WalMart Will Wait

M1ek doesn't live in this neighborhood. He is a 24/7 blogger-TROLL. He has a problem with just about everything and everyone in Austin unless you agree with him. DSK is also M1ek or they are some sort of cyber version of a ventriloquist act.

i think i just threw up in my mouth a little bit

Vernica,

Because, frankly, it's incredibly obvious by RG4N's posts that they're simply willing to say anything and do anything to stop Wal-Mart - up to and including lying on neighborhood message boards.

I have to agree with 'God' - These posts are so ridiculous they are entertaining.

Why don't you just come to the next RG4N community meeting and get your questions answered there?

Jake,

You should really look into enrolling in an anger management class. Challenging someone to a fight over a post left on a message board is beyond pathetic.

I have a strong suspicion that you own a Camaro and sport a mullet. In fact, I'm surprised that you don't support the new Wal-Mart. Have a nice life, loser.

This is the comment section that keeps on giving.

Spiteful, arrogant diatribes against a neighborhood, as if it was a person.

Soul-crushingly dull arguments about how cars enter Schlotzky's.

And the sincere desire to inflict physical violence upon another poster in a parking lot somewhere.

Austinist, I love you.

Wes,

I'm serious, asshole. Don't puss out. Step up for your beating. The rhetorical debate is over. I'm calling you out.

Same thing for you, Stew.

Both of you assholes have no idea what you're talking about, and I'm tired of trying to talk sense into you. You both deserve a beating.

Name it.

Allandale Resident,

It is clear there are some potential discrepancies. However, you have now moved from the realm of fact into one of opinion when determining their level of significance.

For instance, you may believe that people on eastbound Anderson would cut through Northcross to get to the restaraunts on Burnet, but I do not necessarily believe they do. It's a right turn onto Burnet from Anderson (little waiting at light), and then right into the necessary driveways versus dealing with the speed bumps and dodging pedestrians in the Northcross mall area.

Perhaps a lot of people access Schlotzsky's from a Northcross driveway, but it can't be said with certainty that all of them get there that way.

And there the's the fact that we don't know exactly where the traffic counters were placed. And there's the other fact that there is a specific set of variables established to account for at least some of these things (pass through & internal capture).

The number arrived at was some ~8,000 daily trips. Even if we give the skeptics the benefit of the doubt and reduce the number to 5,000 daily trips (probably VERY generous), I still fail to see how this is provocation to bring the development process to a screaming halt.

It is insulting to call Lincoln liars, to criticize a licensed engineer's TIA as wrong, and to insinuate the City staff as being incompetent by saying, "No, you guys are just wrong."

You could probably have a dozen traffic engineers assess traffic at that mall and wind up with a dozen different variations on the TIA.

What I meant to add to my earlier post is that the easy solution to this particular issue that we're discussing is to include the other establishments in the projections. That would be easy for the developer to ask the engineer to do. Of course, if that was done, it is pretty likely that the impacts would be significantly higher than stated in the current TIA.

Pel is correct about Schlotzsky's access. I just came from the area and drove through the NC parking lot. There is also Conn's, which is rarely crowded and the restaurants, which are on the burnet side. Those restaurants have their own driveways, but it would be logical that people on Anderson or Northcross Drive would cut through the NC parking lot to avoid sitting at a light just to enter the fast food places on Burnet. The NC Center was actually bustling in the last half hour. In particular, the inside half of the center near the Norris Conference Center. I'm not sure if all of the shops are busy or not, but on that side are a chiropractor, beauty salon, nail salon and two clothing stores.

The truth is that nobody knows what would happen unless the models were run with more accurate numbers. The model is complicated and there are a number of significant problems in the TIA. I know you think that the opposition group is throwing in the kitchen sink, but it's all real issues that traffic consultants and engineers, including the City's, believe to be worth re-considering.

And you're right about the amount of scrutiny being unprecedented. I don't believe that that's a bad thing because I have a huge stake in it.

DSK,

You can get to Schlotzsky's either from the Tigermart on the corner or from a Northcross parking lot. That Northcross parking lot is accessible from either the Denny's/Rug Store driveway or the internal Northcross loop that circles the mall (and is fed by standard Northcross driveways which may have had the traffic counters).

If one wanted to exclude Schlotzsky's traffic, it would really depend on where the traffic counters were placed.

But I remain unconvinced that the huge gulf between the adequate TIA grade approved by the City and the dire predictions by RG4N can be explained by Schlotzsky's traffic allowance or any other minor TIA abnormalities.

Re. "I agree that the Schlotzsky's probably receives a good portion (perhaps even a majority) of its traffic through one of the Northcross driveways."

Actually, I don't think you can drive into the Schlotsky's parking lot from Northcross - it's separate. Obviously it's traffic still affects Anderson Lane, though.

Allandale Resident,

Thank you for being cordial. I respect your thoroughness in wanting to be in full command of the facts before commenting. I would want to be the same way.

I agree that the Schlotzsky's probably receives a good portion (perhaps even a majority) of its traffic through one of the Northcross driveways. I can't speak for the half of the Northcross Center strip mall that is only reasonably accessible through the Northcross driveways. My impression when I had my vehicles serviced at the Firestone shop across from the strip mall last week was that those businesses don't receive a large amount of traffic. But then, I do confess that opinion was primarily influenced by an anecdotal observation from fifteen minutes of walking between the Firestone service center and the Northcross mall.

It just seems unlikely to me that adjusting the TIA based on potential traffic number skew from the Schlotzsky's and the strip mall in the back would result in a significant change. Reading through the comments made on traffic at the City Council meeting and the article in the ANA newsletter leaves me with the impression that the "anti"s are throwing as much stuff against the wall as possible on the TIA issue with the hopes that something will stick and force the TIA to be rejected and somehow cause the downfall of the site plan. It would not surprise me if this level of TIA scrutiny is unprecedented in the history of the Crestview NA or the Allandale NA.

I don't represent RG4N so I am not responsible for what they have or have not said. I don't represent the leadership of ANA so I don't know what happened to the notice, if it was received. The leadership has, however, stated that they don't remember getting the notice (I know, I know). The City has confirmed that they don't know for sure who did receive the notice(I know, I know). The neighbors themselves, however, would have had no way of knowing anything unless they were notified by someone.

Regarding the first two questions, I used to know (6 weeks ago) all the details, but no longer feel 100% certain to post that information here. I'm sure I'll get slammed for that, but I don't believe in posting something as fact when I'm not absolutely certain about the veracity of it. I will, however, search some archives and see if I can't answer your question. Regardless, though, you can't say that the Schlotsky's or the Northcross Center don't receive a significant amount of traffic. They do. I witness it every day.

