COUNCIL LETS BIG BOXES ESCAPE EPC SCRUTINY (added August 5th, 2011)
On August 1, by a vote of 5 to 4, the City Council removed a provision in the Uptown Sector Plan amendment that would have had "big box" stores' site plans go before the Environmental Planning Commission instead of only before the Design Review Board. The EPC is a 9-member body representing all Council districts and made up of architects, developers, engineers, neighborhood activists, landscape designers, and other citizens with some knowledge of planning and building. Its members are not paid by the city, though they are appointed by the mayor and council. The DRB usually has 4 or 5 members, all of whom are city staff. They are drawn from the water, parks, engineering, and traffic departments.
The EPC is usually the starting point for all commercial site plans. The Uptown Sector Plan had allowed builders to skip the EPC hearing because the plan mandated that no building be more than 90,000 square feet per story. The idea was that smaller buildings have less impact on the quality of life, traffic, and environment near them. When the size cap was removed, neighborhood associations and residents attending numerous meetings discussing the sector plan amendment consistently said the larger buildings should go before the EPC, just as they would if built anywhere else in the city besides Uptown. The EPC agreed and added that provision to the amendment. No one appealed the EPC decision. It then went to the Council's committee on land use, zoning, and planning and was recommended out to the Council with a "Do Pass."
However, none of this seems to have counted for anything. Businessmen representing the Uptown Progress Team association showed up at the City Council when the amendment question came up, announced they wanted the EPC provision removed, and had District 7 Councilor Michael Cook introduce such a request as an amendment to the amendment. Several councilors protested that this was outside the bounds of prescribed procedures for making a final version of a bill. Councilor Debbie O'Malley said this last-minute request was simply unfair to the neighborhoods, who had relied on the provision being included in the amendment since the developer had agreed to it and no one had appealed the EPC decision including it. Councilors Don Harris and Rey Garduno joined her in spiritedly opposing the change.
But it passed, setting a worrying precedent and leading to the questions of whether in the future neighborhoods can trust developers to deliver on promises they make, whether the EPC decisions matter, and whether the appeals process is now irrelevant if an interest group has the ear of a councilor or two.