Sprawl-Busters Newsflash Blog - Anti-Sprawl news since 1998.
Subscribe to Sprawl-Busters Blog Follow Sprawl Busters on Twitter
Occupy Walmart & Order Al's Books Movies Newsflash! The Case Against Sprawl Home Towns Not Home Depot Victories Your Battles About Us Contact Us  

recent news

List articles
by the month:

2018
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2017
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2016
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2015
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2014
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2013
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2012
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2011
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2010
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2009
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2008
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2007
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2006
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2005
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2004
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2003
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2002
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2001
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

2000
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

1999
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC

1998
JAN FEB MAR
APR MAY JUN
JUL AUG SEP
OCT NOV DEC


Search database by text:

2002-01-05
Waveland, MS. Wal-Mart Makes Waves in Waveland.

A Wal-Mart superstore proposed for Waveland, Mississippi has stirred up the bottom in Waveland, and has state and federal officials suggesting that the project is all wet. Wal-Mart originally proposed filling in more than 31 acres of Wet Pine Flats wetland in Waveland, but later submitted plans purportedly filling in "only" 19 acres of wetlands. Last March, the Mississippi Office of Pollution Control took exception to the project, and indicated there were "feasible alternatives" to impacting the local water quality, and asked Wal-Mart to look at "the possibility of reducing the footprint of the project". Then, in early November, the federal Environmental Protection Agency wrote that the affected wetlands were "an aquatic resource of national importance, and determined that the proposed project will result in substantial unacceptable impacts to this resource." The EPA said the planned Wal-Mart would violate the Clean Water Act, and noted that efforts to avoid and minimize wetland impacts were not sufficient to allay their concerns. Why, the feds asked, was Wal-Mart not willing to expand its existing store in Waveland? Wal-Mart responded by saying that its current contract with its landlord prevented any expansion of its existing store, either horizontally or vertically, e.g. adding a second floor. The EPA noted that "expansion of the existing store would greatly reduce the amount of important aquatic resources impacted by the applicant", and the agency asked Wal-Mart to turn over a copy of their lease for the EPA to review. "Development of a multistory facility would allow the applicant to utilize a smaller site and potentially avoid impacts to important aquatic resources," the EPA suggested, and concluded: "The alternative analysis should be revised to include evaluation of smaller sites which could accommodate multistory facilities." Thus far, town officials seem to be saturated with Wal-Mart propaganda, and have raised no objection to destroying nearly half a football field worth of valuable wetlands. Only abuttors to the project have voiced concern about the absurdity of wasting wetlands just to give Wal-Mart a second, larger store in Waveland, which will have a high probability of leading to the closing of the existing Wal-Mart discount store in town.

What you can do: What often happens, is that state or federal officials will grouse about flaws with a big box retailer, but then the developer offers revisions to "mitigate" this or that, and the feds and state officials disappear. Developers know that all they have to do is submit a new plan or two, and outlast the government officials, who usually cave in. In this case, why didn't the EPA just shut down the project by stating the obvious: the scale of this project presents unacceptable adverse impacts to an important water quality resource? For other examples of big box stores encroaching needlessly on wetlands, search the 'newsflash' database by "wetland". For the name of a contact person in the Waveland community, email info@sprawl-busters.com










 
 
"Norman has become the guru of the anti-Wal-Mart movement" ~ 60 Minutes

info@sprawl-busters.com
Strategic Planning ~ Field Operations
Voter Campaigns 
21 Grinnell St, Greenfield ~ MA 01301
(413) 772-6289