My apologies on the double-post. Seamonkey decided to choke on the submit.

Another question for the RG4N crowd - Can anybody demonstrate where neighborhood decline occurred for any of the neighborhoods in Central Texas where Wal-Marts were established? Surely there's a nearby precedent for the kind of horrid future that's being projected for the Northcross area by the RG4N folks.

Allandale Resident,

I recently looked at a Google map for the Northcross area and considered the driveway situation. There appear to be six driveways, of which two appear to be exclusively for mall traffic. The other four could ostensibly be shared with the Schlotzky's, the Rug Store, and the Northcross Center strip mall behind the mall.

Do you know specifically where the traffic counters were placed? Do you have proof of this?

I have a hard time believing any of this will result in a significant change to the TIA. The RG4N people and recent ANA article on the traffic stiuation have all the appearance of digging through City code, the Northcross redevelopment TIA, and the actions of City staff with micrometers and magnifying glasses looking for the smallest infractions in the TIA process. It does not appear to be a coldly neutral review of the procedures followed by the involved parties, but rather an agenda driven witch hunt. Do you disagree with this?

Also, what are your views on the fact that the ANA, and the Crestview NA, and other various entities were notified of the Northcross development site plan application a YEAR ago, and NONE of them so much as lifted a finger to find out what was going on. Until it was revealed that a "Wal-Mart" was going in, that is.

The RG4N folks have not said, "After looking into the TIA for Northcross, we think the TIA estimates are a bit low, and we would like to see the development include some traffic upgrades," after all. Instead it has been an end-of-the-world scenario with threats of lawsuits and laying in front of bulldozers, and as my own Crestview NA newsletter proclaimed, "An unmitigated traffic disaster."

All objectivity has been tossed out the window by the RG4N folks. All of it.

Allandale Resident,

I recently looked at a Google map for the Northcross area and considered the driveway situation. There appear to be six driveways, of which two appear to be exclusively for mall traffic. The other four could ostensibly be shared with the Schlotzky's, the Rug Store, and the Northcross Center strip mall behind the mall.

Do you know specifically where the traffic counters were placed? Do you have proof of this?

I have a hard time believing any of this will result in a significant change to the TIA. The RG4N people and recent ANA article on the traffic stiuation have all the appearance of digging through City code, the Northcross redevelopment TIA, and the actions of City staff with micrometers and magnifying glasses looking for the smallest infractions in the TIA process. It does not appear to be a coldly neutral review of the procedures followed by the involved parties, but rather an agenda driven witch hunt. Do you disagree with this?

Also, what are your views on the fact that the ANA, and the Crestview NA, and other various entities were notified of the Northcross development site plan application a YEAR ago, and NONE of them so much as lifted a finger to find out what was going on. Until it was revealed that a "Wal-Mart" was going in, that is.

The RG4N folks have not said, "After looking into the TIA for Northcross, we think the TIA estimates are a bit low, and we would like to see the development include some traffic upgrades," after all. Instead it has been an end-of-the-world scenario with threats of lawsuits and laying in front of bulldozers, and as my own Crestview NA newsletter proclaimed, "An unmitigated traffic disaster."

All objectivity has been tossed out the window by the RG4N folks. All of it.

Edward,

There's no other north-south corridor on which one could create a bikeway like the LAB. Shoal Creek Boulevard (plus the H&B trail farther south) _IS_ that one place. And the neighborhood interests destroyed its utility and safety by prioritizing both-sides on-street parking over safe bicycle travel.

Mike,

If the neighborhood destroyed "the primary artery" for cyclists years ago, why did the cycling lobby propose yet another east/west artery for the Lance Armstrong Bikeway when that money could have been used to create a practical north/south route? Cyclists have the opposite issue to motorists in this town in that there is no practical north/south route, yet here we go spending again on east/west.

I had a chance to talk to a person I know that lives in the area. They claim to be part of the organized effort and told me that there is a shared view among some that not only do the main issues bother them, but that they don't really want "those" people in their neighborhood. You can deny it all you want, but the truth is that the building will be smaller than the mall retail space, the roads in the area are set up to support that traffic that will come, just as it did when Northcross was a functioning mall. They said that they are not the only one who feels that the "riff raff" as they called it, are not welcome in their neighborhood. It appears that there are some racial issues that need to be worked out up north.

As it was said before, I'm sure there would be no issue if this were a Saks or a Neiman Marcus going in that space.

I agree that the real issues of the TIA have gotten lost in the wash. The TIA issues are far more complicated than what most people are saying. I'm not going to go into every issue point by point because it takes too long and I don't have the time. The first major point, though, is that the Lincoln compares apples and oranges. Traffic counts were taken at all driveways at NC to collect the baseline. As you well know, NC shares driveways with many other businesses. The projections, however, only include the WM, not the other businesses that will share driveways. Obviously, the impacts are going to be much smaller if you do things that way. This point is slightly more involved because the applicant also used the largest percentage to discount for internal capture, etc., which makes NO sense considering the apples v. oranges comparison. Like I said, there are a lot more REAL problems with the TIA. THe only ones that have gotten any press or have been discussed recently on listserves are the ones about real world v. ITE numbers.

"Allandale Resident":

I know many are using the supposedly incorrect TIA as justification for calling the site plan approval 'illegal'. I have seen nobody I trust be willing to go on the record as stating that the TIA actually was incorrect; just a lot of claims that since it doesn't match observed traffic from existing Wal-Marts, that it MUST have been done incorrectly.

Be honest, M1EK. You know perfectly well that many, many people on the neighborhood listserve oppose this development because the developer submitted an inaccurate TIA. You also know perfectly well that the city council and city staff realize that they made a huge mistake and are scrambling to correct it. This is NOT the neighborhood's fault.

Will,

I don't want the neighborhoods to again get their way at the expense of the rest of the city. The items I mentioned above really have killed rail transit for a generation, and really have destroyed the primary artery for bicycle commuters - the second at a cost of over a million dollars (not paid for by these folks; paid for by all of us).

Now, either they sue the city (and we all pay the legal bill) or they win without suing (and we all pay due to the loss of tax revenue from Northcross).

