Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Wal

Environmental Impacts of the
Proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter in Potsdam
Aly Courtemanch and
Lani Bensheimer
Conservation Biology
April 29, 2005
Table of Contents
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.
X.
XI.
XII.
Page
Summary……………………………………………………...2
Problem Definition
a. Construction plan……………………………………..2
b. Stormwater treatment plan…………………………....3
c. Sewage treatment plan………………………………..4
d. Surrounding habitat…………………………………...5
i.Definition of a wetland
ii.Importance of wetlands
Governmental Issues…………………………………………11
Stakeholders………………………………………………….13
Environmental Impacts………………………………………13
a. Wetland degradation…………………………………..13
b. Light pollution………………………………………...17
c. Stormwater runoff…………………………………….18
d. Groundwater use……………………………………...19
e. Sewage treatment……………………………………..21
f. Energy use……………………………………………21
g. Urban Sprawl/zoning…………………………………21
h. Air quality…………………………………………….22
i. Economic……………………………………………..22
j. Social…………………………………………………24
Development of Solutions to the Problem…………………..24
a. Solution 1: Do not build the Wal-Mart store…………25
b. Solution 2: Find an alternative site for the store……...25
c. Solution 3: Remain at the current site, but alter the
site plan………………………………………………26
i.Reduce store size………………………………..26
ii.Reduce parking lot size…………………………27
iii.Design functional mitigated wetlands……….….28
iv.Build three mitigated wetlands………………….29
v.Environmentally-friendly lawn care products…..30
vi.Grey water recycling system……………………30
vii.Relocate the leach field away from the wetlands..31
viii.Buy electricity from wind power sources……….32
ix. Include motion-activated parking lot lighting and
energy efficient bulbs…………………………...33
x. Include natural lighting and sustainable building
materials................................................................33
Feasibility of solutions and best solutions…………………..34
Ease of Implementation……………………………………..36
Challenges to Implementation………………………………37
Implementation Plan………………………………………...37
Conclusion…………………………………………………..38
Literature Cited……………………………………………39
1
I. Summary
The Wal-Mart Corporation is proposing to build a new 188,500 +/- ft2
Supercenter store in Potsdam, New York, on Route 11 south of the Village of Potsdam
(Winters 2005). This case study focused on the environmental impacts of the Wal-Mart
store on the surrounding environment, including wetland destruction, habitat loss, loss of
wetland ecosystem services, light pollution, storm water runoff pollution, ground water
demand, energy use of store, and urban sprawl. Feasible solutions to reduce the
environmental impact of the store were determined, and included many changes to the
site plan of the store. More specifically, our best solutions included altering the size of
the store and parking lot, building mitigated wetlands that correctly mitigate the
ecosystem services and habitat destroyed, using environmentally friendly lawn care
products to reduce chemical runoff into the wetlands, buying wind power to reduce the
impact of the high electricity consumption, using motion-activated parking lot lights, and
incorporating energy efficient lighting systems and green design techniques into the store
design. We would like to inform the public and appropriate governmental agencies of
our research, in order to facilitate changes to the current plan.
II. Problem Definition
Construction plan
The Wal-Mart Corporation is proposing to build a 188,500 +/- ft2 Supercenter
store in Potsdam, New York, on Route 11 south of the Village of Potsdam (Winters
2005). The property is 56.39 acres and the site plan includes the store, a 20,000 ft2
garden center, 940 parking spots, and a 900 ft2 for the gas station (Tire Lube Express) and
one out parcel for future development (Brown 2005, DEIS 2004). Currently, there are
two other Wal-Mart stores in a 35 mile radius from Canton (Figure 1), located in
Massena and Ogdensburg. If the store is built it could cause many environmental,
economic and social problems. This case study is focused on the environmental
problems associated with the Wal-Mart store, such as a decrease in wetland areas; impact
on habitat and species present; reduction in flood regulation, water filtration, erosion
control and other ecosystem services; light pollution from the parking lot; water pollution
2
and stormwater runoff; reduction in ground water; energy use; air pollution, and urban
sprawl.
www.nysegov.com
Figure 1. This is a map of Saint Lawrence County, New York and shows the location of
existing Wal-Mart stores within 35 miles from Canton. It also shows the area that the
proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter would be located, outside of Potsdam.
Stormwater treatment plan
The current stormwater management plan proposed by Wal-Mart incorporates a
subsurface storm sewer collection system, which empties into a stormwater detention
pond/artificial wetland facility on the north side of the site (DEIS, 2004). This detention
pond/wetland facility will be composed of open water areas and two man-made wetland
areas that are designed for stormwater treatment (DEIS, 2004; Response to Public
Comments on DEIS, 2005). Pollutants, such as pesticides, oils, heavy metals, nitrogen,
and phosphorous, will be filtered from stormwater runoff through particle settling,
biological processes in water, and vegetative uptake (DEIS, 2004). This detention
pond/wetland facility will also be used for snow management during the winter. All
snow removed from the proposed Wal-Mart parking lot and access road will be deposited
into the detention pond/wetland facility (DEIS, 2004). Wal-Mart expects that each
3
detention pond/wetland facility will have to be dredged every five years in order to
remove sediment build-up from water runoff and snow deposits (DEIS, 2004). The outlet
of this detention pond/wetland facility is a 36 inch pipe that discharges water to the
wetlands on the western boundary of the site (water from these wetlands eventually flows
into the Raquette River in Potsdam) (DEIS, 2004).
Figure 2. Proposed structure of one of the detention ponds/artificial wetlands in the
stormwater management system (DEIS, 2004).
This detention pond/wetland facility system is proposed to fulfill the dual purpose
of serving as a stormwater management system and also mitigate any damage to natural
wetlands caused by the Wal-Mart construction and operation (DEIS, 2004; Brown, 2004,
17). The DEIS refers to this proposed man-made detention pond/wetland area as “an
enhanced and expanded natural wetland” (DEIS, 2004, 21). The DEIS reported that no
increase in stormwater runoff rates were expected for the site before and after
construction due to “compliance of the proposed stormwater management system with
the stormwater quantity design standards of the NYS DEC [New York State Department
of Environmental Conservation]” (DEIS, 2004, 66).
Sewage Treatment Plan
A sewage disposal system is not currently established on the proposed Wal-Mart
site, and the site is too far from the Village of Potsdam to be connected to the village
sewage management system (Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), 2004).
Therefore, Wal-Mart plans to construct several sewage storage tanks on-site, a back-up
pump, and also a sub-surface leach field (size not indicated) located to the south of the
4
proposed store (DEIS, 2004). In this system, the storage tanks collect sewage from the
store and release it gradually into the leach field, which is a subsurface system that
channels sewage through a physical and microbial filtration system and eventually
releases it into the ground.
According to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Wal-Mart expects that
the volume of sewage effluent will equal the volume of water used each day, which is
approximately 10,800 gallons (DEIS, 2004, 12). Due to a recent increase in the areas of
all of the wetlands bordering the proposed Wal-Mart site, the proposed primary sewer
lines now intersect the New York State Jurisdictional Wetlands Buffer Boundary (Brown,
2/13/2005).
Surrounding habitat
The property consists of open fields (30%), pine plantation (46%), and wetlands
(24%, DEIS 2004), which can be seen in Figure 3. The Draft Environmental Impact
Statement submitted by the Wal-Mart Corporation (2004) reports that there are no rare,
threatened, or endangered species present and no rare or unique habitats or Critical
Environmental Areas on the site.
5
Figure 3. This aerial photograph shows the site of the proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter on
Route 11 in Potsdam, New York. The site is composed of fields, forests, and wetlands.
There are three wetlands present on the site with a combined area of 10.02 acres,
designated according to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) wetland criteria
(DEIS 2004). Of the total wetlands on the site, 0.64 acres would be filled and an
additional 0.97 acres of federally protected buffer would be filled by the construction of
the Wal-Mart store (Northern Ecological Associates 2005). The first wetland (W1) is
1.15 acres and is a narrow patch extending south and east from the northeast corner of the
property and includes a small septic pond (Figure 4). It was characterized as a shallow
emergent marsh by the New York State Natural Heritage Program (NYS NHP)
guidelines, which common throughout New York State and the world (Response by WalMart to Public Comments of DEIS 2005). The second wetland (W2) is 0.61 acres and is
located in the central portion of the site, along the west edge, and is made of shallow
6
emergent marsh and floodplain forest. Floodplain forest had a smaller range but still
quite abundant in New York and globally (DEIS 2004).
The final wetland (W4) is 8.26 acres and is located in the southeastern corner
(Northern Ecological Associates 2005). This wetland is characterized as shallow
emergent marsh and extends far outside of the property towards the southeast. It is part
of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC)
designated wetland WD-34, which is regulated under the New York State Freshwater
Wetlands Act instead of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (DEIS 2004). The New York
state DEC regulates wetlands that are larger than 12.4 acres and the wetland proper (100
ft wide buffer around the perimeter) under the 1975 Freshwater Wetlands Act (New York
State Department of Conservation 2004). WD-34 drains northeast into an unnamed
tributary that eventually leads to the Raquette River and the other three wetlands on the
property empty into Stony Brook, which empties into the Raquette River near
Raymondville, New York (DEIS 2004). The Wal-Mart Corporation is planning on
eliminating 0.64 acres of W1 and W2, preserving WD-34 (W4) and floodplain forest on
W2 (Northern Ecological Associates 2005). However, they are also planning on filling
0.97 acres of the buffer zone around WD-34, which is also federally protected.
