U.K. SITE FIGHT: ASDA WINS APPROVAL IN BURY ST. EDWARDS
ASDA: Final green light [Bury Free Press (U.K.)]
Construction work on the new ASDA store, in Bury St Edmunds, is to begin after a detailed application was approved by planners.
The supermarket giant already had outline permission for a store and business centre in Western Way.On Thursday, St Edmundsbury Borough Council’s development control committee approved plans outlining the size, layout and appearance of the two buildings.
The store, on track to open in the spring, will feature 6,834sqm of floorspace and 361 car parking spaces, while the business centre will have floorspace of 2,019sqm and 31 parking spaces.
Topics: | | | | | United Kingdom
Posted by Luke West on Friday, October 10, 2008 | Permalink
MINNESOTA SITE FIGHT: WAL-MART MIGHT OCCUPY UNDEVELOPED LAND
Sartell may get Wal-Mart, Sam’s Club [St. Cloud Times (Minn.)]
SARTELL — The rumors about what might be built in Sartell on almost 100 acres along Minnesota Highway 15 have run wild for years.
It now looks like a Wal-Mart Supercenter and Sam’s Club could anchor two ends of the property. A proposal going before the Sartell Planning Commission and City Council next month puts some certainty to the 97 acres, which is owned by Sartell Partners LLC.
Wal-Mart would build a 176,000-square-foot store on 18.2 acres on the north side of the property, according to the site plan submitted by developers. A 142,000-square-foot Sam’s Club would be built on 16 acres on the other end of the property. A gas station and car wash are also proposed.
Wal-Mart Supercenters typically include retail, a grocery store and a seasonal garden center. Sam’s Clubs are warehouse stores that offer bulk purchases.
Read the rest of this story ...
Topics: | Community Impact | Environment | Traffic/Sprawl | | |
Posted by Luke West on Friday, October 10, 2008 | Permalink
CALIFORNIA SITE FIGHT: MORE ON WAL-MART’S ENVIRONMENTAL REJECTION IN LODI
Lodi Planning Commission rejects Wal-Mart environmental report [The Record (Calif.)]
LODI – The Lodi Planning Commission voted 5-1 Wednesday night against certifying an Environmental Impact Report for a proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter in West Lodi.
Community Development Director Rad Bartlam recommended approval of the EIR, saying it meets all the city’s specifications, but that wasn’t enough for commissioners who wanted to see further analysis on how a Supercenter could affect small businesses in Lodi, especially during tough economic times.
“My main concern is blight in existing buildings,” said Commissioner Randall Heinitz, who said he thinks a Supercenter that sells groceries could knock smaller grocers out of business, leaving storefronts vacant.
Commissioner Bill Cummins was the lone vote in favor of the project. Commissioner Tim Mattheis recused himself because his wife is an attorney for a group opposing Wal-Mart.
The Carnegie Forum was filled to its capacity with people in favor of, and in opposition of a Lodi Supercenter being built to replace the giant retailer’s current location on Kettleman Lane.
Topics: | | Community Impact | Environment | | |
Posted by Luke West on Friday, October 10, 2008 | Permalink
CALIFORNIA SITE FIGHT: FORUM ON BIG BOX BAN IN ATASCADERO NEXT WEEK
In June, the Atascadero City Council decided to put a measure on the ballot asking voters to cap the square footage of big box stores. Measure D-08 would also cap grocery store space. The measure is also referred to as the “Shield Initiative.”
“It would stop the Wal-Mart that’s currently proposed, which is a Supercenter,” said Tom Comar, spokesperson for Oppose Wal-Mart and Vote Yes on Measure D-08.
“I think Atascadero needs to be more business-friendly to new businesses that need to come to our area to stimulate business,” said Atascadero business owner Kelly Long, a Wal-Mart supporter.
“Measure D-08 will cap the size of a big box store - 150,000 square feet - and stop a Supercenter, which has a grocery component. It doesn’t stop a Wal-Mart department store from coming in,” added Comar.
Also see: Letter: Welcome Wal-Mart [New Times (Calif.)]
Read the rest of this story ...
Topics: | Community Impact | | |
Posted by Luke West on Friday, October 10, 2008 | Permalink
CALIFORNIA SITE FIGHT: MORE ON THE VICTORY IN SANTA ROSA
Judge Halts Proposed Santa Rosa Wal-Mart [KPIX-TV (Calif.)]
A Sonoma County Superior Court judge has ruled that the environmental impact report on a proposed Wal-Mart in Roseland is vague and inconsistent regarding traffic impacts, parking and noise levels.
Judge Robert Boyd issued his ruling Sept. 25 on the challenge to the project by Citizens Against Wal-Mart. The group sued the city of Santa Rosa, the City Council and Wal-Mart to stop the proposed 106,000-square-foot store in the Stony Point Plaza Shopping Center.
The City Council approved Wal-Mart’s environmental study and use permit in 2006.