And these people don't want urbanism. Again, it's a lie: they do not, in fact, want dense urban development. All you need to do is listen in to a neighborhood listserv for a while and realize that 90% of their objections to Wal-Mart would still be true for an urban Target (who DOES know how to address the street in a good urbanist style), and their metrics for opposing Wal-Mart would be offended even WORSE by a "Triangle-style" development that some CLAIM they want. (IE: many are basing their opposition to this project based purely on square-feet of retail; a Triangle-style development covering the footprint of Northcross would be even _more_ retail, thus they'd be even less likely to support that when push came to shove).

M1EK, I have to admit that I am troubled by the animosity toward the neighborhoods. Why would you want to "screw" your neighbors? (Even from a selfish perspective that is unhelpful.) Isn't the ultimate goal of urbanism to foster a better community? If you look to the originators (Jane Jacobs, _Death and Life of American Cities_), that's exactly what they were trying to do.

Anyway, if Wal-Mart indeed builds, then wish I could be as optimistic as you are about a benign or even positive impact. Unfortunately I just don't expect it. I think the potential downside is far too likely and far too large. So for now I'm sticking to a stance of strong opposition. But of course I won't give up all hope if the Wal-Mart goes up.

And of course I will continue to support public transit and dense, mixed-use development. (I live in dense housing next to a major bus route and within walking distance of 2 supermarkets.) At least we agree on that. =)

-- Will

I was premature in the "sole merit" comment. There's also the fact that nobody else wants in to Northcross, and thus, we get some tax revenue to make up for the absurd amount of public money spent on these neighborhoods over the last few years (a million or so for the destruction of Shoal Creek for cyclists; then add on the couple hundred thousand bucks spent recently for sidewalks).

Will,

It's not that negotiation isn't a good tactic to take with people - it's that this same collective group of people already screwed Austin in ways that make Wal-Mart's worst possible effect look like a drop in the bucket. The failure to pass light rail in 2000 (and subsequent activities leading to commuter rail in 2004) doomed us to two or more decades without effective rail transit in this area. That, combined with their activities leading to the destruction of Shoal Creek Boulevard as a safe, attractive, route for commuting bicyclists outweighs all possible negative impacts of this Wal-Mart by many orders of magnitude.

This same collective group has also opposed all other efforts to densify/infill the area with additional multi-family residential, including past efforts to redevelop properties adjacent to Northcross itself. So, no, screw them. I don't believe them now when they claim to support high-density good-quality urban mixed-use development at Northcross. It's a lie, folks. It's just that simple.

So, with THESE people, the right answer, as far as I'm concerned, isn't "negotiate". The right answer is: "we've already screwed the entire city on your behalf enough times that you simply don't get to push us around anymore".

As for the Wal-Mart design - it sucks. It sucks slightly less than their typical suburban store. It still sucks. Nowhere have I said otherwise. The sole merit is in its proximity to some heavily used transit routes (for potential Wal-Mart employees, and possibly a few customers).

It's cool to see so much discussion here, although it worries me to read some of the more antagonistic posts. I hope this whole issue is resolved in a way that benefits the Northcross-area neighborhoods (who after all are the most directly affected) and also the rest of us Austin residents (who of course are somewhat affected by taxes and infrastructure), including myself (I live in northwest Austin about 4 miles from the site). My interest stems in part from the fact that family members live very close to the site.

I understand the frustration of folks like M1EK who see problems in the area neighborhoods as they exist now. He's right that we need better transit through north central Austin, and of course we eventually need higher-density development there as well. However, I am concerned about attacks on the area residents. Good solutions only result from compromise and diplomacy, not from condescension and an unwillingness to listen. So I would urge caution, empathy, and moderation.

And that community has already spoken -- they overwhelmingly don't want a Wal-Mart Supercenter. When I went to the Crestview meeting, for example, not a single Wal-Mart supporter showed up (only one undecided). However, there are still legal questions about the feasibility of blocking the development. If the Supercenter gets built, I hope we all help to make sure that it does not destroy the greater community (beyond just the immediate neighbords). All Austinites benefit from independent, local businesses such as Encore, Rooster Andrews, Thundercloud, Texspresso, Alamo Drafthouse, Waterloo Ice House, Conan's, James Avery (regional), etc., because money stays in the area, decent jobs are created, and venture business acumen is fostered. Let's help keep those sorts of businesses alive regardless of what happens at Northcross.

I must mention to M1EK, however, that there is a major flaw in your supposed urbanist stance. In your City Comforts citation, you showed a great ideal for urban design -- put the parking in back. Yay, we agree on that. Unfortunately Wal-Mart is doing the exact opposite. Have you seen their plans? I have. I saw a picture from their engineering firm, Doucet, which was made public at the Crestview meeting. It puts the huge parking lot (and an additional parking structure) right next to the street. The Wal-Mart store will be at the back, away from Anderson Lane (and Burnet). Strictly *suburban*, and that's the problem.

-- Will

Jake: The empty parking lot behind the now defunct Furr's Cafeteria at Northcross mall. After school. 3 o'clock.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/07/Threeo11.jpg/200px-Threeo11.jpg

Wes,

I challenge you to a good old fist fight. Let me show you how potent my fists are. Name the time and place. Bring your lunch.

--It benefits me if a company (Wal-Mart) is able to buy property (Northcross) that is for sale as much as it benefits you.

You made a statement but then never backed it up. Yes private property is sold and bought. But there are limits to what one can do with private property. If I created a land dump on my property it would have a negative effect on surrounding properties. Either current rules would stop it. If there were no rules the city would look for ways to stop it. And possibly neighbors would look for problems with my siteplan. That is simply how the system works. Currently neighbors are looking for aspects of walmarts siteplan that are faulty.

Now back to the original point. How will walmart help us. It will lower property values. What will that do? It will probably raise the tax burden on other parts of the city such as the south. Here is a pretty good post showing the relationship between http://www.escapesomewhere.com/austinblog/2006/12/an_explanation_of_changes_in_a.html

Yes people will spend money on walmart to buy crappy tvs. But in most cases without a walmart they would buy them somewhere else. In the other hand the lost property tax revenue from surrounding houses will need to be made up somewhere. And if you dont live close to walmart and own a house that someone will probably be you.

Jake: Your impotent rage is really quite funny. You can't stop Wal-Mart. It will be built.

Does Austin really need another Super Wal-Mart?

The is a Super Wal-Mart that was expanded just a couple of years ago 3 miles from where they are planning to build.

Consumerism has gotten really out of control. Just because you can build something doesn't mean you should.

Jake, good sir,

I live in South Austin, yet I have a dog in the Northcross fight and my opinion does count, contrary to your "opinion". As a property owner/taxpayer I own the curb in front of your house as much as you do. The street that your house is on belongs to you and I equally. Sorry if this is scary to you. It benefits me if a company (Wal-Mart) is able to buy property (Northcross) that is for sale as much as it benefits you. It's called the sale and acquisition of private property.