7
Figure 4. This aerial photograph shows the site and the three wetlands present. Wetland
1 is 1.15 acres, wetland 2 is 0.61 acres, wetland 4 (WD-34) is 8.26 acres (Northern
Ecological Associates 2005).
Definition of a wetland
Wetlands are defined as areas that are permanently or seasonally wet, have
specific hydrological systems; physiochemical characteristics, such as soils; and specially
adapted plant and animal species (Cylinder et al. 1995, Environmental Laboratory 1987).
Figure 5 shows a diagram of these three characteristics relate to one another (Mitsch and
Gosselink 2000). Wetland ecosystems can occur adjacent to drier areas or as a transition
between dry habitats and streams or lakes (Mitsch and Gosselink 2000). The soils in
wetlands are hydric; they drain poorly and are waterlogged for much of the year, creating
anaerobic conditions where oxygen is lost from the soil. Anaerobic conditions also cause
a reduction in the decomposition rate because most of the microbes that break down
organic matter cannot survive (Cylinder et al. 1995).
8
Figure 5. This shows the relationships between the three defining characteristics of
wetland ecosystems: the hydrological system, the physiochemical environment, and the
biota (Mitsch and Gosselink 2000).
There are a diversity of wetland types that that provide habitat for different
organisms all over the U.S. and world. Wetlands are commonly thought of as swamps,
marshes, bogs and fens but include many variations in between and sometimes specific to
a region (Thompson and Yocom 1993). Wetlands can also occur as saltwater
ecosystems, such as salt marshes and mangroves, but 95% of wetlands are freshwater
(Dahl 2000). In the past, the United State’s wetlands have not held much value and they
were typically filled, converted for agricultural uses, water flow was diverted for other
uses, and they were developed on (Cylinder et al. 1995). It is estimated that in the 1600s
more than 220 million acres of wetlands existed in the lower 48 states (United States
Environmental Protection Agency 2001) and over the last 200 years 53% of them have
been lost (Cylinder et al. 1995). The most recent data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
9
Service shows that in 1997 there were an estimated 105.5 million acres of wetlands in the
lower 48 states and the estimated rate of wetland loss was 58,500 acres annually (Dahl
2000). World wide there are an estimated 2,000 million to 2,500 million acres of
wetlands, or 6.2 -7.6% of the total land surface area (Lehner and Doll 2004). In 2000,
urban development, agriculture, silviculture, and rural development were the most
important causes of wetland loss (30%, 26%, 23%, and 21%, respectfully. Dahl, T. E.
2000).
Importance of wetlands
Wetlands are also important habitat for many plants and animals because they
help to protect biological diversity (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1990). Some animals
use wetlands seasonally while others depend on them year round and they provide
important feeding areas, breeding grounds, resting spots, and shelter for these species.
Many of these species are endemic only to wetlands, and in New York State half of the
endangered and threatened plant species are live in wetland areas (NY State Department
of Environmental Conservation 2003). Many plants, called hydrophytes, have adapted to
these wet conditions but also live in other ecosystems and others called obligates, need
wetlands specifically for survival and reproduction (Cylinder et al. 1995). Some obligate
species include: cattail (Typha latifolia), water plantain (Alisma triviale), pondweed
(Potamogeton sp.), and arrowhead (Syngonium podophyullum) Cylinder et al. 1995).
Wetlands are important to many species of animals as well, particularly fish and
waterfowl that have economic value for sport fishing and hunting (U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency 1995).
Because of the unique characteristics of wetlands, they provide many ecosystem
services to humans and the natural world. Wetland plants and microorganisms break
down or use chemical pollutants, heavy metals and excess nutrients and break, filtering
them from the water (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1990). The anaerobic soil
conditions in wetlands also cause the chemical properties of some pollutants and wastes
to change, helping to reduce the negative impact of them for other animals and plants
(NY State Department of Environmental Conservation 2003). Wetlands also help to
control floods and rain from heavy storms by being a habitat adapted to periodic flooding
10
(NY State Department of Environmental Conservation 2003). These areas help to
regulate flood waters by being able to absorb a lot of water and then release it slowly,
reducing erosion and other harmful effects of floods (Cylinder et al. 1995, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service 1990, Larson et al. 1980).
Many wetlands are located between rivers or lakes and terrestrial habitats and
help reduce soil erosion. The water flow in wetlands is generally slower than in rivers;
sediments thus have a chance to settle out and wetland vegetation helps keep soil in place
(NY State Department of Environmental Conservation 2003, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service 1990). Due to the reduction of water flow in wetlands, these ecosystems help to
recharge aquifers and groundwater supplies (NY State Department of Environmental
Conservation 2003, Cylinder et al. 1995). The vegetation helps slow the movement of
water through the system, which gives it time to absorb into the surrounding soils.
Wetlands provide many economic benefits to humans because they foster the
growth of species of waterfowl, commercial fish and shellfish (Cylinder et al. 1995).
They also provide natural resources such as peat, cranberries, timber and salt hay (U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service 1990). Many people enjoy hunting, fishing, bird watching,
boating, hiking and other recreational activities in wetlands which are why many
wetlands are protected (NY State Department of Environmental Conservation 2003).
Another service that they provide is the enjoyment of wetlands for their esthetic value
(NY State Department of Environmental Conservation 2003). Wetlands also have value
for educational purposes as an outdoor laboratory and classroom for schools and
scientific research (NY State Department of Environmental Conservation 2003).
III. Governmental Issues
The New York State Department of Conservation (DEC), the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are all
involved in the conservation and protection of wetlands. The Clean Water Act (CWA)
was passed in 1970 and later amended in 1972 and 1977 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
2003) and is the current legislation that regulates wetlands (EPA 2005). Section 404 of
the CWA regulates the dredging and filling of wetlands and requires landowners to attain
a permit to impact wetlands in these ways; this is what Wal-Mart must apply for. The
11
Clean Water Act is under the jurisdiction of the EPA; however USACE has control over
Section 404, which manages the more day to day operations and permits (Robertson
2004). Nationwide, less than 1% of all requests for permits have been denied, indicating
to conservationists that USACE may not be doing their job well enough (U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers 2003). USACE requires that if permits are given to fill or dredge
wetlands new wetlands must be created to replace, or mitigate, the ecosystem services
and habitat lost (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2003).
Another piece of legislation that regulates wetlands in New York State is the
Freshwater Wetlands Act. This act, under the jurisdiction of the New York state DEC,
regulates wetlands at least 12.4 acres and other smaller wetlands of unusual local
importance (NY State Department of Conservation 2004). This act also regulates
dredging and filling of wetlands, as well as other impacts, and protects a 100 foot wide
buffer around wetlands (NY State Department of Environmental Conservation 1985).
Under Section 404 of the CWA, New York State has the authority to review and deny
permits issued by USACE that might cause discharge pollution to state waters (NY State
Department of Conservation 2004).
New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA)
The State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) requires developers to
conduct a Draft Environmental Impact Assessment (DEIS) and a Final Environmental
Impact Assessment (FEIS) to investigate the environmental impacts of a proposed project
and submit it to the lead agency, in this case the Town of Potsdam, for approval before
the development is initiated (Brown, 2004). According to Shannon Brown, chairperson
of Citizens for Responsible Growth, “a DEIS provides adequate, comprehensive (as
defined by the scope), and conclusive information to the community and to the SEQRA
designated Lead Agency [Town of Potsdam] regarding the proposed project and the
mitigation of the determined negative impacts of the proposed project” (Brown, 2004, 3).
The Wal-Mart DEIS addressed the following possible environmental and
community impacts of the proposed Wal-Mart construction: traffic, surface water and
storm water management (including runoff into surrounding waterways), changes in the
quality and quantity of wetlands, air quality, wildlife disruption, aesthetic character,
12
elimination of on-site commercial recreational activities, noise and odor, public health
(including light and visual effects), community character and growth, fiscal, and
municipal services (DEIS, 2004). The DEIS was submitted to the town on October 19,
2004, and the public was allowed a designated amount of time to comment on the
assessment. The DEIS was prepared by F-E-S Associates (Rochester, NY), APD
Engineering, and Northern Ecological Associates, consulting groups that were hired by
the Wal-Mart corporation (DEIS, 2004). The Final Environmental Impact Assessment
has not yet been released by the Wal-Mart Corporation.
