April 24, 2007
New Northcross Wal-Mart Plans Released
This morning, designers of the proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter at Northcross Mall released several images of the new store (again). Instead of the traditional "big box" approach, Wal-Mart seems to have yielded to community pressure and created a design that is more pleasing to the modernist eye. The present design covers 219,000 square feet -- 6,000 square feet less than the originally-proposed project but still about 35,000 square feet larger than the average Wal-Mart Supercenter.
In recent years, Wal-Mart has finally begun to realize that its 800-pound gorilla approach to store construction does nothing to help them in the eyes of consumers. Wal-Mart now appears to hold the interests of communities in mind when constructing these massive stores.
Or does it? While it may look like a modern structure, no mention has been made of the new store's actual effect on the surrounding community. The studies, we have been told, are "ongoing." WiIl this building add more waste to north-central Austin, or will it add value? Is the Allandale Supercenter an asset to the community, or is it just another Wal-Mart juggernaut, clothed in the guise of green architecture and sensibility?
Many questions remain unanswered on this project, but it sure does look perty, don't it? At any rate, Wal-Mart is moving full-steam ahead, hoping that the novel outer design of this huge store will appease the unruly neighborhood groups that have protested its construction for so long. The City of Austin hasn't even completed its traffic-impact study on this project (which is one of the biggest concerns voiced by protesters), yet Wal-Mart representatives have made it abundantly clear that the store is happening, with or without the city's approval. Perhaps the new, "green" Wal-Mart isn't so friendly after all.
Your thoughts, Austinites?
*Images courtesy of the Northcross Wal-Mart site.
|
My thoughts: I'm no architect, but this whole modernist "cram as many square or rectangular shapes into a building's exterior as possible" phase might not look so great down the road.
That said, this Walmart looks no different than your average Crate & Barrel.
Also: if a revised traffic impact study shows that the Walmart will generate x number of trips, then what? Even if that number is higher than Walmart originally represented? Doesn't seem like there's anything actionable in here in a way that would preclude Walmart from moving forward.
There's no additional approval needed from the city. Lincoln (developer) has an approved site plan which met the standards in place at the time - all the caterwauling you hear now about the new ITE study, even if the study weren't ludicrously flawed in its conclusions, is irrelevant since it can't legally apply.
What you're witnessing is Brewster McCracken posturing for the next mayoral election.
Now that we know the original Traffic Impact Analysis was flawed it's time for the City to step up and conduct and independent TIA.
Let’s do it right and then come up with the appropriate mitigation measures to accommodate the increase in traffic. If the projected impact is half of what is really going to happen then the Supercenter should be half the proposed size.
Allandale is not the place for one of Wal-Mart’s behemoth Supercenters no matter how "perty" it is. The City staff should not have the right to approve a project that is going to bury a neighborhood in traffic. (www.allandalereporter.org)
Who cares about sustainability, traffic and aesthetics. I'm worried about the influx of white trash.
Who cares about sustainability, traffic and aesthetics. I'm worried about the influx of white trash.
Oh, good grief. Let it go. You're getting a beautiful walmart. If they put in a whole foods there the traffic would be horrible. If they put in a Target there the traffic would be horrible. the traffic has only not been horrible because the space has been occupied by a dying mall. If the mall had been vibrant the traffic would already be that bad.
This is news? Those images have been out for a while I thought, and this site plan is a few months old.
Interesting how Walmart has started going on a PR campaign to get people on its side and (attempt to) show that it has support from people in the community. RG4N has some info on the flyers they sent out to the surrounding neighborhoods. Hopefully everyone will through the perty pictures.
BOG- What is your definition of White Trash? Some people may think they are the ones that ride the bus? So traffic should not increase.
Wal-Mart did send out some interesting propoganda to the neighborhoods surrounding the development. Your options were to vote yes, and yes, you were happy about the project coming to your neighborhood. No chance to voice any dissenting opinions.
As someone who lives 3 blocks from the proposed supercenter, my biggest concern is the increase in already terrible traffic in the area (and people using our small neighborhood as a cut through). We know Northcross needs redevelopment, but let's do it in a smart way and address the concerns of those folks who live around it.
I also can't believe that the project was approved literally right before the new big box ordinace went into effect, and I feel like the city council is really doing nothing to stand up for people who live in the area and are expressing their concerns. It's all pretty shady.