I want to live in a town where hopefully more than a mom and pop Big Box store could occupy the dying empty hole that is Northcross Mall. And you know what? I am actually right because as our society has been functioning for 325 + years, businesses are allowed to buy property just as people are allowed to do so.

And Jake, here is the sad part. If Austin City Council wanted to use eminent domain to buy out some of the Northcross neighborhood houses to build a Wal-Mart, I would have been totally on your side. But the fact that Wal-Mart is occupying a concrete eyesore that's for sale, I mind you, we must expect the space to be sold to them. Otherwise you wouldn't be assured that the next house you're interested in is actually for sale to "you".

And finally, if you want to talk about the ills of traffic that will plague the currently traffic-free North Austin, get back to me when y'all stop shopping at Barton Creek Mall, Whole Foods, and So-Co or once y'all quit going to First Thursday, ACL Fest, Trail of Lights & Barton Springs.

Any of you in favor of the Wal-Mart, I have one quick question: Where do you live?

If you don't live anywhere that surrounds Northcross, then your opinion in favor of the development does not count.

If you rent, you have no dog in this fight. If you live anywhere beyond 78757 or 78756, not your concern. If you live anywhere outside of the at least 2-mile radius of Northcross, shut up.

Yes, you are entitled to your own opinion. But never your own facts. And if you believe this is a good thing, you aren't processing the facts.

This development negatively impacts us and will hurt our home values. That is not an opinion. That is a fact.

The traffic will overwhelm every intersection within a 1 mile radius. It will even backup traffic on Mopac every day.

Whether or not that post is truly from Council Member McCracken, he is dead-on right.

This development is bad news for Austin and especially for the residents around it.

If you think it's so good, contact Lincoln and tell them they can start building in your front yard.

Listen up, Wal-Mart and Lincoln--and any of their supporters. It will never be built. NEVER. You have no idea of the level of civil outrage that is barely being held at bay. It will be stopped by all means necessary.

I could comment intelligently on the social and economic impacts that a Wal Mart would have, both pro and con. But you all have that covered. So I will stick to the very superficial and make the obvious comment that Wal Mart is simply ugly, inside and out, and devoid of any aesthetic character that could add to the attractiveness of the area. I live downtown, so I would hope that I am exempt from the South Austin ire- I don't want to sit at your lunch table anyway. I but you South Austinites would have a fit if anyone messed with your "keepin it wierd" aesthetic. I remember well the days of ugly south Austin- The Burnet Northcross area has been re-modeling and re-vitalizing-- just because it is ugly now, does not mean the residents should not try to make it a nicer destination, different from every other strip mall around. Just like you all did. And you know what? I don't think many people would deny that Neimans and Saks would be preferable- they are way nicer places to shop and have in the vicinity for lots of reasons. There's nothing wrong with having taste.

"I'm guessing if it were a Neiman Marcus or Saks they would have had no issue with it."

BINGO!

Marty- so I s'pose you do know how everyone in your neighborhood thinks!

People who don't shop or work at Wal-mart may not know enough about it to say.

According to some the traffic study was a lie.

Just the exhaust fumes from the increased truck and auto traffic will pose a problem we don't

need. And whose landfill are they gonna use?

The situation has a different impact on people who own homes and pay taxes in the area than on those that don't. Some people own homes now so that in their future they might be able to sell and support themselves when they're too old to work and don't want to impose on their kids. Some people are concerned that soon enough the only places left to work will be places like Wal-mart. Great. We'll all have to work at places like that and move back in with our parents in their 1950's single family sprawling residences. For what it's worth, those residences have monetary value. And trees-which are becoming more and more necessary.

Who do you think will benefit from Wal-Mart being at Northcross "Mall"? Wal-Mart and only Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart won't go out of business just because one store doesn't cut it. The other stores are prepared to float a store as long as necessary. That's why Austin doesn't need another one. Or another Target-do you think they're that much different??

Lower quality at cheaper prices ehh.....

We aren't talking about North Austin here, are we?

Stew

"What's the difference between a $9.99 piece of plastic crap from China sold at Wal-Mart and the same exact piece of plastic crap sold at a local store for $14.99?"

Walmart will get companies to go to seperate manufactures to produce crappy products just for sale at Walmart. They slap the same label on but its a low grade product made with a different manufacturer. So the product is often a little cheaper but its also crappier.

http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/102/open_snapper.html

"The Wal-Mart vice president responded with strategy and argument. Snapper is the sort of high-quality nameplate, like Levi Strauss, that Wal-Mart hopes can ultimately make it more Target-like. He suggested that Snapper find a lower-cost contract manufacturer. He suggested producing a separate, lesser-quality line with the Snapper nameplate just for Wal-Mart. Just like Levi did. "

M1EK,

"Crestview was smart about the Huntsman site - trading supporting what to them was likely the lesser of two evils rather than being dumb like NUNA was with the Villas on Guadalupe."

Trading support? What are you talking about. The developers came and gave their plan. The neighborhood said basically that sounds really cool. Talking to neighbors around the hood people are excited about the development. There were no trades I would not even know what we traded for. At the meetings the developer said we hope to land a small grocery like wheatsville. And the neighbors said that would be great. A few old people rumbled about it afterwards but the majority were very positive about it.

"Doesn't change the fact that Crestview is still likely full of NIMBYers. And no, I can't believe that a ton of them have moved away in the mere 6 years since '00. Give me a break. "

http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0069/twps0069.html#tab02

If you look at Metropolitan areas on average 19.3 percent have lived in their current place for 0 - 1 years. 25.3 percent have lived in their current place for 1-3 years. So 44.6 percent have lived in their house for in 0 - 3 years. Its been 6 years since the 2000 debate.

Further looking at the census data shows more interesting statistics. I said that the old people that killed the 2000 plan and support walmart were still here and the young people for the most part moved here more recently. I didnt have any solid evidence but it seemed that old people I talked to had been here for a long time 10 - 20 years frequently and younger people I talked to had recently moved to the area.

People 25-34

71.4 percent were in their residences for only 0-3 years

People 65 and older

15.8 percent were in their residences for only 0-3 years

Anyway back to my original point. The old people that killed light rail are still here. They love walmart. The younger residents that support the dense residential development at Huntsman were more likely to have not been in crestview in 2000.

Supporting walmart is supporting the people that killed the 2000 plan. They seem pretty into the walmart plan.