IV. Stakeholders
Many of the stakeholders in this issue have already been mentioned. They
include, but are not limited to:
Government
Town of Potsdam Planning Board
Surrounding local town governments
St. Lawrence County Planning Board
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
US Army Corps of Engineers
Business
Wal-Mart Corporation
Local business owners
Local business employees
Community
Local community members
Consumers
Property owners adjacent to site
Unemployed community members
Environmentalists
Citizens for Responsible Growth
V. Environmental Impacts
Wetland degradation
The construction of the Wal-Mart Supercenter and parking lot will eliminate 0.64
acres of wetlands and 0.97 acres of adjacent buffer habitat (Figure 6, Northern Ecological
Associates 2005). The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), which the Wal-
13
Mart Corporation is required to submit to the Town of Potsdam, showed that none of
wetland WD-34 (wetland 4) or the floodplain forest (part of wetland 2) would be
destroyed (DEIS 2004). The wetland area that would be destroyed by the store is shallow
emergent marsh and common through out the U.S. and the world (DEIS 2004). The
destruction of these wetland areas will result in the direct loss of habitat, plants and
animals, important ecosystem services, and potential economic gains from resource
extraction. Additionally the surrounding ecosystems will be affected by the store through
fragmentation, pollution, and sedimentation.
Figure 6. Site plan for the proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter in Potsdam, New York.
Route 11 is located at the right of the map and WD-34 (wetland 4) is marked at the lower
left-hand corner, which is the southeast corner of the property. The 100 ft. buffer zone is
marked with dashed lines, and there are shaded areas representing the filled wetland
areas.
Many of the ecosystem services that wetlands provide will be impacted by
constructing a Wal-Mart Supercenter on this site. Filling in wetlands impacts the ability
of these ecosystems to moderate flood waters. Flooding often increases in areas where
wetlands used to exist, both downstream because water moves through the area faster and
floods below the filled area, and upstream if the water flow is blocked by fill and it pools
up (NY State Department of Environmental Conservation 2003). Other ecosystem
14
services, such as water filtration of pollutants will be impacted because the remaining
wetlands will receive higher amounts of pollutants and may be unable to process all of
them. Urban runoff, runoff from sewage disposal (such as a leach field) and agricultural
runoff degrades wetland ecosystems, sometimes to the point where the ecosystem is not
even healthy enough to process pollutants (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1990).
Sedimentation is a major concern in areas of increased development because it
can impact the hydrological systems in a wetland (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
2001). In freshwater ecosystems, hydrology is considered the most important variable
that determines the type of aquatic ecosystem an area will be and the kinds of species that
will live there (Sanders et al. 2001). When things like increased sediments, changes in
drainage, dredging, diversion of water flow, increased impervious surfaces, and increased
pollution runoff, which are all things that can happen when adjacent land is developed,
occur in a wetland the hydrological systems change (U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency 2001). The whole ecosystem can be changed by these anthropogenic impacts
and the ecological services associated with wetlands may be decreased or eliminated
(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1990).
Although the proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter in Potsdam, New York will have
two mitigated wetlands/detention ponds that will collect some of the sedimentation and
runoff from the parking lot, they will not catch all of it and the levels of pollutants and
sediments in the neighboring wetlands will most likely increase. The U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (Army Regulation 200-1 1997) identifies the need for pollution prevention
initiatives to reduce non-point sources of pollution (e.g. storm water runoff and
sedimentation) and has incorporated these principles into their policies by limiting the
amount of pollution that can enter our water.
The direct loss of habitat and ecosystem services will impact the surrounding
communities, both human and wild, but the indirect degradation of habitat quality around
this site could cause population declines in the species present there. Many species that
live in wetlands, such as frogs (Anura sp.), salamanders (Caudata sp.) and turtles
(Chelonia sp.) migrate between aquatic and terrestrial habitats in order to forage,
reproduce and over-winter. It is important to conserve as much habitat as possible
surrounding the wetlands for these species (Semlitsch and Bodie 2002). There is much
15
debate among conservation biologists about the minimum threshold size of wetlands for
species and ecosystem service protection (Gibbs 2000), however amphibians and reptiles
have been found to range from 159-290 meters and 127-289 meters, respectfully, from
their core habitat. This provides a minimum threshold for these species, making it
important to protect the ecosystems within these ranges (Semlitsch and Bodie 2002).
Considering the proximity of the proposed Wal-Mart store to wetland habitat, we predict
that amphibian and reptile populations will be negatively impacted by its construction
and long term presence.
Individuals that live in a particular wetland are connected to individuals in other
wetlands through metapopulation dynamics: migration, emigration and immigration
flows (Semlitsch and Bodie 2002, Gibbs 2000). It is important to protect ecosystems on
the landscape level because some species need to be able to move between patches. Two
nationally threatened turtle species Emydoidea blandingi (Blanding’s turtle) and
Clemmys guttata (the Spotted turtle), that are present in New York State, migrate
between multiple wetland patches throughout their life (Joyal et al. 2001). It is important
for this species and many others to protect a network of wetland patches. If local
populations of species go extinct, because a wetland is filled or there are negative impacts
from adjacent land-use practices, then the metapopulation as a whole is at a greater risk
of extinction (Findlay and Houlahan 1996). This is especially important because
anthropogenic impacts are not isolated events but occur all over the county, state, country
and world. Even though the area of wetland that would be filled on the site in Potsdam is
relatively small, the loss of habitat and ecosystem services will be added to the national
and worldwide toll taken on wetlands.
A lot of data has also shown that there is a significant relationship between the
area of a habitat patch and the species richness within it, including wetlands (Findley and
Houlahan 1996). If the area of a wetland is reduced by 50% it would result in a 10-16%
reduction of species in any taxonomic group (Findley and Houlahan 1996). In the past 15
years the breeding population of continental ducks has declined 31% in the U.S. partly
because of destruction of wetland habitats (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2001).
Paved road density near wetland habitats also reduces species diversity (Findley
and Houlahan 1996). A 2 m/ha increase in road density would cause a 19% decline in
16
reptile and amphibian species richness and a 14% decline in bird species richness
(Findlay and Houlahan 1996). Paved roads have a negative impact on wetland
ecosystems for several reasons: 1) they cause changes in the hydrological regimes due to
increased sedimentation, 2) they cause an increased mortality due to road kill, and 3) they
cause increased edge effects, like climatic changes (Findlay and Houlahan 1996).
Increasing paved road density by 2 m/ha within 1000 m of a wetland could have
approximately the same impact on reptiles, amphibians and mammal species richness as
the loss of 50% of the main wetland habitat, or almost 7 acres of the wetlands on the
Wal-Mart site (Findlay and Houlahan 1996). Building a commercial store will increase
the traffic along route 11 (Brown 2005) and paving 940 space parking lot will have
similar impacts as the creation of a road when it comes to sedimentation, chemical runoff,
and edge effects. Therefore, it is likely that the ecosystems surrounding the proposed
Wal-Mart Supercenter will be negatively impacted and not be able to support diverse and
healthy plant and animal populations or be able to continue supplying ecosystem
services.
Light pollution
Light pollution is of concern when looking at the environmental impacts caused
by the proposed Wal-Mart Superstore and parking lot. The Wal-Mart Corporation is
planning on creating 940 parking spaces and the necessary artificial lighting, in addition
to the outside lighting around the store itself (Response by Wal-Mart to Public Comments
of DEIS 2005). The store is proposed as a 24-hour Supercenter so the lights will be on
all night long causing what is termed “sky glow” (Harder 2002). Sky glow can
negatively impact many insects, amphibians, reptiles, fish, birds, and even mammals
(Harder 2002). For example, species of frogs (Anura sp.) and salamanders (Caudata sp.)
become motionless when exposed to artificial lights, such as in a parking lot (Harder
2002). They stay frozen long after the light has been turned off, leaving them open to
predators and disrupting their normal feeding and mating functions (Harder 2002).
When moth species are exposed to artificial light they have a reduced awareness
of echolocation that bats, one of their predators, send out to locate objects. This means
moths do not go into a defensive dive, as they would naturally do, when they are in the
17
presence of lights and so are more likely to be eaten by bats (Harder 2002). There is also
preliminary data on the negative effects of artificial lights on some plants, birds, small
aquatic invertebrates, fish species, fireflies and other organisms (Harder 2002).
Stormwater Runoff
Stormwater runoff, which washes chemicals, oils, salts, pathogens, debris, and
soil nutrients (specifically nitrogen and phosphorous) into wetlands, lakes, rivers, and
streams, is a major contribution to water pollution (Gaffield et al, 2003; NYSDEC; Parris,
2004). Increasing the proportion of land covered by impervious surfaces, such as parking
lots and rooftops, further increases stormwater runoff and decreases water quality of
runoff (DEIS, 2004; Parris, 2004). Stormwater runoff washes excess nitrogen and
phosphorous in soil into waterways, leading to nitrogen saturation in wetlands (Zhu &
Ehrenfeld, 1999) and harmful algal blooms in downstream waterways that can disrupt
aquatic ecosystems (Gaffield et. al., 2003). Studies have found that these harmful effects
to wetland and aquatic ecosystems are exacerbated in urban and suburban areas with a
high proportion of impervious surfaces (Gaffield et. al., 2003; Zhu & Ehrenfeld, 1999).
Stormwater runoff not only affects aquatic habitats, but it can threaten human health by
degrading the quality of public drinking water (Gaffield et.al., 2003). Runoff from roofs,
roads, parking lots, and lawns can contain abnormal levels of heavy metals such as lead
and chemical pesticides and insecticides, many of which are carcinogens and can
potentially impact human health (Gaffield et.al., 2003). “Reducing stormwater runoff
and associated non-point source pollution is a potentially valuable component of an
integrated strategy to protect public health at the least cost” (Gaffield et.al., 2003, 1527).
