Littleton – When the Aspen Grove mall opened along Santa Fe Drive in 2001, the opposition was a token movement at best.
For most residents, the mall didn’t seem to be a detriment to a stretch of busy highway that includes a rock and gravel company, an aging mobile-home park and another mall being planned nearby.
Much of the development around Santa Fe Drive and neighboring South Platte Park – from the mall with 50 stores and the neighboring light-rail station with acres of parking – has generated little debate.
Until now.
A proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter has some residents raising concerns about water, noise and light pollution. And, opponents say, the 24-acre project along this Littleton commercial corridor threatens the health of South Platte Park.
“(That’s) 24 acres, 24-7,” said Donna Jesenovec, of the citizens group Littleton Against Wal-Mart.
The all-hours nature of the Supercenter sets it apart from its neighbors, said Wal-Mart opponents. From what they have seen of other Supercenters, it will be acres of asphalt and unceasing noise and light.
“I’m going to be awake 24 hours a day listening to their air-conditioning unit and delivery trucks coming in and out,” said Linda Knofinke, who lives a block and a half away.
Bill Wertz, Wal-Mart’s Denver spokesman, said the company would work with the city and the property’s neighbors to design the store appropriately.
The city would require a buffer of vegetation between the store and the park, and designers could minimize light and noise problems, Wertz added.
Mary Roberts, Littleton’s chief planner, said the Wal-Mart issue is perhaps a backlash to the area’s development.
“For people who have lived in Littleton for a long time, they’ve watched a lot of changes to the Sante Fe corridor,” she said. “You have people who remember it when it was turf farms and horse ranches.”
No public hearings are set yet.
Wal-Mart has faced increasingly stiff opposition in communities locally and nationally in recent years.
A proposed Wal-Mart outlet was on seven local ballots nationwide in 2005, with Wal-Mart winning six, including a victory in Westminster.
In the Westminster campaign, Wal-Mart spent $150,000 to opponents’ $30,000, scrapped together by unions and a citizens group.
If Littleton’s planning commission and City Council vote in favor of Wal-Mart, opponents say they would seek a ballot measure to let residents settle the matter. “We’ll bring out the guns wherever we have to,” said Susan Burgstiner.
Littleton residents began organizing in the spring, soon after Wal-Mart began working with city staff on its rezoning.
The United Food and Commercial Workers Union is assisting the Littleton opposition group. Dave Minshall, a media strategist for the union, said he has been involved in about five Wal-Mart protests.
Kevin Sheridan, the Washington, D.C., spokesman for a group called Working Families for Wal-Mart, said Littleton should be aware of outside players.
“Every community is unique and local concerns should always be taken seriously, but if residents see a union-led campaign to attack Wal-Mart, they should ask what’s really behind it,” he said. “They may find it’s special-interest politics.”
Daniel Pratt of Lakewood, a member of the state committee for Working Families for Wal-Mart, said he has no qualms with Wal-Mart opponents. “If they don’t want to shop at Wal-Mart, that’s fine with me,” he said. “But don’t try to take my Wal-Mart from me.”
Wal-Mart wars
The following are some of the recent disputes over proposed Wal-Marts in Colorado.
Thornton – November 2005: After more than a year of protests by residents and mixed messages from the City Council, Thornton voters support zoning that would allow for a big-box store at East 128th Avenue and Quebec Street. Some residents had feared that a proposed 24-hour Wal-Mart would increase traffic and alter the environment.
Westminster – November 2005: Voters narrowly support the construction of a Wal-Mart Supercenter at West 72nd Avenue and Sheridan Boulevard. The issue made the ballot after citizens with support from labor unions disagreed with the City Council’s approval of the project.
Loveland – February 2005: An effort to unionize Wal-Mart’s tire and lube center loses in a 17-1 vote. Union officials blame the defeat on worker intimidation and voting irregularities, but the National Labor Relations Board recommended dismissing the claims for lack of evidence.
North Denver – September 2004: Wal-Mart allows an option to purchase the former Elitch Gardens site to expire without submitting a development proposal. Hundreds of residents had objected to potential increased traffic, congestion and architectural changes the development might bring.
Gunnison – September 2004: After months of disagreement and impassioned citizen debate over a proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter, city officials agree to a six-month moratorium on big-box developments to research the effects of large retailers in other towns.