"already terrible traffic in the area "
Burnet/Anderson is "terrible" only by rural standards. GMAFB.
Why do we have to go through this all the time? Traffic is not bad there now. It won't be any worse than what it was desinged for. You remember, NC Mall that was much larger than the proposed WM. And you have to admit, this isn't about WM, its about who you don't want in your neighborhoods. Some call it biggotry or racism, you can call it responsible growth concern if you want, but we all know what you mean.
Here's an idea. if you don't like what they're doing with the land and what its zoned for. Buy the land yourselves and build you little white, upper middle class village you so desire.
The pictures are closeups of building and don't even show the massive parking lot that will inevitably surround this. The steamroller is coming and the free market is giving us the what they say we, the consumers, desire more than anything, cheap low-grade mass-produced goods with plenty of parking spots to pull into. This is choice, Wal-mart style.
christoball, Have you ever been to the site? It is completely paved, as is; no steamroller required.
By the way, I love the HEB supported astroturfing. Keep it up!
christoball, have you been to the site? It is currently completely paved over, no steamroller required.
BTW, I love the HEB supported astroturfing. Keep it up! Maybe we can do Randall's, next.
Anon, this is 100% about WalMart. Its about not wanting a store in my neighborhood whose politics and policies towards its employees SUCK. It's about not being given a choice, and about being ignored when we, as a neighborhood, assert our choices. It is not about race or class: I completely resent your assertion that only "certain people" shop at WalMart. That in itself is a racist assumption on your part. I'll say this to those of you who are tired of hearing about this: those of you who want the WalMart should go out and lobby for it to go into your neighborhood. You'd be doing us all a favor!
Wal-Mart slipped this one in under the wire. It may get built, but I will never be happy about it. This a lame, segregated, suburban, surface parking heavy plan that completely fails to engage the street. It doesn't comply with the city design regs (didn't have to because they got the plans approved before those regs went into effect) or the new big box ordinance (which, in my understanding, was passed largely in response to this plan). Hopefully, the regulations and procedures now in place will prevent future developments like this. I can certainly understand nearby residents displeasure, even if I don't agree with a lot of their rationale or rhetoric (e.g. I don't care about traffic or Wal-Mart's business practices). If the city or RG4N can figure out some legalistic excuse (through revised TIA or whatever) to re-start the process on this and make Lincoln comply with the current rules, I think we would get a better end result.
shilli,
I wish I could believe that outcome was the most likely. In fact, though, Lincoln has the legal rights here - and will probably sue, and win, if denied; so all we'll get out of it is an even bigger bill for RG4N's tantrums (to add to the million bucks or so some of the same neighborhoods cost us on Shoal Creek).
As for the Big Box ordinance - it's a step away from what you or I like, since it effectively forces large retail out to frontage roads where they will remain virtually inaccessible to all but single-occupant motorists. A big box which engages the street and supports pedestrian and transit activity is a win-win, but the obstacles the ordinance puts in front of it mean it will never happen (basically the neighborhoods would have to enthusiastically support it since it's now a conditional use everywhere except frontage roads). This is as close as we're likely to get, in other words.
And once again - remember: frontage roads are a really bad place to put major employment or retail centers. They are huge barriers to ped/bike travel and cannot support good transit service even when a lot of density exists along them due to their physical characteristics (long distance between crossings). If you push any economic activity out there, you're encouraging suburban sprawl.
MizJen, does Lincoln get a choice when you decide you want to put an addition on your house?
See, it doesn't work the same way when it comes to telling "them" what they can and can't do with their private property, only when someone else's private property doesn't meet their standards.
Oh yeah - and for putting it in my neighborhood. I didn't "choose" to live in an area that has these zonig allowances - forethought and common sense made that decision for me.
Always absent from the Wal Mart debate is the silent majority of Wal-Mart shoppers. Those that can't afford, or perhaps aren't "enlightened" enough to scour the blogs for commentary.
If you don't like Wal-Mart, don't shop there. Living in a society works that way. Some things you like, somethings you don't. You may have it shoved in your face, but hey, that's life. Get over it.
Anyone else get the impression that this town has an overwhelming number of the annoyingly self righteous?
