Council rejects plan for Walgreen's on Bluebonnet

Only Dunkerley, Thomas voted for zoning change

The Austin City Council on Thursday sided with South Lamar neighborhood residents and denied a requested zoning change for property at 2409 South Lamar and Bluebonnet Lane. The zoning change would have allowed construction of a 24-hour Walgreen’s on the site, which is currently occupied by a mobile home park. However, neighborhood residents did not get everything they wanted from the Council, which agreed to allow a zoning change on the tract next door, formerly the home of Amy’s Toy Depot.

Although the Zoning and Platting Commission had recommended a change from SF-3 to LR-CO for the potential Walgreen’s site, neighbors told the Council that a commercial use, especially one with a drive-through window, would be inappropriate there. (See In Fact Daily, June 11, 2003.) “The applicant can certainly stand here and say, ‘We don’t think the store is going to generate 2,000 trips per day,’ but we have information to suggest otherwise,” said Kevin Lewis, president of the South Lamar Neighborhood Association. “The whole gig for retailers is (to) get people through the door, get people through the driveway.” Lewis also told Council members that he believed the intersection of Bluebonnet and Lamar, combined with the store’s proposed layout, would pose a problem.

Other nearby residents made more emotional appeals to the Council to reject the zoning change. “I’m here speaking on behalf of the trees,” said Si Si Wong. “I beg you to go across the street on Lamar and look at this last piece of magical green of South Austin.” She also appealed to the Council to purchase the tract to prevent further development. “Would you spend five million dollars and buy the whole piece, please? Just buy it for the city and keep it forever.”

While that suggestion got a round of applause from the South Austin residents in the audience, the Council made no move to purchase the land. However, Council members did express concerns about future commercial use on the site. “I’m pretty familiar with this area,” said Council Member Daryl Slusher. “And I think this particular use goes too far back into the neighborhood. And I also know that this corner has a lot of wrecks on it. I just really don’t think this is going to be a good use there and I can’t support it.”

Only Council Members Betty Dunkerley and Danny Thomas were in favor of the zoning change. A motion by Dunkerley to change the zoning failed with five Council members opposed.

The Council voted against the wishes of surrounding neighbors when it approved a zoning change on second and third reading for 2403 South Lamar, formerly Amy’s Toy Depot. Neighborhood groups had previously told the Council and the Zoning and Platting Commission that they feared the application of commercial zoning to the site, specifically GR-CO, would be used as a precedent to justify the upzoning of additional land in the neighborhood. Part of the lot had been zoned SF-3, but had been used for years as parking for the toy store. Plans for a bakery to go into the site have been dropped, although neighbors say they would support a bakery, café or certain types of restaurant uses. The motion to approve the zoning change from SF-3 to GR-CO (community retail) passed by a vote of 5-2, with Council Members Goodman and Alvarez opposed.

Following the meeting, Sarah Crocker, who represented the applicant, said her client was thinking about his options.

EB recommends variance

For grandfathered tract

After listening to the request and discussing the matter for nearly two hours, the Environmental Board last week voted to recommend an impervious cover variance for a convenience store at 7002 N. FM 620. The variance will have no immediate impact on the store, which has been in place since the early 1970’s as a Circle K and is now operated as a Speedy Stop.

When the store was built, the site was in Travis County. Since it was annexed into the city limits, the existing impervious cover level of 64.67 percent was grandfathered. Although the variance was not technically necessary since the site has already been declared a legal lot, the new owners are attempting to clear the way for the possibility of major renovations or redevelopment of the site in the future. Having the variance could make it easier down the line to build a replacement store or to make major changes because any major redevelopment would trigger new water quality requirements. Consultant Sarah Crocker told the board the owner was already exploring options for water quality improvements, including new requirements for a hazardous materials interceptor for the convenience store’s gas pumps.

Several board members were opposed to granting any variance for the site. “The nature of variances given by this board are for you to enhance the environmental conditions,” said Board Member Tim Jones. The lack of water quality improvements, he said, would mean the site would continue to generate pollution. “What’s generating a lot of pollution that’s coming off the site is the gas station.” The store does have a gas station, although it is unusual in that while the underground storage tanks are located on-site, the actual fuel pumps are on the lot next door. “If I was going to give you a variance, that’s one thing that I would require . . . that you address all the water quality impacts generated by your operation. What this site is doing is insulting the water quality in Bullock Hollow and Lake Travis.”

Board Member Phil Moncada moved to deny the variance. “This board is here to look at all environmental issues to look at development or redevelopment,” he said. “If we move forward with this variance I have a fear that we’d be setting a precedent for any other grandfathered property that gets annexed into the city that has impervious cover that exceeds what’s allowed under the code.”

Board Chair Lee Leffingwell agreed with the two that the site was problematic. “We’re all kind of frustrated because it’s a very bad situation,” he said. “It has huge impervious cover, it has runoff from automobiles, gasoline, parking lots, etc. . . . it drains into Bullock Hollow; there’s BCP Preserve right behind it; it drains right into Lake Travis. Something needs to be done about it. The question is what? With what is before us tonight, I don’t really sense we can do anything about it.”