What's the difference between a $9.99 piece of plastic crap from China sold at Wal-Mart and the same exact piece of plastic crap sold at a local store for $14.99?

I say enough with your nationalist/protectionist ideals. Thinking global means shopping global, you can't have it both ways.

Kenneth,

The question "is it two blocks away on any one side from a residential neighborhood" can be answered yes for Highland Mall, Barton Creek Square, Capital Plaza, etc. as well as most of the existing big box sites around here. Not particularly compelling given that.

jent,

Now that I've got a family, I have better uses for my time than waiting hours and hours to speak in front of our council. I spent 5 years on the Urban Transportation Commission working with traffic engineers, just like the ones you mentioned (maybe even the same ones) and have every confidence the roads can handle the traffic - at least as well as the typical central Austin major arterial handles it.

The "major artery" argument is for people who are interested in the issue enough to analyze the arguments - and I know very well that the City Council is _not_ among those folks. They're making the purely political decision about how likely it is they're going to get sued versus how likely it is they'll lose the next election if they pander insufficiently.

M1EK,

Remarkable that given your vendetta against the evil neighborhoods that you were not at the city council meeting last night to speak your views on the subject. Not one person spoke on behalf of Walmart, Lincoln, or the development plan in general. God knows, you've beaten the same drum here (and the Chronicle blog)...it was your big opportunity to spead your one trick pony "major artery" argument to the masses. That would have shown them.

By the way, neither of the traffic engineers at the meeting, were confident that the "artery" could manage up to 28,000 trips a day that other Walmart's in the area currently experience (surprisingly, 18K more trips than the Northcross Walmart site plan projected). The projections were based on hard evidence, not pictures and third party statements from Urban Planning textbooks.

I know, I know, we can't build on freeways though, because what's most important is to make sure that employees who live outside the area have airtight bus routes to get them to and from work. To hell with anybody that actually reside near there (notice in order to spare another its not IN a neighborhood argument, I made sure to artfully dance around your tired retort).

Yes, I was technically incorrect when I said this proposed Wal-MegaMart is "in a residential neighborhood." It is, however, near one (about 2 blocks away).

People are going to use two-lane residential streets like Shoal Creek for short cuts, esp. when traffic's bad on MoPac. If you don't believe me, take a walk down Exposition on any weekday about 5:30.

That's just not fair to people who have been living in those homes for years, to have a steady stream of cars on their street 24 hours a day, 365 days a year just so the rest of us will have a place to buy cheap DVDs. If that makes me a "tree-huggin', Wal-Mart hatin', Democrat votin' Keep Austin weirdo" then so be it.

Crestview was smart about the Huntsman site - trading supporting what to them was likely the lesser of two evils rather than being dumb like NUNA was with the Villas on Guadalupe. Doesn't change the fact that Crestview is still likely full of NIMBYers. And no, I can't believe that a ton of them have moved away in the mere 6 years since '00. Give me a break. The ones most likely to move that quickly are the same ones who don't bother to get involved in neighborhood issues.

You keep saying that Crestview killed the rail project. But most of those people have moved or been moved into nursing homes or died. Alot of the current residents of Crestview were in college in 2000. The remaining residents are all for the Walmart. They are happy because they killed the 2000 rail plan and are getting a Walmart. They could not be happier. I think they dont like the Crestview station though.

Second I was not talking about how Crestview supports the current rail project. I was saying that Crestview supports the increased density at the new development around the Crestview station. You keep saying Crestview is against density but that plan was pretty dense and had pretty strong support from the neighborhood from most everyone except for the old people.

For people like WannabeLikeMike who quotes

"Yes, many "Walmart is the Evil Satan Keep Austin in the Dark Ages and Weird" people signed the petition like they sign every other petition for every other liberal cause. So what"

Why are you even in Austin if you hate it so much. Austin is liberal. Austin is wierd. It has been liberal for a long time. Did you somehow miss that when you moved here? If you dont like that move to Houston or Dallas.

I didnt move to Houston because I have no interest in listening to a bunch of people that will talk about how great Bush and Limbaugh are for the country.

A) I've been here my whole life.

B) Most of you haven't.

C) Yes, that's snobbish.

D) FU, I'm awesome (so is that).

E) Northcross Mall is not, and has never been, IN THE MIDDLE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD.

F) Northcross Mall is one of the junkiest retail outlest I can think of.

G) Northcross Mall belongs to someone that paid money for it, just like you did for your property.

H) Part of being a free society is accepting that other's may do things you don't like.

I) Letter H, if you think about it, is really good in the grand scheme of things.

Anna,

I'm not optimistic that the most exurban neighborhoods can be fixed. The non-grid-pattern ones are, I think, eventually doomed (oil gets more expensive -> driving is too expensive, but you still can't serve them with transit).

The older grid-pattern neighborhoods (like "northloop") can be salvaged with small-scale infill (like we used to do in this country before we slapped a suburban-development-only zoning code on most cities around WWII). For all the grief I've given McCracken for pandering on this stuff, his commercial design standards/VMU proposals are a good start for the arterials - but somebody needs to have the guts to stand up and tell neighborhoods that they are going to have more density INSIDE their boundaries down the road than they do now. That hasn't happened yet - every attempt to do so has failed due to panderorama. And without more people in the lower-density (but salvageable grid pattern) neighborhoods, that nicer VMU development isn't going to be economically viable.

Mark, you nailed it. Urban and suburban are descriptive words applied to styles of development, not mere indicators of overall size. Many older small towns in this country are more urban than Houston. Certainly many very small cities in Europe are as urban as New York City.

And again for the naysayers, this matches the usage of most planners - i.e., I didn't make it up myself.

There are lots of cities that are technically bigger than Austin, but it doesn't mean most of them are "urban".

I've lived in 3 cities bigger than Austin, Anna, and non-through side streets with nothing but local traffic didn't have sidewalks on them either. Turns out, you're allowed to walk on a street.

What about the workers that were building the Walmart who have now been put out of work at Christmas time?

I agree with M1EK. How can someone say with a straight face "if there's no traffic on a side street what do you need a sidewalk for?" Or "the Wal-Mart will be in a residential neighborhood?"

The people making these comments have no idea what a "real" city is and have nothing to compare with.

My question to M1EK is how do you fix a city like Austin that is mostly sprawl? Changing the zoning won't mean that a bodega will pop up on someone's cul-de-sac and they'll start walking there to buy milk instead of driving to HEB...

You know, half the fun is posting, just knowing M1EK can't accept not getting the last word in, and always taking one final opportunity to prove his superiority over the rest of Austin.