Currently, the site contains a minimal amount of impervious surfaces (artificial
land surfaces such as pavement and rooftops, which do not allow rainwater to percolate
into the soil, but instead cause it to runoff into surrounding surface waterways) (DEIS,
2004). The proposed Wal-Mart site plan would convert 43% of the site into impervious
surfaces, such as the parking lot and main store. Twenty-three percent of the site will be
lawn or field, and 33.3% will remain wooded (DEIS, 2004). This conversion of a large
portion of the site to impervious surfaces will cause an increase in the volume of
stormwater runoff.
18
The Wal-Mart site plan includes a design for a stormwater management system,
which has been described earlier in this report. However, according to Gaffield et.al.
(2003), while detention ponds and man-made wetland filtration systems, such as that
proposed, are effective at removing 70% of bacteria from stormwater, they are less
effective at removing many other pollutants. Although the Wal-Mart Corporation
believes they can mitigate any loss of functions that may result from this disturbance
(DEIS 2004) it is unlikely that they will be able to mitigate them all. This is because a
mitigated wetland that is dramatically disturbed every 5 years is not a stable habitat for
plants and animals; half of all projects to restore or create wetlands have been shown to
fail (Brown and Lant 1999). The ability to configure the right system plants to cleanse
the water can take many years to develop and if the wetland is being dredged every 5
years it seems unlikely that this will occur (Brown and Lant 1999).
Creating the correct hydrological systems is the most difficult part of mitigating
wetlands and is the reason so many have failed (Brown and Lant 1999). The hydrology
of a wetland is very sensitive to sediment overload and during the years before the
wetland is dredged of excess sediments the hydrology will be impacted by the amount of
excess sediments present at the time. It is also uncertain if mitigated wetlands can even
be replacements for natural wetlands, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2001)
noted that most mitigated wetlands fail and Brown and Lant (1999) noted that it is
difficult to correctly replace the ecosystem services of wetlands. Therefore, reducing the
sources of stormwater runoff should be a primary concern for the Wal-Mart site design.
After store construction is completed, the stormwater runoff from the permeable
areas such as the lawn, fields, and wooded areas on the site will continue to flow toward
the existing wetland area to the southeast of the site (DEIS, 2004). Applications of
pesticides and fertilizers to the lawns on the site will be washed into the adjacent
wetlands, which eventually empty into the Racquette River in Potsdam.
Ground Water Demand
The proposed Wal-Mart site is located too far from existing Potsdam water supply
lines to be incorporated into the town water distribution (DEIS, 2004; Brown, 2004).
Therefore, Wal-Mart will draw its water on-site from existing wells and two additional
19
wells (to serve as a buffer water supply during seasonal peaks and maintenance) (DEIS,
2004, 10). Wal-Mart plans to construct a 200,000 gallon, 145 foot tall water tower onsite to store water (Brown, 2004, 13). Additionally, a water treatment system will be
constructed (Brown, 2004, 13).
The anticipated water demand for the Wal-Mart site is +/- 7,000 gallons per day
(gpd) for the Wal-Mart Supercenter, 3,500 gpd for the existing restaurant, 300 gpd for the
proposed gas station (DEIS, 2004). Two outparcels were included in the original site
plans, and were expected to require 4,000 gpd of water, but have recently been eliminated
due to zoning regulations (Brown, pers. comm., 4/28/05). Therefore, the original water
demand was 14,800 gpd with the inclusion of these outparcels, but has recently been
reduced to a total of 10,800 gpd. Therefore, the total expected water demand for the site
is approximately 3,942,000 gallons annually. This volume may increase because WalMart has indicated that an additional well may be constructed to supply water for its
Garden Center, and the volume of water (unknown) will be in addition to the expected
total 10,800 gpd (DEIS, 2004). Wal-Mart plans to draw ground water for 12 hours/day
and then allow a recovery period for the aquifer of 12 hours/day (DEIS, 2004).
Some community members, including the Duncan family who live adjacent to the
proposed site, have expressed concern about Wal-Mart’s large groundwater demand and
its potential effects on the aquifer (Duncan, 7/22/2004). No test results have been
reported that demonstrate that the aquifer can support a demand of 10,800 gpd and nearly
4 million gallons per year (Brown, 2004, 14; Response to Public Comments on DEIS,
2005). This concern is addressed by the Draft Environmental Impact Statement: “no
problems are expected since the existing wells for the motel and restaurant have been
operating for years without any known impacts on neighboring property wells” (DEIS,
2004, 11). However, the Draft Environmental Impact Statement does not address the fact
that the existing wells have not previously supported a 10,800 gpd demand. According to
Shannon Brown, chairperson of Citizens for Responsible Growth, “the water issue may
seriously affect the future development on the proposed site, existing development, and
future development. Further, in the event that water sources are inadequate, taxpayers
may be required to pay for extending public water or for creating a water district in the
area” (Brown, 2004, 15). At this time, Wal-Mart is carrying out tests on the existing
20
wells to determine if this increased demand can be supported (DEIS, 2004; Response to
Public Comments on DEIS, 2005), however, the company does not address the possible
effects on the aquifer.
Sewage Treatment
The proposed on-site leach field is located adjacent to a jurisdictional federal
wetland area, and has the potential, without proper construction and/or proper
maintenance, to contaminate this wetland area. The proposed leach field is expected to
process approximately 4 million gallons of sewage annually (DEIS, 2004).
Energy Use
The proposed Wal-Mart store is planning to be open 24 hours per day, 365 days
per year (DEIS, 2004, 15). The store is expected to use 96.5 MBTU of energy per day,
which is equivalent to 28,274.2 kWh/day (DEIS, 2004, 95). This energy usage is nearly
three times the energy (kWh) used by the average residential home in the U.S. each year.
Electricity will be supplied by the Niagara Mohawk Company through power lines to the
site, and heat will be provided by propane combustion on-site (DEIS, 2004).
The Wal-Mart corporation states on its website (www.walmartstores.com) that the
construction of most Wal-Mart stores now incorporate skylighting that allows the store
lights to be dimmed during part of the day, and a more energy efficient lighting system
(T-8 low mercury fluorescent lamps and electronic ballasts have replaced the old T-12
system) that reduces the amount of electricity used for lighting by 15%.
Urban Sprawl / Zoning
The proposed Wal-Mart site falls into two zoning districts, ResidentialAgricultural (R-A) and Community Center (C-C), and a third Planned Development (PD) Overlay District (Brown, 2/15/2005; DEIS, 2004). The site of the proposed store is
located almost completely within the Residential-Agricultural (R-A) Zoning District,
however, retail stores are not a permitted form of development within this zone (Brown,
2004, 7). The zoning restrictions of this site have caused necessary modifications to the
proposed Wal-Mart site plan. Originally, the site included two outparcels, which have
21
since been removed from the site plans because they violated the acceptable forms of
development allowed in the P-D Overlay District (Brown, pers. comm., 28 April 2005).
The proposed site for the store is located outside of the Village of Potsdam, away
from other centers of existing large development. In addition to the Wal-Mart
Supercenter, there are plans for a gas station and two out-parcels with a restaurant and
possibly a bank. Large-scale development at this proposed site will effectively draw
future development away from the village center and contribute to sprawl. Instead of
concentrating development and the associated environmental impacts of development
(runoff, air pollution, light pollution, etc.) into a small core area, urban sprawl spreads
development and environmental degradation over a larger area, affecting more animal
populations and more ecosystems.
Air Quality
A traffic study conducted by Wal-Mart suggested that traffic volumes will
increase around the project site by at least 46% from current levels (DEIS, 2004). This
increase in traffic will also increase the air pollution from automobile emissions at the
site and in the nearby area.
Since the site is not serviced by town electricity lines, Wal-Mart plans to use onsite propane combustion to supply its energy needs (DEIS, 2004). However, the DEIS
does not outline the amounts and specific types of emissions from propane combustion
that are expected to be released on-site, but rather uses statistics from natural gas
combustion (Brown, 2004, 18).
Economic Impact
The economic issues surrounding Wal-Mart are complex and controversial, and
there is evidence that communities have both benefited and suffered from the
establishment of Wal-Mart in their areas. Since this report is focused on the
environmental impacts of Wal-Mart, we will not explore the economic implications of
the Wal-Mart fully. However, it is important to briefly address the economic information
that is known about the proposed Wal-Mart in Potsdam.
22
The anticipated gross annual revenue for the three Wal-Marts in St. Lawrence
County, including the proposed Wal-Mart in Potsdam and the existing stores in Massena
and Ogdensburg, is $60-80 million (Brown, pers. comm. 4/4/2005). However, since
Wal-Mart is a multi-national corporation, ¼ of that revenue is expected to exit the
county, meaning Wal-Mart would effectively be drawing money out of St. Lawrence
County (Brown, pers. comm. 4/4/ 2005).