Impression? Damn, they pretty much wear t-shirts proclaiming it - well, nicely starched polo tops I guess.
shilli - I'm sorry you're not interested in Wal-Mart's business practices. I hope you work in a market that they aren't targeting or won't target down the road. Case in point, the Circuit City layoffs [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18274443/]. Or the fact that their profits are built on our tax dollars [paying sub-standard wages so their employees need federal and state assistance]. I'm not saying that many folks won't like a discount center nearby. But I'd like one I can trust, not one I expect is picking my pockets any chance they can get.
As for neighborliness, when I was planning an addition I checked with my neighbors to get their input ahead of the planning stage. So did Wal-Mart, but they only reduced the size a fraction and changed the store hours slightly. BFD. And if I lived nearby and was planning an addition on my house that would affect Lincoln (midnight cock fighting, fireworks testing, body farm, etc.), I'd expect them to want a say in the matter. Rightfully so.
They're proven liars when it comes to traffic studies. Again, what kind of neighbors do you want to have? While I expect it'll be built, and I expect never to shop there, it would have been nice if the city had pushed back a little harder when they had a chance.
My only hope is that it quickly becomes as empty as the current Northcross or the super-twos built in my neighborhood.
Meanwhile, I don't begrudge the folks that are still fighting. It's only over when it's over.
ahh, yes. the inevitable, classic tangents that such debates produce. the race card. the slander against local Austinites, who are "too liberal" or "too stuck up" to grasp reality. et cetera, et cetera. the legal advice by non-attorneys. etc., etc...bravo!
let's not forget for one moment that the positions held on each side of this debate - WalMart and the local residents who oppose WalMart's move -
are equally valid. WalMart, last i checked, wasn't breaking any laws here, and, as a business entity playing by the rules in a capitalist society, WalMart has the right to pursue a profit within the bounds of the law.
likewise, the people who oppose this thing being built - you know, the Austin liberals, the upper-class, pie-in-the-sky hippies (or whatever wholesale, easy label makes you most comfortable) - are mostly good people with legitimate concerns and opinions. they too should be given respect. not everyone has to like WalMart, after all. people have rights.
so please, spare us the diatribes based on misinformation, uninformed assertions and exaggerated truths. let's have a real discussion here. doesn't anyone want to step out on a limb and give us the pro's and con's for each sides position? or do we jsut resort to name-calling and rat-tailing with wet towels? well-shaped arguments, if you please!
MizJen,
How arrogant of you. You don't own the property ergo you don't get a choice. The property is zoned for this kind of retail. The Wal-Mart will be built.
I don't currenlty patronize Wal-Mart but I will spend money at this one just to tick you off.
There are communities you have to respect when you develop your property. Private property has never been an absolute.
Hopefully, the lawsuits and other processes here will convince Wal-Mart to give up. If not, I sure hope they find a way to force a more responsible development.
When looking at a Wal-Mart coming into town people tend to look at the business and the jobs it brings and see these things incorrectly. Fact of the matter is, Wal Mart will provide better jobs, in greater numbers than any realistic alternative. This isn't some statement about the greatness of Wal Mart, but rather a snapshot at the sorry state of retail jobs in general. I understand the argument that Wal Mart kills small business and the classic idea of "Main Street USA" (though it is not 100% accurate, Main Streets were dead or dying before Wal Mart came in), but the idea that Wal Mart is worse than the alternative is false. The choice is not between a Wal Mart job and a great job. It is often between a Wal Mart job and no job (or an even shittier job). Which isn't to say people shouldn't be treated fairly, but when you stop a Wal Mart from opening, what are you left with? A dying Northcross mall and fewer job opportunities for those without many to begin with.
Re: traffic studies: I agree that you can't trust Wal-Mart in this regard. However, Lincoln's (not Wal-Mart's) TIA was vetted by city staff several times, and you can and SHOULD trust our city staff to be honest and thorough.
Wes, I don't think it's arrogant to care about my neighborhood and the kinds of businesses that go in (literally) next door to me. It's not like I'm the only one in my neighborhood who is disgusted by this plan, and would like to see some alternatives proposed. I'm personally not against development, but does the world really need another WalMart? I doubt it. Yeah, you can shop where you like. Your dollar is your vote. I won't shop WalMart, for a good number of reasons. I also choose to fight against things I don't believe in, on a number of levels. To each her/his own.
What's funny is that most of the anti-WN development ppl on here will be shopping there as soon as they need something and realize they're too damn lazy to take the bus down to Whole Foods to get it on a Tueday night at 9pm.
