisects neighborhoods on both sides of the freeway.
"There are people who have very legitimate concerns," said Wal-Mart spokeswoman Daphne Moore. "We always want that feedback."
Chris Ellis, a principal at Endeavor, added, "We are trying to do the right thing." But, as with many Austin environmental fights, there may be little room to compromise.
Opponents say they don't want a Supercenter on that corner. And asked whether Wal-Mart might consider looking for another site, Moore replied, "No."
Lawsuit past, future?
It's unclear how the Wal-Mart fight should be fought.
The project already has most necessary city approvals by virtue of a 1996 settlement over a past landowner's development rights.
The settlement covers almost 600 acres in the area, most of which have been developed. Endeavor controls 43 acres there, 29 of which would be used by the Supercenter. The deal also avoids any sort of vote by the City Council, the traditional venue for such disputes.
The 1996 settlement allows as much as 65 percent of the property to be covered with buildings or pavement. Wal-Mart would reduce that to 51 percent, though that's not enough for opponents.
"Now it is entirely up to Wal-Mart to make the right choice and locate the project elsewhere," said Mayor Will Wynn, announcing his opposition to the project and noting the city's inability to stop it. "The City of Austin must honor and abide by the agreements it makes."
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is charged with regulating development in the Barton Springs watershed, the zone in which water percolates into the Edwards Aquifer and pours out at Austin's iconic Barton Springs Pool. An endangered salamander species lives in the pool, and the Fish and Wildlife Service analyzes new projects to see whether they'll harm it.
But federal regulators don't typically block developers altogether, said Bob Pine, supervisor for the service's Austin Ecological Services Field Office. He said the agency's mission is to gauge the threat from a new project and work with developers to reduce the pollution or mitigate its effects.
There remains the possibility of a lawsuit, though it's not clear what the grounds might be or even who would be sued.
That leaves overt public pressure to persuade Wal-Mart to look elsewhere. Last week's meeting closed with the announcement of contact information for Wal-Mart and Endeavor officials, and organizers passed out pre-written post cards to help people log their opposition.
"Right now it is in the court of public opinion," said Colin Clark, communications director for the Save Our Springs Alliance. He told the crowd at Bowie, "Ultimately Wal-Mart will have to respect what the people of this community want."
Pollution fear
Austin City Council Member Daryl Slusher, who criticized Endeavor and Wal-Mart at the Bowie meeting, said the Supercenter compared unfavorably with the controversial Circle C-area development deals that Austin approved with developer Gary Bradley in 2000 and Stratus Properties last year.
The two deals each come much closer to meeting city regulations, and Austin officials have said the construction allowed under both should not pollute the aquifer.
"I think most people would be happy if Endeavor/Wal-Mart did what Gary Bradley and Stratus did," said Slusher, who supported both deals.
Endeavor had representatives at the meeting, but they did not speak. Wal-Mart officials there reiterated that the Superstore would exceed the requirements outlined in the 1996 settlement.
But they did not commit to making sure the project would not pollute the aquifer.
"We know what is required for this location, and we will meet or exceed every single requirement for this location," said Moore, the Wal-Mart spokeswoman.
Stratus chief executive Beau Armstrong said he thinks Endeavor could find relatively easy ways to make sure development there will not degrade the environment or harm Barton Springs.
"They're good guys. They're going to do the right thing," Armstrong said. "Nondegradation was not that difficult to achieve, and I feel a lot better having done it."
Ellis said Endeavor is doing more to protect the aquifer than another developer might under the settlement agreement. He also said the company "will continue to strive and look for options" to trap pollution on the property and keep it out of the aquifer. Moore said Wal-Mart is trying to maintain a good image in Austin -- in part because the company plans to build three or four other Supercenters here in coming years.
"We know we're going to be in Austin for years to come," she said.
The name on the building alone may be galvanizing opposition. Urias, the Sendera association president, said he would be more comfortable with a Target or another large store that would be less of a regional draw. But Lori Erickson, who represented the group on the podium, and others at the meeting said they oppose any big-box stores on the property or in the neighborhood.
Erickson said the neighborhood would support development scaled for the surrounding community: "Businesses that provide needed services for us, not the western half of Travis County and Hays County."
Copyright (c) 2003 Austin American-Statesman