Wal-Mart anticipates that the new store in Potsdam will provide 400 permanent
jobs to local people (DEIS, 2004). Figure 7 illustrates expected vs. actual retail
employment data for St. Lawrence County after the opening of the Ogdensburg Wal-Mart
(data is from the New York State Department of Labor) (Brown, 2004, 21). Even though
the retail employment rate in the county was expected to increase after the opening of
Wal-Mart in Ogdensburg, data over a three-month period showed an actual decrease in
retail employment.
Figure 7. Expected vs. actual employment in the retail sector of St. Lawrence County
before and after the opening of the Ogdensburg Wal-Mart (Brown, 2004). Data is from
the New York State Department of Labor.
Wal-Mart expects to pay $18,306 annually to the Town of Potsdam in property
taxes (DEIS, 2004). This property tax assessment was calculated by Wal-Mart itself,
even though Wal-Mart is not “legally authorized” to carry out the assessment (Brown,
2004, 22). Wal-Mart currently receives at least $218,010 in tax abatement from St.
Lawrence County for its stores in Ogdensburg and Massena (Brown, 2004, 22).
23
Social Impact
Currently, the area in the vicinity of the proposed Wal-Mart site is comprised of
small businesses, minimal lighting, and low traffic volumes (Brown, 2004). According to
the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, “the proposed Wal-mart development will be
consistent and compatible with the existing community character in the project vicinity
and will not negatively impact upon it” (DEIS, 2004, 26). However, in the opinion of S.
Brown, chairperson of Citizens for Responsible Growth, “the proposed Project
significantly and drastically alters the community characters near the proposed site.
When zoning districts are undermined, the community plan and community character are,
by definition, undermined” (Brown, 2004, 19).
VI. Development of Solutions to the Problem
The definition of solutions to the problem of Wal-Mart building a Supercenter in
Potsdam, New York can include a wide array of potential solutions. It is necessary when
doing a case study like this, to determine which of the potential solutions are most
feasible and which are the best. In order to determine which the best solutions are, we
must first parameterize them and define what variables an acceptable solution would
address. An acceptable solution would include a replacement plan for irreversibly
damaged wetland ecosystems and ecosystem services. It would also include a way to
reduce water pollution and groundwater demand, which both effect the wetland
ecosystem as well as the people who live near the site and get their water from the aquifer
in that area. One way to reduce water pollution by means of runoff is to reduce
impervious surfaces, which is a characteristic of an acceptable solution for us. This also
reduces the amount of irreversibly damaged wetlands. It is also considered necessary to
reduce the amount and impact of artificial light pollution, which can be done by reducing
the area of the developed site and by using ecologically better light bulbs. Another
variable that must be limited is the energy use of the store itself, and an acceptable
solution would do this, because this reduces the environmental impact of the store
globally. In addition, using locally produced construction materials, such as wood, and
incorporating green design into the building of the store would help reduce the global
24
ecological footprint of the store. These are the variables we feel are important in defining
an acceptable solution for this case study from an environmental stand point.
Solution 1: Do not build the Wal-Mart store
From our research we have determined many potential solutions to help reduce
the environmental impact of the proposed Wal-Mart store. The first is to not build the
store at all. This will eliminate any environmental impacts the store development might
have and would be best for the local environment. However, this is not that feasible
because there are a lot of people who want Wal-Mart to build a store here and the store is
already far along in the planning.
Solution 2: Find an alternative site for the store
The current site on Route 11 for the proposed Wal-Mart store is far from ideal.
The site is constrained on one side by Route 11 and on the other three sides by wetlands
that border the property. These wetlands are active, dynamic ecosystems, and there is
evidence from aerial photographs that all of the wetlands adjacent to the property have
increased in size in the past year (Brown, 2/13/2005). Due to this growth in the wetland
area, the required New York Sate Jurisdictional Wetlands Buffer Boundary has now
shifted and abuts the southeast corner of the proposed store, the main sewer lines, the
southeast corner of the parking lot, and the main truck delivery driveway (Brown,
2/13/2005). This change is of concern because untreated sewage lines and impervious
paved and building areas fall within the wetland boundary (Brown, 2/13/2005).
The size of the proposed store and garden center (+/-208,500 square feet), the
940+ space parking lot, the gas station, stormwater management detention ponds/wetland
facilities, the leach field, the water tower, and other structures on the property require
more space than the site area allows in order to provide adequate buffer for the adjacent
wetland ecosystems. Therefore, we propose that the site is not large enough to
accommodate the current scale of the development plan, particularly when the recent and
continuing expansion of the surrounding wetlands is considered, and that an alternative
site should be considered for construction.
25
An alternative site that has been proposed is on Route 56 North, however, this
area falls completely within a Residential-Agricultural (RA) zone (Brown, pers. comm.
4/4/2005). A second site that has been proposed is located on the Route 11B on the east
side of the Village of Potsdam, near the airport, however, it would be difficult to handle
the high volume of traffic using the existing roads to this site and it falls outside of the
public water district (Brown, pers. comm. 4/4/2005).
Solution 3: Remain at current site, but alter the site plan
Another solution is to keep the present site for the Wal-Mart store but alter the
site plan. This solution is the most viable because it takes into consideration both the pro
and con views on the presence of Wal-Mart in the Potsdam community. It does not
suggest drastic changes like the first two potential solutions, but it still helps to protect
the surrounding environment. There are quite a few changes that could be done to the
current site plan to improve the environmental impact it has.
Reduce store size
The store is currently proposed as a Wal-Mart Supercenter, which has an average
size of 186,077 ft2 (Wal-Mart Corporation 2004). But there are two other sizes of WalMart stores, both much smaller: the 98,079 ft2 Discount Store and the 42,286 ft2
Neighborhood Market Store (Wal-Mart Corporation 2004). The store could be built as
one of these other two sizes, preferably the Neighborhood Market Store because it is the
smallest. This would have many benefits, one of which is that there would be less
wetland area eliminated by the store and the benefits of these areas, like habitat and
ecosystem services, would not be destroyed (Semlitsch and Bodie 2002, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service 1990). The scale of pollution and sedimentation caused by the site
would also decrease overall (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1990). If the store was
smaller there would be a larger buffer of vegetation between the wetland and the store,
decreasing the impacts of runoff and sedimentation (Semlitsch and Bodie 2003). The
New York State DEC may require Wal-Mart to reduce the store size because the plan
would fill some of the federal buffer area around WD-34 (Brown 2005).
26
Reduce Parking Lot Size
The proposed parking lot size in the Wal-Mart site plans is 940+ parking spaces,
which creates a very large impervious surface on the site (Response to Public Comments
on DEIS, 2005). The St. Lawrence County Planning Department submitted a comment
on the DEIS that suggested that the parking lot size be reduced to the minimum parking
requirements of the Town of Potsdam, which is 1 parking space per 300 square feet of
gross building area, plus 1 parking space for every employee on shift (Response to Public
Comments on DEIS, 2005). This would reduce the parking lot size from 940+ spaces to
614 spaces plus one space for every employee on shift. Aerial photographs of the
Ogdensburg Wal-Mart parking lot, which is smaller than the proposed Potsdam Wal-Mart
parking lot, from April 2003 showed that the parking lot was underutilized (Response to
Public Comments on DEIS, 2005).
It is important to note that due to a recent increase in the areas of all of the
wetlands bordering the proposed Wal-Mart site, the southeast corner of the proposed
parking lot now falls within the New York State Jurisdictional Wetlands Buffer Boundary
(Brown, 2/13/2005). This reduction in parking lot size would reduce the amount of
impervious area of the site and allow for a larger buffer between the parking lot and the
wetlands adjacent to the site (Response to Public Comments on DEIS, 2005). Wal-Mart
responded to this suggestion of reduced parking lot size with the following statement:
“Wal-Mart has experience operating over 3000 retail facilities and based upon this
experience, is confident that the proposed parking ratio is necessary at the Potsdam
location to adequately and safely serve the site and its patrons” (Response to Public
Comments on DEIS, 2005). This response by the Wal-Mart Corporation is inadequate
because it in no way addresses the environmental issues that are caused by the large
parking lot.
We suggest that, taking into consideration the fact that the site is confined by
Route 11 on the north side and wetland systems to the east, south, and west, reducing the
parking lot size is necessary to provide adequate buffer zones between the development
on the site and the adjacent wetland ecosystems. Additionally, reducing the parking lot
size will reduce the proportion of the site that is covered by impervious surfaces, which
will decrease the rate of stormwater runoff and improve the water quality of the runoff.
27
Design functional mitigated wetlands
The current plan to replace the loss of wetlands caused by the Wal-Mart
Supercenter on this site is to build 1.24 acres of mitigated wetlands/stormwater detention
ponds (DEIS 2004). It is also uncertain if mitigated wetlands can even serve as
replacements for natural wetlands, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2001)
noted that most mitigated wetlands fail and Brown and Lant (1999) noted that it is
difficult to correctly replace the characteristics exhibited by wetlands. We suggest that
Wal-Mart build a mitigated wetland on a different piece of property. Wal-Mart could
purchase another area, perhaps a degraded area that they can build a wetland ecosystem
in that would be able to replace the ecosystem services and habitat lost by their
development project. This would not ensure that this mitigated wetland would work,
because wetlands are still very hard to build and maintain, but it would have a better
chance of working. It would not receive the high levels of pollutants and sediments from
parking lot and snowmelt, and it would not be dredged every 5-10 years. This would
help increase the habitat quality of that particular area and provide the mitigated wetland
ecosystem services required by law. It would take more time and expertise to manage the
mitigated wetlands properly, plus more money for a new location for them. Yet, the state
and federal requirements should make sure mitigated wetlands are well managed so that
they are actually able to replace the ecological benefits they are meant to do.