Kelly, those pixels could have become something new and interesting.

Instead, they became your comment. Which you copied from another argument on the internet that you probably participated in.

Irony is dead. So is this discussion. Bye!

Ref: urban vs. suburban: Here's a blog post from the author of one of the best books on urbanism (old or new); which has the added bonus of containing links to both the chapter of a book on the "three rules for urbanism" subject (mostly oriented towards retail, but applicable nonetheless) as well as the infamous animated GIF showing them distilled into their simplest form.

http://citycomfortsblog.typepad.com/cities/2004/09/the_three_rules.html

This combines 2 of the 4 links from the post I made earlier today which never showed up.

Arguing over the internet is like running in the Special Olympics....

Even if you win, youre still retarded.

And I see we have a few runners here.

"your kind":

People who, when they start getting their arguments shredded by actual facts, fall back on the "but you're being mean to me!" defense. And then follow up by calling their opponent an arrogant prick.

Ref: josh's attacking me for having the temerity to use the actual, accepted, definitions for urban versus suburban building design (backed up by a little group called the Congress for the New Urbanism, as well as every professional planner in the friggin' world). Like his claims about transit service on frontage roads (which I even spent a bunch of time drawing some ugly pictures in MS-Paint for).

Here was marty's very first post here, emphasis mine:

"M1EK, you're opinion is obviously biased by the fact that items you wanted passed in the past failed due to the folks in my neighborhood. So, it's pretty difficult to believe you have any kind of objectivity in your position on this issue. That said, I think I've already made this point clear in your blog, but you just keep running your mouth (err, fingers) assuming you know how everyone in my neighborhood thinks."

Is this the sort of civility I'm supposed to emulate? Just wondering.

"I've dealt with your kind before."

You mean, the kind that asks you questions that you don't answer, disagrees with your blanket generalizations and attacks on people with legitimate concerns, and points out that you argue on the internet with the smugness of an arrogant prick?

We must be difficult for you.

And thus, the point beautifully illustrated by the man himself. What exactly is "our kind", M1EK? I tend to agree with your views more than I disagree, even if it makes me feel sorta dirty.

marty,

Maybe so. But if all I accomplish is drowning out the misrepresentations and disingenuousness of guys on your side, I'm gonna call that a minor victory for the forces of actual facts and knowledge.

Your pal,

M1EK

I like Ron's comments. (=

josh and Ron,

I'm just dang positive that it wouldn't matter if I posted the same exact arguments in flowery victorian prose; I've dealt with your kind before. And seeing as how I don't particularly like wasting my time pussy-footing around when I think somebody's either being disingenuous, you're stuck with me the way I am.

Thanks for your input. Really.

"I'm trying to call the bad people on their misrepresentations and lies so that the much larger audience of people who are reading don't get misinformed"

M1EK, you're kidding, right? The Austinist readers likely already moved on after you mentioned light rail for the 10th time.

Im sure the same people opposed to Wal-Mart in Nortchross are the same ones who bitch and moan about a sluggish economy. In our neighborhood, we call those people hypocrites.

josh,

Check the pictures. Here it is again, since you didn't bother the first time:

http://mdahmus.monkeysystems.com/blog/archives/000372.html

The new (2004) rail plan sucks - it will never serve central Austin, and will be an utter failure at attracting riders. Crestview and Wooten screwed the pooch, since they still get the noise of the trains through their backyard anyways.

"I'm trying to call the bad people on their misrepresentations and lies so that the much larger audience of people who are reading don't get misinformed."

I think I'm probably not the only one who feels less inclined to put much stock in anything you say because of your style of communication. And "misinformed" is a pretty relative statement, btw.

M1Ek, you might have a better time convincing people of the validity of your arguments if you didn't treat people like a smug, self righteous prick. If you stop pretending to be the only intelligent person on the planet, someone, anyone might treat you as a person with something to offer.

I have absolutely no idea how it would be impossible for "a worker on a bus" to the walmart at, say, rundberg and I-35, but could get to one at Burnet and Anderson.

Also, I don't understand the claim that just one neighborhood killed rail in 2000 (proof?). Whether or not that happened, the new rail plan, approved by voters, does go through Crestview. So because one area allegedly was against a failed rail plan 7 years ago, a neighborhood doesn't have the right to voice its concerns about the arrival of a 200,000 square foot, 24 hour a day megaretailer?

Thank god this is America, not the United States of Some Internet Urban Planning "Expert."

Ron,

I have a lot of venom for:

1. People who act like they know a lot about a subject but really don't know much at all (josh)

2. People who got the City Council to pander to them in a way that destroyed bicycle commuting's most important route in this city (allandale, rosedale)

3. People who rallied against light rail in 2000, the most important transportation issue of our generation (crestview, wooten). No, commuter rail in 2004 doesn't make up for it; it's even worse than doing nothing, because it prevents light rail from ever getting built.

4. People who repost talking points from said neighborhood groups like "it's in the middle of a neighborhood!" (many)

You're just lucky enough to see the intersection of all four here.

I'm not trying to win your opinion; the people who are _posting_ here have essentially already made up their minds. I'm trying to call the bad people on their misrepresentations and lies so that the much larger audience of people who are reading don't get misinformed.

Your pal,

M1EK

marty,

If you mean the definition of "in the middle of a residential neighborhood", then bullshit. The definition (self-serving) being used by rg4n would exclude anywhere but possibly the Arboretum.

There are NO single-family lots even across the street from the actual plot being used for Wal-Mart; it's separated from single-family use by some other retail and some old hotel use to the south; a very wide swath of retail to the north, and an even wider swath of retail to the west and east.

If that's "in the middle of a neighborhood" then so is Whole Foods at 6th/Lamar; so is the Barton Creek Square Mall; so is Lakeline Mall; so is Highland Mall; so is Capital Plaza; so are the mega-strips along North I-35 [...]

M1EK, while you tend to have some useful knowledge on these topics, your venom for anyone not in your trusted inner circle of blogdom or who -- gasp -- disagrees with you is tedious and off-putting.

Perhaps you do have all the answers and the rest of us just haven't figured it out yet. Until then, some civility and respect would be much appreciated.

It's little wonder planning issues in this town get so screwed up when people on both sides of the issue (ie NAs, M1EK) ignore the idea of consensus and portray everything an a zero-sum, either/or, with-us-or-against-us situation.

M1EK, it certainly is amazing how my definitions (and others, apparently) differ so greatly from yours..

