Lawrence city commissioners on Tuesday rejected rezonings and plans for a proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter at Sixth Street and Wakarusa Drive by a 4-1 vote.

But a Wal-Mart still could be built on the site, and soon.

The rejected proposal was slightly larger than commercial zoning already approved for the site in 2001, but commissioners said Tuesday that Wal-Mart would have a detrimental impact on the surrounding neighborhood.

“This is not the same project that I voted for” in the earlier rezoning, Commissioner Jim Henry said. “I can’t support this one.”

Wal-Mart’s Lawrence attorney, Todd Thompson, said the retailer could bypass the rejection and build a store with the zoning that already is in place.

“Obviously, they can apply for a building permit as soon as the plans are done,” Thompson said.

The current commercial zoning prohibits construction of a department store on the site. However, Wal-Mart is technically not a department store under city codes — it’s a “variety store.”

Asked if the city could or would prevent Wal-Mart construction at the site, Commissioner David Dunfield declined comment after the meeting.

“Too hypothetical,” he said.

Dunfield’s motion for denial was seconded by Commissioner Mike Rundle. Henry and Mayor Sue Hack joined them in opposing the plans.

Commissioner Marty Kennedy voted in the minority. He said the proposal met the requirements of Horizon 2020, the city-county comprehensive plan.

“We need the sales tax,” Kennedy said. “We need the property tax. And most of all we need the jobs.”

Tuesday’s rejection continued the tortured history of the project.

Planning commissioners in October voted against a 200,000-square-foot version of the project, which included a grocery store and car service center.

The retailer withdrew its proposal before the City Commission could give its probable rejection, and Wal-Mart returned in late 2002 with a proposal closer to 150,000 square feet, minus the car service center.

¢See past stories, video reports on the Wal-Mart proposal

That’s roughly the same amount of commercial space that already had been approved for the intersection, albeit for three separate stores. The largest store allowed under the current approved plans would cover 130,000 square feet.

To make the store more palatable to neighbors, Wal-Mart promised to screen its loading docks and parking lots from public view, as well as to improve aesthetics with a brick exterior, awnings and more than 230 trees on the property’s open space.

“I think it’ll be sad if the city turns its back on all the bells and whistles that were offered here and gets a much more basic facility,” Thompson said after the rejection.

The many west Lawrence residents who testified against the project said they were worried about increased traffic the store would generate in their neighborhood, near Free State High School and the city’s indoor aquatic center.

“There are hundreds and hundreds of children in this neighborhood who will be negatively affected,” said Paula Pepin, a west Lawrence resident who displayed a photograph of elementary schoolchildren from the neighborhood.

And others argued the store would hurt Lawrence’s homegrown downtown businesses.

Dunfield likened the city’s action to Lawrence’s rejection in the early 1980s of a “cornfield mall.” Big-box stores represent a similarly suspicious retail trend, he said.

“Twenty years ago, the reasons for denying the mall were the community impacts it would have,” he said. “My reason for voting no (on Wal-Mart) is the negative impact this new approach will have on our community.”