The group challenged the environmental impact report, claiming it failed to include a clear project description and did not address traffic impacts, noise levels and insufficient parking.
Read the rest of this story ...
Topics: | Community Impact | Environment | Traffic/Sprawl | legislation | Zoning Regulations | | |
Posted by Luke West on Friday, October 10, 2008 | Permalink
NEW YORK SITE FIGHT: SUFFOLK COUNTY SUPREME COURT DENIES WAL-MART
Wal-Mart Riverhead opening barred [Newsday (N.Y.)]
A Suffolk County Supreme Court judge has overturned the Riverhead Town Board’s approval of plans to construct a 169,547-square-foot Wal-Mart supercenter with a car repair shop and a food center near the Tanger Outlets on Route 58.
Judge Thomas F. Whelan ruled that Wal-Mart’s site plan violated the town’s zoning codes for that area and the town’s comprehensive plan. Whelan also concluded in his decision, issued Monday, that the town board did not have the authority to grant Wal-Mart variances of zoning restrictions.
The supercenter, which the retailer has in other states and which also includes a supermarket and garden center, would have been Long Island’s first.
“The Town Board, in its role as site plan administrator, cannot approve site plan applications that run counter to the Town Law, its Comprehensive Plan, and its own zoning code,” Whelan wrote. “One of the most cherished principles of our democracy is the respect and deference accorded our governing laws by our citizenry. Town Boards are not exempt from that fundamental ideal.”
Also see: Riverhead, NY. Court Nixes Town Approval of Wal-Mart [Battle-Mart Blog]
Read the rest of this story ...
Topics: | legislation | | |
Posted by Luke West on Friday, October 10, 2008 | Permalink
Riverhead, NY. Court Nixes Town Approval of Wal-Mart
Wal-Mart suffered another legal setback this week on Long Island. Newsday reports that the town of Riverhead, New York---which already has a Wal-Mart discount store on Old Country Road---has had its approval of a Wal-Mart supercenter overturned. The giant retailer wanted to build a 169,548 sf. store on Route 58, which would have been the first supercenter on crowded Long Island. Despite approval by the Riverhead Town Board, local residents refused to take ‘yes’ for an answer, and threw the case into court. On October 6th, Judge Thomas F. Whelan of the Suffolk County Supreme Court tossed out the Town Board’s approval. The judge ruled that Wal-Mart’s site plan violated the town’s zoning code, and the town’s comprehensive plan. According to the court, the Town Board did not have the discretion to give Wal-Mart variances from the zoning restrictions.
“The Town Board, in its role as site plan administrator, cannot approve site plan applications that run counter to the Town Law, its Comprehensive Plan, and its own zoning code,” Judge Whelan wrote. “One of the most cherished principles of our democracy is the respect and deference accorded our governing laws by our citizenry. Town Boards are not exempt from that fundamental ideal.” Two lawsuits had been filed against Riverhead and Wal-Mart in the wake of town approval in June of 2007. The owner of a shopping center on Route 58 and Riverhead residents filed the lawsuits. The plaintiffs were pleased with the outcome of their court battle. “It’s a rational, sound, well-written decision,” said James Gaughran, the attorney who filed the appeal on behalf of Riverhead residents. “I think it will be difficult for them to overturn on appeal.”
Wal-Mart issued its standard disclaimer in such cases, noting that the real losers in this battle were Wal-Mart customers. “We are obviously disappointed in the decision,” Wal-Mart told the media. “Our customers in the area were very much looking forward to shopping in the upgraded Wal-Mart store that was planned for Riverhead. In addition, the project would have created about 100 construction jobs during that phase of the project, as well as about 100 additional permanent jobs at the store, when construction was complete.”
Read the rest of this story ...
Topics: Lawsuits
Posted by Al Norman on Friday, October 10, 2008 | Permalink
U.K. SITE FIGHT: INVERNESS TO EXAMINE ASDA PLANS
Asda welcomes inquiry support [Inverness Courier (U.K.)]
SUPERMARKET chain Asda today welcomed the support from across the local community for its proposed new store in Inverness as the date for local public inquiry draws closer.
Local residents, community councils, and MSPs are to support the plans submitted jointly by the supermarket chain and Elphinstone Land.
Lisa Rooke, property communications manager for the supermarket was pleased with support ahead of the inquiry on 20th October.
“I am delighted to see such wide endorsement from across the Inverness community,” she said. “We have had excellent feedback from the public through our consultation with the Inverness community and from local politicians.
“We look forward to the inquiry and strongly believe that a positive outcome will enable us to provide much needed supermarket choice in Inverness.”
Fergus Ewing, SNP MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, said he had been contacted by many constituents regarding the proposed store — the majority of which he said were in support.
Read the rest of this story ...
Topics: | | | United Kingdom
Posted by Luke West on Thursday, October 09, 2008 | Permalink