Thanks Kenneth, that's the kind of attitude I was hoping for!

PS - I (like many in my neighborhood these days) wasn't around to vote for or against the light rail in 2000, so please consider lifting your feeling of enmity you have for us before the end of eternity :-)

kenneth,

it's NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. That's a talking point of rg4n, for sure, but it's just NOT TRUE. And stores on freeway off-ramps are STUPID. I'd like the workers at Wal-Mart to be able to ride the bus to work, wouldn't you?

crestview:

One giant store vs. many smaller ones IS more accessible to those without cars. Multiple small stores means many parking lots instead of one parking garage, for one thing.

Yes, Crestview/Allandale are the same pissy grandmothers who bolloxed the Shoal Creek bike lane so they'd have a place to park their Buicks and bass boats. For that they have my eternal enmity.

But that doesn't change the fact that this will be a mega-Wal Mart on steroids in a residential neighborhood. It's not like this is on some freeway off-ramp in Pflugerville. You're talking about tens of thousands of cars daily on mostly two-lane streets.

I went to the meetings about the new transit center. I would estimate that 85% of the neighborhood favored that development which has pretty dense residential and commercial. Most Also most people live in a home for only 4-5 years on average. So most of the people that opposed the 2000 plan dont even live in Crestview anymore. So hating the current residents because of what previous residents did is kind of wierd. Personally I voted for the 2000 plan but didnt live in Crestview at the time. The same goes for most of my friends in the neighborhood against the current Walmart.

The 15% against the transit center are older and the people who are pro Walmart. These are also the residents who have lived in crestview for a long time and were against the original 2000 plan. So basically the people who helped kill the 2000 plan are thrilled with Walmart.

Also this will be a superwalmart its going to have to draw from the entire city to be profitable. So basically I would rather have multiple small stores throughout the city than one giant store on anderson. If we are worried about car use and accessibility one giant store instead of multiple smaller stores doesnt make alot of sense.

Stew:

More development doenst mean lower taxes. Look at Houston. They are much larger but dont have lower taxes. I dont know why people always think city with more development and larger populations will have lower taxes. Austin doubling in size wont decrease taxes. We will double the current number of city related costs. Also moving shoppers from one store to a new store doenst increase tax revenues that much. Lastly, a development like Walmart where there are alot of police calls around walmarts can end up increasing city related expenditures for police.

e,

no, multiple links are a quick trip to moderation limbo. I didn't enter as real html; just put the actual urls.

Edward - if you put a link in your post like this (just copy and paste):

http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/News/?oid=oid%3A429467

it should post okay (the site makes it live). I think it's just the html that's blocked for spam reasons.

Don't use links on Austinist if you want your comments to appear anytime this century if ever.

josh,

As for urbanism: I posted a series of links which shaped my, and essentially most modern planners' definitions of the term, but apparently if you even post a couple links these days, you get sent to moderation limbo. Try googling on "new urbanism" and the Stapleton project in Denver.

marty,

The same Allandale neighborhood folks that screwed up Shoal Creek, destroying the safety and utility of the primary commuting artery for cyclists, are behind the opposition to this Northcross project. I don't know for sure about the Crestview story, but I have a hard time believing the neighborhood leadership has turned over in a mere 6 years.

As for: Is this a good location for a Walmart supercenter of this size? It's a good location for a large retail building. I'd prefer an Urban Target; but I don't get the choice. The size is not a problem - this is not a large increase from the retail space that was in the mall when it was actually a going concern.

Would I support one closer in? Well, in the late 1990s when I lived in a condo in Clarksville, I was eagerly looking forward to the 6th/Lamar redevelopment plans which included a big theatre and a big urban Target - those two types of trips being the main ones I couldn't walk to at the time. (this was prior to Whole Foods, obviously). I'd also be more thrilled if Costco built a huge building at Northcross or closer in.

Wal-Mart is definitely more evil than those two competitors. That's why I choose not to shop there. But, unfortunately, it does not appear that anybody I like better is interested in the space, so again the choice is between "sucking chest wound" and "suboptimal, but still better than standard suburban design, Wal-Mart".

M1EK, what's unfortunate about your posts is your obvious dislike (hatred?) of the residents of the Northcross neighborhoods (or anything north of Hyde Park for that matter) over something that happend 6 years ago. Calling Cresview residents "fuckers"? You hope Walmart sues the city even though you (as an Austin resident) would have to help flip the bill!?

Your vengeful attitude (saying we deserve this structure because you endured such injustice in 2000) in your posts shadows the fact that you are correct on some of your points. How do you expect anyone to get behind you when you comment like a 15 year old would, "son"? (How incredibly condescending)

I think feeder roads are a terrible idea, I'm with you all the way on that. We didn't have them where I grew up (a much larger city than Austin) and somehow we got by. Again, I do NOT think a Walmart at Northcross is a bad idea.

I know this will be difficult for you to do (probably impossible), but completely ignoring your history with the neighborhoods around Northcross Mall, do you honestly believe this is a good location for a Walmart Supercenter of this size? Do you not think that perhaps a smaller, more thought out Walmart would be a better choice?

With no traffic on a side street, who cares if there's a sidewalk?

Go buy a house in Hyde Park then (good luck!) and be happy with it. Newsflash, Hyde Park is suburban in origin and layout too. Don't tell me how big my porch is or should be (wtf? seriously.) Don't tell me that my house or neighborhood doesn't meet your design specifications for "urbanity." Which, as is obvious, has nothing to do with the density and walkability standards of any major city in the world.

Oh, and "urban" requires sidewalks on MOST OR ALL streets, not just the big ones, son. Take a look at the neighborhoods I mentioned - most of the interior streets have sidewalks, not just Lamar or Enfield (or Speedway or Duval).

Josh,

Big porches vs. garages as the street face of a house is a good shorthand for urban vs. suburban design, as far as SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES go. No, the little concrete pad a lot of 1940s/1950s houses have doesn't count.

And no, most houses up your way don't have big porches, and DO present at BEST a blank face to the street. I live just south of Hyde Park, smart guy. I used to ride my bike through your neighborhood every single day.

A porch is what makes a place urban? Paging San Francisco, New York, and Boston! You're no longer cities! You lack a porch! Clarksville, Hyde Park, etc are exceptionally low density neighborhoods of nothing but single family houses, with or without porches and garages, none of which cost less than $400,000. Meanwhile, most of the houses in Northloop, like mine, have a front porch but no garage, cost at or less than 200k, and with sidewalks running down Guadalupe, Ave. F, and Duval. Ever been to the area? I guess YOU have no idea what you're talking about, "son."

