Posted: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 03:29 PM - 6,418 Readers

By: Sarah Coppola

1989 agreement still applies to West Austin tract, but is full of 'holes' and expires in 10 years.

Plans by the University of Texas to develop 350 acres in West Austin could be exempt from some of the city's land-use rules and procedures, according to a 1989 agreement that still applies to what is known as the Brackenridge tract.

The agreement between the city and UT lays out some land-use rules, such as height and density limits, that UT must follow if it develops the lakeside property. But those rules don't apply to university structures, such as education buildings, or the 141-acre golf course that is part of the development plans. The pact exempts UT from some normal city zoning processes; is vague about who would pay for water, sewer and electric lines; and has other loopholes that former City Manager Toby Futrell once said were "big enough to drive a bulldozer through."

"The university is in a powerful position with the agreement," said Greg Guernsey, the city's zoning director. "We are kind of in the back seat."

Two conceptual plans presented last month by Cooper, Robertson & Partners LLP, the urban-planning firm UT hired, call for as much as 15 million square feet of development — shops, housing and offices — on the Brackenridge land, far more than the 1.7 million square feet allowed under the 1989 pact.

It's unclear whether UT would have to follow city land-use rules when the pact expires in 2019. In the past, UT has argued that it won't have to because it's a state entity. The city has argued that its land-use rules would apply to nonuniversity structures, such as condos.

Asked to give their current stances on that point, both sides said it's too early to say because Cooper, Robertson's plans don't yet specify building types, heights and densities. Neither side could point to a comparable example of UT developing a big piece of Austin land and how the responsibilities played out with the city. And UT officials said the pact shouldn't be seen as a template for how the development process will unfold.

"The city of Austin has changed, and the needs of the university have changed since 1989," UT spokesman Anthony de Bruyn said.

What gets built will also be driven by politics and public relations. It's unlikely that UT would want to anger city officials and West Austinites by ignoring city land-use rules. It's equally unlikely that the city would want to alienate UT by trying to dictate what the university can and can't build. The city has another incentive to compromise: It will reap sales tax and property tax money from nonuniversity structures built on the land.

A recent attempt by the city to pressure UT hinted at how little clout the city may have in affecting decisions about the Brackenridge tract, a century-old gift to the university. The City Council passed a resolution in October that called for making Lions Municipal Golf Course a permanent public facility and possibly negotiating a land swap for it. But Cooper, Robertson's plans call for developing the golf course, and the land-swap idea seems to have gotten no traction.

Wide latitude in rules

The city entered into the 1989 pact to hang onto its golf course lease, which will expire in 2019, and commit to paper some land-use rules to counter state laws that gave the university wide latitude about what it could build.

Still, the agreement allows UT to bypass many of Austin's usual zoning and land-use procedures, such as paying fees, obtaining some permits, holding public hearings and submitting to lengthy reviews.

The agreement also says UT won't have to comply with new city planning rules enacted from 1989 to 2019. That means rules the City Council passed last month limiting the heights, densities and placement of new buildings along the shores of Lady Bird Lake might not apply. The Brackenridge tract has more than a mile of lakefront.

In the past, big parcels of state-owned land have gone through the city's zoning process, but the state could appeal city decisions to a review board of three state officials and two local leaders, said Jerry Rusthoven, a planning manager at the city. It's not clear if that appeals process or a slightly different one in the 1989 pact would apply to the Brackenridge tract, he said.

Noting that state law gave the university more development power, an acting city manager told the City Council in a 1988 memo that the pact was too vague or lax on everything from parking standards to building heights to rules protecting water quality.

"The Agreement constitutes a major departure from standard (city) development procedures and standards," the memo said. "There are major concerns about the provision of utilities, roadway improvements, city participation in building, permitting and inspection, land use intensities and consistency with development performance criteria."

The pact divides the land into eight parcels and lists rules for how tall buildings can be and how much square footage and developed surfaces (called "impervious cover") are allowed, and restrictions on other things such as building materials and the number of driveways.

For example, on the 157-acre tract along the lake, building heights could range from 65 feet to about 120 feet, and buildings could cover no more than 50 percent of the tract. The recently approved waterfront rules generally limit building heights to 60 feet in that area.

After UT or Cooper, Robertson creates a site plan — a detailed design of what it wants to build — the 1989 agreement gives the city three weeks to review and comment on it, with no requirement that the university adopt the city's ideas. The city's usual zoning process can involve months of review, public hearings and negotiation among developers, neighbors and city staffers.

The university would have to obtain city building permits and building inspections. But the pact says only UT could halt construction if a conflict arose. The pact also lists dispute resolution processes — panels of university officials, city officials and neutral parties — that aim to keep any fights out of court.

Both UT and city officials said they expect to work cooperatively. Assistant City Manager Sue Edwards said UT and Cooper, Robertson officials have met with city staffers in the past two years to understand the city's rules about land-use and utilities.

"I think, wherever possible, they will abide by those guidelines," she said. "They have shown an interest in doing so."

Utilities infrastructure

The 1989 agreement requires the city to provide utility service to the Brackenridge tract. But it's fuzzy on who will build the water, sewer and power lines. For example, one part of the pact says UT will pay for water utility projects; another suggests the city will pay for any water and sewer projects necessary to provide service. Both the city and UT say it's too soon to estimate what infrastructure will be needed and who will foot the bill.

Edwards said developers normally have to build and pay for any infrastructure — roads, utility lines, drainage — inside the bounds of a development. The city often shares the cost of large lines or utility projects that will help the city serve other utility customers nearby, she said.

Austin Energy usually installs and pays for overhead power lines, but developers pay the extra cost of buried lines, the more modern form used in mixed-use developments, said Cheryl Mele, Austin Energy's acting chief operating officer. Big transmission lines run along Lake Austin Boulevard, and a substation supplies power to West Austin neighborhoods. If that station needs to be expanded or a new one built, Austin Energy probably would pay for that, Mele said.

In the late 1990s, the Austin Water Utility built a large water main along Lake Austin Boulevard as part of normal utility upgrades. A newly expanded water plant sits just across the river. So, beyond smaller water lines that the developer would install, it's unlikely the city would need to build large new water projects to serve the Brackenridge land, water utility assistant director David Juarez said.

A 40-year-old sewer line that runs parallel to the lake is big enough and in good enough condition to serve about 10,000 more residents. A Southeast Austin plant has ample capacity to treat sewage from thousands more residents, including any on the Brackenridge land, Juarez said.