Judge upholds Austin vote on plan to redevelop old Statesman site

A judge has ruled against an environmental group that sued the city of Austin, alleging elected officials violated state law with their vote allowing redevelopment along the shores of Lady Bird Lake.

Travis County judge Jan Soifer did not include a reason for her ruling.

Save Our Springs Alliance had argued that, by not adequately advertising the scope of the redevelopment, Austin violated the Texas Open Meetings Act, a state law intended to make government more transparent.

Bobby Levinski, senior staff attorney for Save Our Springs, said the organization was disappointed in the judge’s decision and members were discussing a potential appeal.

The case centered on a vote council members took in 2022, when they approved a developer’s plans to build 1,400 apartments, 1 million square feet of office space and a hotel along the city’s main waterway. The 19-acre property used to house the Austin-American Statesman offices and is often referred to as the Statesman PUD.

Tuesday’s ruling upholds that vote, keeping in place the developer’s right to build.

But it’s not yet clear what this means for the future of, arguably, one of the most prime pieces of Austin real estate.

In a ruling last year on a separate Save Our Springs lawsuit, a different judge sided with the organization. The ruling put an end to the city’s plan to set aside a portion of property tax revenue for the Statesman property and other projects nearby. Representatives for the developer, Endeavor Real Estate Group, argued it needed this financial deal to move forward with some of its plans for the site.

A search of the city’s permitting database did not turn up any applications for construction there.

An attorney for Endeavor did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday. A spokesperson for the city said it was happy with the court’s decision.

In its lawsuit, Save Our Springs said the approval of new building rules for the Statesman land, which allowed the developer to build more and taller than typically allowed, was a special zoning case. State law requires cities to handle these kinds of cases differently, including mailing individual notices to property owners.

Austin has a bad track record on cases like these. The city has lost several lawsuits over how it has handled the intricacies of zoning law, including a legal challenge that upended the city’s attempt to rewrite building rules for every property in 2020.

But attorneys had more success this time. They said the city complied with state law and accused Save Our Springs of trying to “undermine a lawful and democratic re-zoning process” simply to end a development the group’s members didn’t like.