Buying Wetland Credits from a commercial wetland mitigation bank is an
alternative solution that would also provide a more reliable way to replace the ecosystem
services lost. Commercial wetland mitigation banking is a market-based technique that
provides consumers a way to buy and sell the environmental services provided by
wetlands (Robertson 2004). In 1996, there were 68 wetland mitigation banks in the
United States (Brown and Lant 1999). A private firm makes the initial investment of
buying and restoring a degraded area, then individuals or companies buy credits from
them based on how many acres they need to mitigate.
The bank will better manage these ecosystems than many companies or
individuals because they will benefit economically by ensuring the ecosystems health and
functionality (Robertson 2004). The banks can hire personnel that know how to manage
the wetlands properly, and they will not receive high levels of sediments and pollutants
28
from the development projects they mitigate for (Robertson 2004). However, this system
is not very well regulated and there is ample opportunity for individuals to take advantage
of it (Brown and Lant 1999). Some mitigation banks do not manage the wetlands
properly or they use land that is already wetland habitat and try to increase the services
provided by it (Brown and Lant 1999). These practices should not be used as a
replacement for USACE mitigation requirements because they do not ‘create’ new
wetland habitat to replace the filled or dredged areas. Also, mitigation banks remove the
benefits of wetlands from the local communities and concentrate them in certain areas
(Brown and Lant 1999). This is not beneficial for people in the Potsdam area because
they may not receive the ecosystem services that are being lost from their community.
For this project, if wetland credits are to be bought, there must be guidelines set on the
quality of the firm they are bought from, to ensure they meet the USACE requirements.
Build three on-site artificial wetlands for stormwater management
In the original DEIS submitted in October 2004, the site plan included only one
stormwater detention pond/wetland facility (DEIS, 2004). However, in the document
containing Wal-Mart’s responses to public comments on the DEIS (February 2005), WalMart announced a revised plan that included two detention ponds/wetland facilities.
However, we suggest that that plan be further revised to include three detention
ponds/wetland facilities. The main reason for this suggestion is that in order to maintain
the system, Wal-Mart plans to dredge the man-made wetlands every five years to remove
sediment build-up (DEIS, 2004). Dredging will severely disrupt the structure and
biological processes within these man-made wetlands, and they will require a recovery
period before they will be able to adequately function again as a stormwater management
system. Therefore, it is necessary to construct a system containing three separate
detention ponds/wetlands that are each at different stages of sedimentation and recovery
in order to ensure that stormwater runoff will be properly filtered before it is discharged
into the adjacent natural wetland ecosystems. The three components of a stormwater
management wetland system are a standard requirement of the Maine Department of
Environmental Protection for development sites (Courtemanch, pers. comm.).
29
Use environmentally-friendly lawn care products
A potential solution that could reduce the amount and toxicity of the chemicals
that will run off the Wal-Mart site is to use environmentally friendly lawn care products.
Fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides are often applied to lawn areas around housings and
building to make the lawn grow and look better. However, if too large of a quantity is
used, or there is heavy rain there is likely to be chemicals running off the site and into the
neighboring wetlands (EPA 2003). The pollutants can contaminate drinking water, such
as the underground aquifer in the vicinity of the proposed Wal-Mart store. Pesticide
runoff is harmful to aquatic organisms, particularly, as well as to humans (Stormwater
Manager’s Resource Center 2004).
It would be easy for Wal-Mart to reduce the amount of toxic runoff from lawn
care products. There are many different environmentally-friendly fertilizers, pesticides,
and herbicides on the market now that could be utilized by Wal-Mart. One suggestion is
to use organic compost instead of chemical fertilizers (Earth east 2005). There is also a
product on the market that is a time-release, water insoluble nitrogen fertilizer, which
releases nitrogen slowly so that plants have time to absorb it, reducing runoff (Eartheasy
2005). One alternative to chemical herbicides that is on the market, is to use corn gluten,
a nontoxic byproduct of corn processing (Eartheasy 2005). Corn gluten reduces weed
survival by 60%, controls 90% of weeds, and adds nitrogen to the soil (Eartheasy 2005).
The drawbacks of using environmentally-friendly fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides is
that they may be more expensive, but well worth the cost.
Incorporate more efficient water-use practices into the site design, including a gray
water recycling system
Under the current site design plan, the daily sewage discharge into the leach field
will equal the daily water demand (approximately 10,800 gallons) (DEIS, 2004). Due to
the concerns about the large demand on the aquifer, the high amount of energy needed to
pump 10,800 gpd of groundwater, and the potential impact of leach field leakage into
surrounding wetlands, reducing the input and output volumes of water at the site is an
important issue to address.
30
Gray water cycling systems have been incorporated into many urban building
designs, including a Wal-Mart store, known as the “Eco-Mart”, built in Lawrence,
Kansas in the early 1990s (Holt, 1993). Gray water is water that has been used in water
fountains and bathroom sinks, or collected from rooftop or parking lot runoff, which is
not contaminated by human waste. Gray water can be treated and then used to irrigate
lawns, irrigate plants, and recycled for flushing toilets. In the case of the proposed WalMart, the store roof will be 184,300 square feet and will shed 114,880.33 gallons of water
in a one-inch rainstorm (Duncan, 7/22/2004). With a simple collection system, this water
could be stored and used for lawn irrigation or irrigation of plants in the Lawn and
Garden Center.
Besides using gray water recycling systems, the building could install low-flush
toilets to decrease water demand. While a conventional toilet uses 3.5-5 gallons of water
per flush, low-flush toilets use 1.6 gallons or less per flush (US EPA).
Relocate the leach field away from the wetlands
The proposed leach field for the septic system would be located right behind the
store (Brown 2005). This location is very close and uphill to WD-34 and W-2. Although
a leach field is supposed to clean the harmful substances from the waste water
(Environmental Protection Agency 2002), it will also flow downhill and may leach into
the wetland (Brown 2005). Leach field design is based on several factors, such as the soil
type, the percolation rate, the water level, the quantity of waste water produced and
others (Lockwood 2005). The percolation rate shows how fast water can be absorbed,
based on the soil type (Lockwood 2005) and in the site of the leach field for the WalMart store, the soil is very saturated already because it is so close to the water table.
Since the wetlands in this area lead to the Raquette River and may recharge the ground
aquifer the location of the leach field could pose serious water contamination and health
hazards.
Data from the EPA show that septic systems are the second greatest threat to
groundwater quality (Environmental Protection Agency 2005). Septic systems can leach
nutrients and pathogens, such as different bacteria and viruses, into the nearby water
sources, such as the wetlands (Environmental Protection Agency 2003). If the pathogens
31
contaminate the water supply they could create a serious health hazard to those people
who use this water for their drinking supply (The Water Quality Program Committee,
Virginia Tech. 1996). Leaching nutrients and organic matter can cause algal blooms in
the wetland that reduces the dissolved oxygen level in the water when the algae all die at
the same time, which can cause suffocation of aquatic organisms (The Water Quality
Program Committee, Virginia Tech. 1996).
One potential solution is to move the leach field to a different location that is
farther away from the wetlands and the underground aquifer. This is a much needed plan
of action, but it is not very viable because of the space constraints on the site. If the store
and parking lot were smaller, there would be more space to move the leach field around
in and perhaps the possible human health and environmental impacts would be reduced.
Buy all or a portion of electricity from renewable sources
The Niagara Mohawk Company, from which Wal-Mart will be purchasing its
electricity, offers businesses the choice of buying all or a portion of their electricity from
renewable sources, such as wind, solar, and hydroelectric in the “Green Up Renewable
Energy Program” (www.nationalgridus.com/niagaramohawk). This program is aimed to
reduce the use of energy from non-renewable sources in New York state (81% of energy
used in 2002 was non-renewable), improving air quality and reducing dependence on
fossil fuel foreign imports (www.nationalgridus.com/niagaramohawk). Buying
renewable energy through this program would cost Wal-Mart an extra 1-2 cents per kWh,
depending on the source company and the market. Considering that Wal-Mart anticipates
using approximately 28,274 kWh per day, it would cost an extra $282 per day to buy
electricity from all renewable sources. This would result in an extra $103,200 annually.
However, based on information on energy price for large businesses on the Niagara
Mohawk website, Wal-Mart would most likely pay a minimum of 8-9 cents per kWh of
non-renewable energy (www.nationalgridus.com/niagaramohawk). Based on this price,
Wal-Mart will be paying a minimum of approximately $2,262 per day for electricity, and
$825,630 annually. Therefore, if Wal-Mart chose to buy all of its electricity from
renewable sources, it would result in a 12% energy price increase for Wal-Mart annually.