Better yet, WM should not allow any of the anti-WM ppl to shop there. Why don't you voluntarily give them a list of names and ask that they check id's of more middle class looking folks to make sure you're not being a traitor to your values.
Beyond all the posturing and dishonest arguments around racism, property values, traffic impact, light pollution, and corporate politics, the reality has been lost. Although there will surely be a silent majority of people in surrounding neighborhoods that will benefit from this store, I doubt people really, truly "wanted" a Wal-Mart. I can't imagine too many people thinking to themselves, "Boy, I wish they'd put another Wal-Mart right here. What? They are? Oh, my prayers have been answered!" How sad is it that we've come to this point and we have to decide between a Wal-Mart and a dead mall? No, what we have here is a colossal failure of imagination and foresight on the part of Austin's leadership and its residents. We could have had something more interesting and exciting than another big-box store, but now it's too late. We are to blame, not Wal-Mart.
As for people who claim to oppose Wal-Mart's business practices, I simply ask you: Have you researched the business practices of all the stores you patronize in the area? I bet some of them behave badly and support causes you don't agree with. Picking on the 800 pound gorilla is just trendy and too convenient. Give me a break.
To the people who claim that Wal-Mart forces local merchants out of business I say: No, it's shoppers who force local merchants out of business. Local businesses close because people stop shopping there by choice. Yes, Wal-Mart may be able to undercut prices. But it's the local shoppers who decide that saving a few bucks is more important than supporting their local businesses. If people are only shopping at a local business because they have no alternative, than I have to wonder about someone's business model.
To the people with visions of some beautiful, urban, mixed-use fantasy at Northcross: Yes, that would be nice. Sadly, urbanism doesn't work that way. You can't expect to plop some ready-made VMU development into the middle of a suburb that doesn't have the infrastructure to support that model, and then expect it to work. Will people really walk from their homes and cross Burnet or Anderson to get there? Is there a train that stops there? Where do you expect people to park the cars that this area practically requires them to own. Do we really want another faux-urbanist, ugly apartment complex with a cell phone store and a dry cleaners underneath? Sorry, if you want a functioning mixed-use development, it's going to have to grow organically out of carefully planned zoning change and incentives. It will take some time. Yeah, I'm talking about actual long-view thinking.
People living in the area around Northcross (myself included) need to stop deluding themselves that they live in an "urban" area. Yes, I suppose it's urban as compared to Round Rock. But in truth, you live in a post-war, low density, single-family home, automobile-centric suburb. Prior to this Wal-Mart fiasco, have you been out there pushing for zoning changes and lobbying for increased residential density in your neighborhood? Maybe if you had been, the Northcross property would have appealed to someone other than Wal-Mart. Are you insulted that Wal-Mart even thinks of your neighborhood as one where a Wal-Mart would succeed? Well, ironically, you're getting exactly what you asked for.
Seems as if Anon is quite the misanthrope. Anon, certainly it's true that plenty of people in the world say one thing and then do another. But you make it sound as if no one alive can resist the draw of the WalMart experience. You'd have us believe that the place is just so darn convenient, such an amazing shopping experience, that anyone who says they won't shop there is just lying.
Care to explain this interesting, broad theory? I'm by no means a wealthy person, and yet I've never shopped at WalMart, simply because it never crossed my mind to do so. I prefer to shop locally. Anon...speak up?
in the realm of possibilites for a dead mall converting to a WM is a positive one. In Dallas, that mall would be cramped full of students playing hooky, gang warfare, various hoodlums, a shooting here and there, etc. Don't have to worry about that when a WM moves in with the bright lights and the golf cart driving security gaurd.
Having lived in the NW Hills area for 10 years, then moving to Westlake recently, I have a unique perspective. Northcross has been an unfortunate nearly-dead mall for at least 15 years, and this is probably one of the better uses for it. As long as it has a multilevel parking garage, and multilevel store, I think it's great. I was happy with the Lowes that opened off of Shoal Creek next to Anderson.. I think lots of people were. Traffic will be horrible, but we are experiencing that all over Austin -- it's more a city infrastructure problem than anything else. Get used to it for the next decade.
Also, you REALLY don't want that area to become like Westlake (basically no big box, no road expansions)... it needs to be a balance, and central Austin neighborhoods still need strong retail appropriate for their areas. Being 4 miles from downtown yet 20 minutes from any substantial retail sucks.