Print

Email story

Comment

Letter to the editor

Wal-Mart dispute simmers

Foes call for public hearings. Tarpon Springs says probably not.

By ELENA LESLEY, Times Staff Writer
Published September 18, 2007

TARPON SPRINGS - With a new Wal-Mart application before it, city staff's previous decision to classify changes in the site plan as minor is once again a major point of contention.

Those opposing the big-box retailer claim that revisions to the original 2005 site plan are major, which means the project should go back before the city for a series of public hearings.

"They need to start the process all over again," said Dory Larsen, a member of the anti-Wal-Mart group Friends of the Anclote.

But in the past, city staff hasn't agreed. In August 2006, staff members determined a revised plan - which was later withdrawn - consisted of minor changes, which require review by only a small committee made up of staff.

Mayor Beverley Billiris said she doubts the staff's major-minor decision will be any different this time around.

"I don't think this will be coming back before the commission," she said.

City staff is still reviewing Wal-Mart's new application package, which was submitted in August, and hasn't made any determinations yet, said city spokeswoman Judy Staley.

"Hopefully, they'll determine these are minor modifications and it will go straight to the technical review committee," said David Theriaque, a lawyer for Wal-Mart.

But Commissioner Peter Dalacos said even if staff members do initially fast-track the application, approval could be a drawn-out process. Opponents would most likely contest the decision to the Board of Adjustments.

"The potential exists that the commission could be reviewing or rehearing this," he said, adding that he is waiting to see what staff decides.

Wal-Mart first revised its site plan after the Army Corps of Engineers determined in July 2006 that it improperly granted a permit allowing the company to build over a small protected wetland area. The mistake was brought to light by opponents of the project.

Without the corps permit, Wal-Mart had to choose whether to redesign the project, which would require the company to endure another long approval process, or make minor adjustments to avoid protected wetlands.

The retail giant chose the latter.

While city staff determined the changes were minor, local opponents took up arms against what they deemed to be major revisions.

Dalacos requested the issue be placed on the commission agenda for Halloween night 2006. His suggestion that commissioners instruct the city manager to declare the changes major didn't gain traction. But the opponents went on to challenge the "minor" label before the Board of Adjustments.

Just before the board hearing, scheduled for December 2006, Wal-Mart withdrew its revised application.

In addition to working around the Army Corps gaffe, the company needed to apply for a new Southwest Florida Water Management District permit at the request of the city. As part of its stormwater management plan, Wal-Mart mistakenly decided to put a floodplain in an area promised to the city as a nature preserve.

Company representatives said they would prefer to have all permits in place before trying to seek city approval for revisions.

In July, the water management district granted Wal-Mart a new permit.

The company's revised application, which created room for water storage beneath the parking lot, had no "wetland and/or surface water impacts," according to the district.

But opponents say it's hard to determine wetland impacts when the numbers keep changing.

Friends of the Anclote has highlighted discrepancies of wetland acreage in Wal-Mart's development agreement - 33.5 acres - and the eventual site plan - 28.1 acres. A request by the group to arrange for a third-party surveyor was rejected by Wal-Mart.

The group has now filed an administrative appeal against the water management district permit. A hearing is set for early December.

In the meantime, anti-Wal-Mart activists will be doing all they can to get site plan changes branded "major."

"We're still hopeful," Larsen said of the ongoing fight. "It's been 21/2 years and they haven't broken ground yet."

Elena Lesley can be reached at elesley@sptimes.com or (727) 445-4167.

[Last modified September 17, 2007, 22:00:36]