All of Austin's problems would be solved by tearing down the capital and in its place building a single 500 story condominium project where every Austin resident would live. Besides, nobody actually uses their yard and anyone that does is wasting *my* tax dollars. You bastards! For optimum density, the condo project should actually be 500,000 stories tall with one condo per floor, but we have to be realistic.

Josh,

Click on my name at the end of this posting for my awful art project showing the problem with transit service on frontage roads. You have no idea what you're talking about, son.

And Northloop is car-dependent suburban development, yes. When most streets don't have sidewalks and most houses present a garage face to the street rather than a nice big porch, you've got yourself suburban design, whether it was done in 1955 or 1985. 78704 isn't where I was going with "urban", BTW; try Old West Austin, Clarksville, Hyde Park, etc.

1. If Northloop is suburban sprawl, then 78704 is somehow urban Manhattan? Sorry, I'm not buying it. Austin is all low density outside of downtown. Single family houses and 2 or 3 story apartment complexes abound. The population density of the "chosen" south austin neighborhoods is no different, but housing is 2-3 times more expensive because its trendier.

2. You've ridden buses? Wow, how awesome of you. So have I. Can you piss further than the rest of us, too? Buses can run on a frontage road as easily as a major arterial. Distance to walk across a busy major road like Lamar, including turn lanes - 10 lanes. Distance to walk under a three lane highway, including frontage lanes: 12 lanes. People that need or want to take the bus can and do handle the extra 20 feet of walking. Anyone not living in front of a bus stop walks further just to get there.

josh and others,

Northloop is car-dependent suburban sprawl; it's just from the 1950s instead of the 1970s, or 1990s, or [...]. The only real urban neighborhoods in this town developed before WWII.

As for frontage roads - they're a BUG, not a feature, and the bus lines that DO run on them are just awful. Consider how far you have to walk to cross the highway from the bus stop on one side to your destination on the other side. Now compare/contrast to buses running on Burnet Road.

(Unlike most people who shoot their mouth off here, I've ridden both - I've ridden the local 183 route, as well as the express routes hundreds of times; as well as the #3 a hundred times or so - there is a dramatic difference in how usable they are because of the fact that one must travel on frontage roads and the other one is on city streets).

And I quote....

'Who are you to determine what is right for Austin and who are you to tell other people that their opinions are incorrect?'

[29] Posted by: Grape Ape | December 5, 2006 12:21 PM in 'CondoMania Continues at Shady ...'

M1EK, Walmarts in other states aren't on freeways because freeways in other states don't have frontage roads, just exits. I can't think of another walmart supercenter in Texas that isn't on a frontage road.

Whether or not you like frontage roads, they're here and will continue to be here. Bus lines can and do run on them, and also on the cross streets that intersect those highways.

Again, I urge you to think about the Dominion, currently being built at Braker and Mopac (1.7 million square feet of retail, much larger than the proposed Walmart), the transit options, and traffic impacts of that location.

btw, I've lived in 78704 and north central austin; the only difference in the two is that I can afford a house in Northloop.

To my knowledge there isn't a multi-acre parking lot with a 100K+ sq. ft. building already on the Peter Pan location. I know where there is such a location though, and its already zoned for what Wal-Mart is building. Its called Northcross Mall in North Austin where the roads were desinged to support traffic flow for a highly active mall and surrounding retail areas - some refer to it as Anderson and Burnet.

Shilli,

The site plan is approved. It was reviewed by City staff and met all zoning and technical requirements. Unless something was overlooked, the site plan can't be contested.

Josh,

My point was badly made. Hell, it wasn't even made.

But my point is...Austin's decreasing quality of life,

whether it be traffic congestion, air pollution, loss of open and green space, skyrocketing taxes and cost of living due to real estate appreciation, etc. is all due to growth. Population growth.

More people, primarily due to inmigration.

If we don't want the stretch from Georgetown to San Antonio completely developed, we have to get a handle on population growth.

I hope I'm wrong, but I believe no amount of urban planning or design can counter the growth that is projected. It might lessen the impacts somewhat, but the impacts will still be felt.

Of course, there is also the issue at a global scale of population growth also in terms of resource depletion and degradation of the global environment.

Have a nice day y'all. Smile at someone you don't know today.

I live in Brentwood, close enough to the Northcross situation to have a vested interest in the outcome. I consider myself to live in Central Austin being that I'm around 45th and Lamar --- no further from the city center than many who consider themselves south austinites. I fail to see how my neighborhood differs much from those in Travis Heights, Hyde Park, University Hills, etc. Same bungalow, same relative age, similar demographic population (at least in my neck of the woods...by the Omlettry). I also am not "old." I DO bike just about everywhere and find that the area is very biker friendly. Now that I have evidently qualified myself as worthy of posting...

Would your reactions to us supposed suburbanites be any different if there was a movement to plant a Wal-Mart on South Lamar, say where the Peter Pan is located...after all it is a major artery, right? Regardless of whatever these "old" folks have done to get you bent out of shape, it shouldn't matter who it is that is opposing a behemoth structure in their own backyard. To separate the "cool" south austinites from the north austin folk is counterproductive. Sure, the Crestview residents should've/could've taken up arms when the original Northcross was built, but they didn't. Why should that penalize them now? The current Wal-Mart opposition, in my opinion, is both a very real threat and symbolic of the community sentiment that enough is enough.

The fight is not about just this one Wal-Mart, but the incredible and unnecessary development that many in our city aren't comfortable with. I applaud any group who can gather enough support to get the city council's ear and, if nothing else, allow the citizens voice's to be heard.

Shawn,

This goes back to the move towards form-based zoning, in my view. Like you, I'd love to see a multi-story, arterial-fronted, building (and would then prefer a local store, then a Target, and only LAST a Wal-Mart); but tenants come and go; the important thing is the building.

However, even the half-assed building they're currently proposing is better than most big boxes, including many in more central parts of town, has good transit accessibility (thanks to the transfer center being on Northcross Blvd), and is approximately one trillion times better than the existing mall. Plus, it generates some actual revenue to pay the city back for all the previous, expensive, pandering they've done to these neighborhoods.

But the neighborhood probably knows (correctly) that Wal-Mart's the only one that wants in - so if they can stop this particular tenant, the building won't get built. Thing is, no matter what you or I want, the mixed-use high-density pedestrian-oriented retail isn't going to get built here; there aren't nearly enough people within walking distance, and there are enough superior options nearby for the automobile drivers to make this kind of thing obviously unprofitable.