Print

Email story

Comment

Letter to the editor

Tarpon Wal-Mart hits major setback

"Minor" plan changes were major, say board members.

By ELENA LESLEY, Times Staff Writer
Published January 18, 2008

TARPON SPRINGS - It could be back to square one for Wal-Mart.

After more than three hours of testimony and discussion Wednesday night, the Tarpon Springs Board of Adjustment ruled that changes to the retail giant's site plan were "major," not "minor," as city staff had previously determined.

The decision, if upheld on appeal, will force Wal-Mart to go back before the City Commission for a series of public hearings.

It was a striking and stirring victory for local activists and environmentalists who have opposed the company's plans to build a supercenter on the western bank of the Anclote River.

As the board announced its decision - a 3-2 vote - sometime after 10 p.m., two dozen opponents burst into applause.

"Power to the people!" some shouted.

"We're extremely excited about the decision," said Dory Larsen, one of the community activists who argued before the board. But, she added, "we know we have a long road ahead."

A Wal-Mart spokeswoman said Thursday the company is disappointed by the decision and is trying to determine what it will do next.

At this point Wal-Mart has several options, said Tarpon Springs Mayor Beverley Billiris. The company could appeal the board's decision in circuit court, pull the site plan or walk away from the project, she said.

Wal-Mart has faced a drawn-out fight in Tarpon Springs, though a company spokeswoman said many of its stores have taken even longer to be approved.

The company received final site plan approval from the city nearly three years ago after a grueling, all-night meeting that lasted until dawn.

But then project opponents discovered that the Army Corps of Engineers had improperly granted Wal-Mart a permit allowing the company to build over a small protected wetlands area.

The corps subsequently withdrew the permit, and 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 officials at Tarpon Springs City Hall concluded that those changes were minor - and thus did not need to be reapproved after another public hearing before the City Commission - opponents disagreed.

The proposed changes, they said, were major revisions. They went on to appeal the "minor" classification to the Board of Adjustment.

Just before a 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. That's because Wal-Mart's stormwater management plan mistakenly would have 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, and in August another revised site plan was submitted to the city. Once again, city staff marked the changes "minor," and Wal-Mart opponents appealed the decision.

This time, they got to present their case.

On Wednesday night, community members told the board that encroachments into river and wetlands buffers spelled out in the development agreement, as well as modified vehicle access points, all qualified changes as major.

They also noted the much-referenced discrepancies in the amount of wetlands recognized by Wal-Mart in different documents. In the development agreement, Wal-Mart listed 33.5 acres of wetlands but later noted there were only 28.1 acres.

There's "nothing sinister about this," countered Renea Vincent, Tarpon's director of planning and zoning, who was representing the city. She said the 33.5 acres was an approximation that had carried over from a preliminary ecological consultation.

How the number ended up on the document is irrelevant, Larsen replied.

"You have to stick to the truth of the legal contract," she said. "You can't just wish it away."

Wal-Mart attorney David Theriaque attacked the qualifications of Larsen and other appellants. He pointed out that none of them had expertise in urban planning or land use, and said that their expert witness, Sam Casella, was not as familiar with Tarpon Springs' regulations as was Vincent.

"It was typical of a bully," activist Chris Hrabovsky said. He added that he felt "Wal-Mart clearly wasn't gaining any ground."

Opinion on the board was split.

"I don't think they're that major," board member Nancy Dively said of the changes.

But Matt King and Ed Cole said that given the magnitude of the project, they felt the city had to proceed cautiously.

"The information on which the city's agreement is based is wrong," King said.

Until the vote, neither side could call the verdict: a squeaker at 3-2 in favor of the appeal.

"I was on the edge of my seat," Hrabovsky said. "I knew we had a better case, but Wal-Mart plays fast and loose with the truth."

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

Fast facts

Major vs. minor

These are the disputed changes to Wal-Mart's proposed site plan near the Anclote River. The Tarpon Springs Board of Adjustment decided they are major - not minor, as the city's staff had concluded - and thus require another public hearing:

- Development agreement's statement that 33.5 acres of wetlands exist on the site, while later documents claim 28.1 acres of wetlands.

- Two encroachments into the 50-foot river buffer.

- Two encroachments into the 30-foot wetlands buffer.

- A change in the number of vehicle access points.

- Land use change on property from preservation to recreational use.

[Last modified January 17, 2008, 21:09:10]