February 20, 2009

Wal-Mart foes urge caution

By Kathy Gray
of The Chronicle

     Opponents of a Wal-Mart Super Store proposed for west The Dalles say they want The Dalles City Council to take their time, look to the comprehensive plan for guidance, and not do anything the city might regret for years to come.
     Citizens for Responsible Development in The Dalles filed an appeal of the Wal-Mart site plan for a 150,000-square-foot Super Store. A hearing on the appeal will be heard at Monday’s council meeting, at 5:30 p.m. at the Wasco County Courthouse circuit courtroom.
     “We’re not just an anti-Wal-Mart group; we’re not against development and we’re not NIMBY (Not in My Back Yard),” said Luise Langheinrich, who represented the group in an interview with Chronicle staff members. She was joined by Michael Leash and John Nelson.
     “Obviously, we disagree with the siting of Wal-Mart in town,” she added. “We want development in town to benefit the community as a whole.”
     Diversifying the economic base of the community is goal No. 9 of the city’s comprehensive plan. Opponents worry that a Wal-Mart employing 300 to 400 people at an average wage of $11.71 per hour, would mean many of those employees would make less than a living wage, which could add to the number of people dependent on public assistance.
     If those jobs displace other retail jobs in the community, Leash said, “there would be less real-wage jobs and a deterioration of the community business diversity.”
Citing annual sales projections from HHC
     Warehouse Club Focus and the Wal-Mart annual report, they also contend that Wal-Mart’s $104 million annual sales goal in The Dalles would gobble up sales totaling more than a third of Wasco County’s entire retail base.
     “They’ll do that by eroding from every single business in town,” Leash added.
While that’s often a concern when any large retailer comes to town, Leash said, the size of Wal-Mart’s sales goals in comparison to the county’s retail economy makes it an even bigger concern.
     “If those dollars are going here, where are they coming from?” Langheinrich asked.
“Wal-Mart’s goal is to own the shopping cart,” Leash added.
     Leash also worries that Wal-Mart could pull out of the community as quickly as it arrives, leaving a gaping hole in the local retail system after it has pushed other businesses to leave or scale back.
     Both downtown business owners, Leash and Langheinrich further worried that the Wal-Mart might force some downtown retailers out of business, causing a further increase in an already large vacancy rate downtown.
     “We believe that Wal-Mart is not good for the community or the gorge,” Leash said.
While those kinds of issues don’t fall within the specific criteria of a site plan appeal, Langheinrich and Leash say the city has some latitude to slow the progress of this application, to require additional concessions from developers and to use the comprehensive plan as an enforcement document.
     Langheinrich cited Portland as one example of a city that has used its comprehensive plan in such a way, as a strong document with strong guidelines.
“If there are no ordinances that pertain to an issue, then the comprehensive plan serves as guide,” their position paper contends.
     Furthermore, the group’s leaders were critical of the planning commission’s and the city council’s enforcement of the specific requirements of the site plan.      Transportation and wetlands protection were two of the group’s specific concerns.
Regarding transportation, they cite a September 29, 2006 memo from David Warrick, interchange engineer for the Oregon Department of Transportation.
     In the memo, Warrick questions the ability of the Chenoweth Interchange, on which the proposed Wal-Mart would be sited, to handle traffic from a commercial development.
     Based on trip generation guidelines, he suggests each thousand square feet of commercial development could generate 40 to 45 trips through the interchange each day. For the 150,000-square-foot Wal-Mart alone, the approximate figure would to between 6,000 and 7,000 trips, not to mention further commercial development indicated on the site plan.
     In comparison, Warrick writes, industrial development generates between 1.5 and 7 trips per thousand.
     “The bottom line is that this is a massive change from assumptions made when the interchange was planned and built,” he writes.
     The current configuration of the Highway 30, the freeway, the interchange and River Road would force all traffic to the commercial site to go through Chenoweth Interchange, he adds.
     “1) The increased traffic that will result from commercial use of land compared to industrial is huge (several hundred percent increase); 2) The existing Chenoweth interchange is located and configured in such a way that it can’t support the tremendous increase in demand; 3) Opportunities for improving or reconfiguring the existing Chenoweth interchange are hugely constrained by three main facts — it sits right next to the UPRR (Union Pacific Railroad), it sits just outside the Gorge Scenic Area, and it is very close to the Historic Columbia River Highway (US 30); 4) The local road network isn’t in place to support the freeway and its interchanges.”
     Opponents of Wal-Mart also worry about the development’s proximity to the Chenoweth Creek, and its diverse plants and wildlife.
     “When we approached the planning commission, and now as we are approaching the council, I don’t get the impression they are seriously taking a step back and saying      ‘Maybe we out to look at these things,’” said Nelson. “There were very few questions asked back of us.”
     “They’re rushing it through so fast,” Langheinrich said, “and they don’t have to. They can say, ‘We need to look at this.’”