32
We realize that this is an ideal situation, and will most likely not be accepted by
the Wal-Mart Corporation. Therefore, we are suggesting that at the least, Wal-Mart
should agree to purchase 50% of its electricity from renewable sources, resulting in
paying an extra $51,600 per year. Considering that Wal-Mart is a multi-billion dollar
corporation, this extra price for renewable energy is not an unreasonable economic
sacrifice to request of Wal-Mart.
Include motion-activated parking lot lighting, energy efficient bulbs, and skylighting
in store
The Wal-Mart Supercenter is proposed as a 24-hour store, which means the lights
in the parking lot and around the store will be on every minute of every day. A potential,
and cost saving goal would be to reduce the amount of energy used for lighting. This can
be done very easily by installing the most energy efficient fluorescent bulbs indoors and
outdoors, and putting the outdoor lights on a motion-activated system that turns the lights
off when no one is near around them. Another thing that can be done to reduce the
impacts of artificial lighting is to have a smaller parking lot and store, and thus fewer
lights.
In addition to the concern over energy efficiency, the impact of light pollution on
the neighboring environments must be addressed. One option is to use low-pressure
sodium lamps, which reduce the negative impacts for some species, such as moths, yet
may also increase the impacts on other species, such as frogs and salamanders (Harder
2002). However, there may be other bulbs that are more effective.
Although Wal-Mart states that most of its new buildings include skylights in their
design, it is important to make sure that sufficient skylighting will be incorporated in
order to reduce dependence on electric lighting. With enough skylighting present in the
building, indoor electrical lights can be dimmed or completely turned off during the
daytime, reducing the energy demand and energy cost of the store.
Use local and sustainable building materials
Instead of using steel-beam construction, the “Eco-Mart” built in Lawrence,
Kansas was instead built using a wood-beam system with certified “sustainably
33
harvested” wood (Holt, 1993). Unlike steel, wood is a renewable resource, and it
requires 33% less energy than steel beams to produce (Holt, 1993). Considering the
proposed site’s proximity to many sustainable timber harvest operations in the
Adirondack region and the fact that Wal-Mart has carried out wooden construction in the
past, it would be fairly easy for Wal-Mart to utilize local and sustainable wood in the
store’s construction. Additionally, the international price of steel is currently rising, so
using a wood-beam construction instead of steel could be economically beneficial for
Wal-Mart.
VII. Feasibility of solutions
Solution 3 is the most feasible and involves keeping the same site for the store but
making modifications to the site plan to reduce the environmental impact of the store.
Reducing store size
Reducing the size of the store is feasible because the site plan infringes into the
100 ft wide buffer zone around WD-34 and from a conservation prospective, this should
not be allowed by NYS DEC regulations (Northern Ecological Associates, 2005). WalMart is applying for a permit to fill and mitigate this area, but it is our hope that the DEC
will do their job correctly and not allow this to happen.
Reducing parking lot size
Reducing the parking lot size is feasible, particularly considering that the other
two Wal-Mart parking lots in St. Lawrence County, and even the parking lot at the WalMart in Syracuse (a much larger city than Potsdam), are smaller than the proposed
Potsdam lot. Due to the recent growth of the wetlands surrounding the site and the
constraints on the site area, the parking lot may have to be reduced anyway to meet
wetland buffer zone requirements of the Department of Environmental Conservation and
the Army Corps of Engineers.
Design functional mitigated wetlands
Another solution is to improve the ability of the mitigated wetland to function as a
34
wetland, including providing habitat and ecosystem services. The options outlined earlier
are to buy new land to build a mitigated wetland on or to buy wetland credits from a
wetland mitigation bank. Both of these would cost Wal-Mart more money, but if it
meant the wetland habitat and ecosystem services were actually replaced, then it is worth
the costs. The biggest challenge for this solution is convincing, Wal-Mart or the Town of
Potsdam that the current mitigation plan is not satisfactory and making them change their
plan.
Building three artificial wetlands in stormwater management system
Incorporating a third detention pond/mitigated wetland area into the stormwater
management system would only require a slight change in design plans, but would ensure
that the large volume of stormwater runoff that will likely be produced by the impervious
surfaces on the site will be properly managed. Additionally, have three artificial
wetlands in various stages of succession after dredging will increase the likelihood that at
least one of them can serve as a mature, functioning wetland at all times, and possibly
provide habitat for some wetland species.
Use environmentally-friendly lawn care products
A really easy solution to help reduce chemical runoff into the surrounding
wetlands and water system is to use more environmentally friendly pesticides, herbicides,
and fertilizers (EPA 2003). There are many products available to use that are more
ecologically friendly and this solution would take only a little more money and some
basic knowledge about environmentally friendly agricultural chemicals.
Include motion-activated parking lot lighting, energy efficient bulbs, and skylighting
It is also relatively easy to install motion-activated parking lot lighting and to
more ecologically safe and energy efficient bulbs in the parking lot. Also, Wal-Mart has
already proven that designing stores to make use of more natural lighting is an
economically worthwhile solution. The company states on its website
(www.walmartstores.com) that most of its new buildings are designed with skylighting to
provide more natural lighting and reduce dependence on electric lighting during the day.
35
The design plans for the store must be reviewed, and possibly additional skylighting
suggested.
Best Solutions
Several solutions we define as our best and have highest potential to gain support
and get implemented. These solutions are to reduce store and parking lot size; improve
the design and functionality of the mitigated wetland system used, in order to best replace
the ecosystem services and habitat lost; use environmentally friendly lawn care products;
buy all or a portion of the electricity from a wind power source; use more efficient and
ecologically safe lighting inside and outside of the store; and to put the outdoor lighting
on a movement sensor to conserve energy use and reduce light pollution.
VIII. Ease of implementation
The ease of implementation of the different solutions can be divided into several
categories, this first one being cost savings solutions. The cost savings solutions are
using more energy efficient lighting and motion-activated parking lot lights, because both
of these will reduce the amount of energy used and save Wal-Mart money in the end.
Reducing the store and parking lot size will also save Wal-Mart money in construction
and energy costs; however this could seem as a loss of profit because the store will not
offer as many products.
Several other solutions may cause an increase in costs. Designing a wetland
system to better replace the habitat and ecosystem services lost may need more money to
buy new property or wetland credits. However, these costs are worth the protection they
will create for the surrounding human and natural communities, because of the benefits
wetlands provide. Another solution to reduce the energy use of the store is to buy all or a
portion of the electricity from a wind-power source. This will cost more, but in
comparison to how much they are predicted to spend on electricity it would not be a
substantial increase.
Several of these solutions are not based on money alone to implement them, but
need time and energy from Wal-Mart planners to design the best system. Most notably,
building and designing a better wetland mitigation system off site. This will take time for
36
someone to figure out the best possible way to design a mitigation system in order to
maximize the habitat and ecosystem services gained from it. Also, there would be more
time spent redesigning their construction plan to include more energy saving, and
sustainable building techniques.
IX. Challenges to Implementation
One of the major challenges of convincing Wal-Mart to accept these suggestions
is that they are not legally required to do so. Legally, they are only required to follow the
requests of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and
the US Army Corps of Engineers, the agencies that are responsible for approving permits
for the environmental damage that will occur on-site and in the wetlands adjacent to the
site. Therefore, unless there is additional pressure from the community and Lead Agency
(Town of Potsdam) that will approve or reject the DEIS and FEIS, to make further
changes in the site plan to incorporate more environmentally-friendly practices, WalMart will have no reason to make the additional effort of altering their plans.
At this point, after having conversations with Shannon Brown, the chairperson of
the group Citizens for Responsible Growth and Harold Demick, the chairperson of the
Potsdam Town Planning Board, it seems to us that the majority of the community and the
Town Planning Board do not consider these environmental concerns to be a priority.
Therefore, it will be challenging to try to convince the community and the town
government that environmental issues such as wetland degradation, stormwater runoff
pollution, high groundwater demand, high energy use, etc. are issues that require more
discussion and attention before plans for the Wal-Mart construction are approved.
However, public education and discussion of the environmental issues is critical before
this project is allowed to proceed.
X. Implementation Plan
We feel the most useful thing we can do now is share the information we have
gathered and share the ideas we have. We wrote an editorial to the Watertown Daily
Times, the Daily Courier-Observer, and North Country This Week explaining some of
our main points and we hope this will inform the public on some of the environmental
37
issues associated with the proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter. We will send similar letters
with copies of our final paper to people from the Potsdam Town Planning Board, County
Planning Board, NYS DEC, USACE, and the Wal-Mart Corporation to inform them of
our ideas. We will also submit a letter to USACE about the permit Wal-Mart has applied
for to fill and mitigate some of the wetlands on site. This permit was just applied for by
Wal-Mart and it is open for public comment from April 20, 2005 to May 19, 2005. From
these actions we hope to inform the public and involved agencies about our results so that
changes will be made to the site and construction plan of the proposed Wal-Mart store.