The motion to deny the variance failed on a vote of 3-4, with Board Members Moncada, Jones and Karen Bongiorni voting to deny. After extensive further discussion, Board Member David Anderson reluctantly moved to approve the variance. “As much as I don’t like the situation, some opportunity for some type of water quality control is better than no opportunity,” he said. Leffingwell agreed that the owner would likely make major improvements or totally rebuild the aging convenience store, which would trigger the adoption of newer water quality standards. The motion to recommend approval of the variance was passed 4-3, with Board Members Anderson, Dr. Mary Gay Maxwell, Rebecca Morris and Leffingwell in favor. Moncada, Jones and Bongiorni were opposed. There are two vacancies on the nine-member panel.

Downtown Commission Wants to close loopholes

Panel says residents should be able to appeal to Council

The Downtown Commission moved swiftly to recommend closing loopholes in the City Code that allowed the Rainey Street Apartments to win a variance for properties within the Waterfront Overlay District.

Only a day after the Zoning and Platting Commission gave Fairfield Residential a waiver for its ground-level parking garage, Chair Chris Riley proposed changes to the City Code to strengthen the Downtown Commission’s ability to comment on downtown projects. (See In Fact Daily, July 17, 2003.) The Downtown Commission and the Design Commission have long stressed that downtown development should accommodate pedestrian-oriented uses.

A trio of downtown residents, Riley among them, argued against the waiver for the Rainey Street Apartments at last week’s ZAP meeting. Fairfield Residential, however, argued more persuasively that pedestrian-oriented mandates should be waived for the waterfront property, an assessment that clearly frustrated downtown residents who have fought for stricter design guidelines.

Riley responded at last week’s Downtown Commission by recommending two changes to the City Code. While the Downtown Commission is unlikely to stop the development, Riley clearly wants the group’s voice to be heard.

Riley’s first proposal was to allow for appeals to Council on waivers within the Waterfront Overlay District.

Waivers can be granted to the overlay district’s pedestrian-oriented provisions if present and anticipated development in the area is not amenable to access by pedestrians, an argument made by Fairfield. Exceptions can otherwise be made for a development if the provisions don’t allow a reasonable use of the property or if circumstances make compliance impractical.

Under current code, waivers do not go to the City Council; ZAP has final authority. Riley added a line that would give interested parties the ability to appeal to the Council. Those interested parties could include neighborhood groups or a commission. Riley said the policy made the waiver consistent with other city variances.

Riley also proposed that language be added to a section on right-of-way vacation. In that section of code, Riley suggested adding a sentence that would require downtown vacations to go before the Downtown Commission, as well as the Urban Transportation Commission and the Planning Commission. At one time, it was understood that such variances came to the Downtown Commission, but it was never written into code, Riley said.

The Rainey Street Apartments had a street vacation that was never presented to the Downtown Commission. Those who supported more pedestrian-oriented uses for the neighborhood had proposed using the vacated street for better circulation.

The Downtown Commission voted unanimously to recommend Riley’s proposals. The recommendations will be forwarded to the City Council for discussion.

Riley, who was clearly unhappy with ZAP’s ruling on the Rainey Street Apartments, has long argued that central city zoning decisions should go to the Planning Commission, rather than ZAP. The Planning Commission handles broader zoning issues in neighborhood plans, while ZAP has concentrated on waivers and variances to city code.

©2003 In Fact News, Inc. All rights reserved.

Asphalt on BSEACD meeting agenda . . . Even though the proposed developers of an asphalt plant next to the Ruby Ranch subdivision have not contacted the district, nearby residents have requested a public hearing on the matter. That item, along with discussion and possible action on the Higginbotham well, could make for a lively meeting Thursday night . . . Urban renewal . . . City staff will give a status report on the East 11th & 12th Streets Redevelopment Project to the board of the Austin Urban Renewal agency tonight. The meeting begins at 5:30pm at One Texas Center, Room 240. The Urban Transportation Commission will meet at 6pm tonight in the 8th Floor Conference Room of the same building . . . Capital Metro sales tax numbers down . . . CEO Fred Gilliam told the Capital Metro board that May sales tax revenues are down 10 percent over last year and down eight percent for the year to date. That means revenues are 10 percent below budget projections. Gilliam plans to give the board an updated status report on revenues and the upcoming budget at the board’s next work session . . . Envisioning transportation . . . Capital Metro will ask the Central Texas Regional Visioning Project to make a presentation on the transportation component of the project at the board’s July 30 meeting. When Executive Directory Beverly Silas made her last presentation at Capital Metro, many of the specifics of the transportation recommendations had yet to be refined. Capital Metro is the main financial backer of the visioning project. The Central Texas Regional Visioning Project will be holding meetings around the five-county region in September to get feedback on current plans . . . Computer recycling activists happy . . . Following the Dell shareholder meeting last week, activists with the Computer Take Back Campaign delivered hundreds of old computers to be recycled. The Austin leader of the campaign, Robin Schneider, said members of the Dell corporate staff accepted the waste computers representatives and assisted representatives of the in placing the e-waste on a truck for hauling to Austin recycler Image Microsystems. “We’re not exactly holding hands and singing ‘Kumbaya,’ but this is more common ground on recycling than we’ve had for a while,” she said. The Dallas Morning News reported last week that Dell had just quietly launched its own offer to pick up and recycle computers and other electronic items for just 99 cents apiece. The offer is available for a limited time at http://www.dell4me/recycling.