XI. Conclusion
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the Wal-Mart
Corporation to the Town of Potsdam inadequately addresses the potential initial and
continued environmental impacts that the Wal-Mart store will have on the surrounding
ecosystems. The current site design, which includes a large percentage of impervious
surfaces that encroach on the surrounding wetlands and wetland buffer zones, threatens
water quality and the integrity of the surrounding wetland ecosystems. The current
proposed “mitigated wetlands”, which double as the stormwater management detention
ponds, do not serve as sufficient, functional wetland habitat, and thus should not be
considered mitigated wetland areas to replace damaged natural wetlands.
In recognition that the Wal-Mart proposal is in its final stages of approval by the
town, and that a large portion of the community supports the project, we feel that calling
for the cessation of the project is unreasonable, but that modifications to the site and
building design are reasonable and absolutely essential to decrease its potential
environmental impacts. Before this project can be allowed to proceed, the Town of
Potsdam Planning Board, the St. Lawrence County Planning Board, the US Army Corps
of Engineers, the Department of Environmental Conservation, and the public must review
these environmental issues and discuss and develop ways to reduce the environmental
impacts of the proposed Wal-Mart. Additionally, there is much need for improvement
regarding public outreach for the agencies involved, particularly the lead agency (the
Town of Potsdam Planning Board). It is the responsibility of the Town of Potsdam to
actively educate the community about updates to the proposed project, make current and
38
reliable information about the project available to the community, and allow adequate
opportunity for public feedback on the project.
Literature Cited
Army Regulation 200-1. (1997) Environmental Quality: Environmental Protection and
Enhancement. Department of the Army, Washington, DC.
<http://www.usapa.army.mil/pdffiles/r200_1.pdf>
Brown, P. P. and C. L. Lant. 1999. The effect of wetland mitigation banking on the
achievement of no-net-loss. Environmental Management. 23(3): 333-345.
Brown, S. February 25, 2005. Personal Communication.
Brown, S. March 9, 2005. Personal Communication.
Brown, S. 4 April 2005. Interview.
Brown, S. April 28, 2005. Personal communication.
Brown, S. 2004. Evaluation of the Wal-mart Stores, Inc. Draft Environmental Impact
Statement Dated 19 October 2004. Submitted to H. Demick, Chairman of Town
of Potsdam Planning Board, NY.
Brown, S. Citizens for Responsible Growth. Letter to B. Brown, US Army Corps of
Engineers. 16 January 2005.
Brown, S. Citizens for Responsible Growth. Letter to S.L. LeBarron, Regional Director
of New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 13 February
2005.
Brown, S. Citizens for Responsible Growth. Letter to J. Ward, Chairman of Town of
Potsdam Zoning Board of Appeals, NY. 21 February 2005.
Courtemanch, D. Maine Department of Environmental Protection, Water Quality Bureau.
Personal Communication, 6 March 2005.
Cylinder, P.D., K.M. Bogdan, E. M. Davis and A. I. Herson. (1995). Wetland regulations:
a complete guide to Federal and California programs. Solano Press Books, Point
Arena, CA.
Dahl T. E. 2000. Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminous United States 19861997. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington D.C.
82 pp.
39
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Wal-Mart Supercenter (DEIS). F-E-S
Associates, APD Engineering, Northern Ecological Associates. Submitted
10/19/2004 to Town of Potsdam, NY.
Duncan, C.S. Letter to Town of Potsdam Planning Board, NY. 22 July 2004.
Eartheasy. Last updated 2005. Natural Lawn Care. Viewed April 5, 2005.
<http://eartheasy.com/grow_lawn_care.htm>
Environmental Laboratory. (1987). “Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual”.
Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, MS.
Findlay, C. S. and J. Houlahan. 1996. Anthropogenic correlates of species richness in
southeastern Ontario wetlands. Conservation Biology. 11(4): 1000-1009
Gaffield, S.J.; Goo, R.L.; Richards, L.A. and R.J. Jackson. 2003. Public health effects
of inadequately managed stormwater runoff. American Journal of Public Health.
93(9): 1527-1533.
Gibbs, J. P. 2000.Wetland loss and biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology.
14(1): 314-317.
Harder, B. 2002. Derived of darkness. Science News. 161(16): 248-249.
Holt, C. 1993. Mainstream green at Wal-Mart. Visual Merchandising and Store Design.
124(10): 31-39.
Joyal, L.A., M. McCollough, and M. L. Hunter Jr. 2001. Landscape ecology approaches
to wetland species conservation: a case study of two turtle species in Southern Maine.
Conservation Biology. 15(6): 1755- 1762.
Kimball, John W. Last updated July 1, 2004. “Ecosystem Productivity”. Kimball’s
Biology Pages. Viewed April 3, 2005.
<http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/N/NetProductivity.html>
Larson, J. S., A. J. Mueller, and W. P. MacConnell. 1980. A model of natural and maninduced changes in open freshwater wetlands on Massachusetts coastal plain. Journal
of Applied Ecology. 17: 667-673.
Lehner, B. and P. Doll. 2004. Development and validation of a global database of lakes,
reservoirs and wetlands. Journal of Hydrology. 296: 1-22.
Lockwood, K. Last updated April 1, 2005. Septic systems: an engineer’s view. Viewed
April 5, 2005. <http://www.inspect-ny.com/septic/lockwood.htm>
40
Meyerson, H. Wal-Mart nation. American Prospect. January 2004. 15 (1): 46.
Mitsch, W. J. and J. G. Gosselink (2000). Wetlands: third edition. John Wiley and Sons,
Inc. New York, NY.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). New York
DEC Stormwater Information.
http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dow/mainpage.htm
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Amended on Sept. 9, 1985.
Freshwater wetlands permit requirements regulations. Viewed April 3, 2005.
<http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/regs/part663.html>
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Last updated April 3, 2003.
Wetland Functions and Values. Viewed April 3, 2005.
<http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dfwmr/habitat/fwwprog2.htm>
Niagara Mohawk National Grid Company.
http://www.nationalgridus.com/niagaramohawk/
Northern Ecological Associates. April 20, 2005. Application for permit under authority of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. Buffalo District.
Ortega, B. 1999. Organizing Wal-Mart: an anti-union company bests labor. Working
USA. 2(5): 40-53.
Parris, T.M. 2004. Managing stormwater. Environment. 46(9): 3.
Response by Wal-Mart to Public Comments of Draft Environmental Impact Statement.
Submitted to Town of Potsdam. February 2005.
Robertson, M. M. 2004. The neoliberalization of ecosystem services: wetland mitigation
banking and problems in environmental governance. Geoforum. 35: 361-373.
Saunders, D. L., J. J. Meeuwig, and A. C. J. Vincent. 2001. Freshwater protected areas:
strategies for conservation. Conservation Biology. 1(1): 30-41.
Semlitsch, R. D. and J. R. Bodie. 2002. Biological criteria for buffer zones around
wetlands and riparian habitats for amphibians and reptiles. Conservation Biology.
17(5): 1219-1228.
Stephen, A. America. New Statesman. 27 October 2003. 132(27): 12-13.
Stone, K.E. 1995. Impact of Wal-Mart stores on Iowa communities: 1983-93. Economic
41
Development Review. 13(2): 60-69.
Stormwater Manager’s Resource Center. Last updated Aug. 9, 2004. Pollution prevention
fact sheet: landscaping and lawn care. Viewed April 5, 2005.
<http://www.stormwatercenter.net/Pollution_Prevention_Factsheets/Landscapingand
LawnCare.htm>
Thompson, D.A. and T. G. Yocom. 1993. Uncertain Ground. Technology Review. (Aug.
/Sept.) 96: 20-29.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. Last updated 2003. History of the regulatory
program. Viewed April 24, 2005.
<http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/functions/cw/cecwo/reg/reghist.pdf>
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). How to Conserve Water and Use
it Effectively. http://www.epa.gov/OW/you/chap3.html
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Final determination sheet. Office
of Water. <http://www.epa.gov/safewater/uic/fact6-7-02text.pdf>
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. After the storm: a citizen’s guide
to understanding stormwater. EPA 833-B-03-002.
<http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/after_the_storm.pdf>
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. Decentralized wastewater
treatment systems: a program strategy. U.S. EPA Publications Clearinghouse.
Cincinnati, OH.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2001. Threats to Wetlands, EPA843-F01-002d. Office of wetlands, oceans and watersheds.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2001. Threats to Wetlands Fact Sheet.
EPA 843-F-01-002d. Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1995. America's wetlands: Our vital
link between land and water. Office of Water, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and
Watersheds. EPA843-K-95-001.
Wal-Mart Corporation. www.walmartstores.com
Wal-Mart Corporation. Last updated Oct. 31, 2004. New York community impact.
Viewed April 5, 2005. <www.walmart.com>
Water Quality Program Committee, Virginia Tech. 1996. Septic system maintenance.
Publication Number 448-400. <http://www.ext.vt.edu/pubs/housing/448-400/448400.html>
42
Winters, D. Feb. 13, 2005. Potsdam Wal-Mart Supercenter plan now focused on route 11
vicinity. Watertown Daily Times, New York.
Zhu, W.X. and J.G. Ehrenfeld. 1999. Nitrogen mineralization and nitrification in
suburban and undeveloped Atlantic white cedar wetlands. Journal of
Environmental Quality. 28(2): 523-9.
43