Wednesday, April 26, 2017     Volume: 31, Issue: 39

Weekly Poll
Are you concerned about the recent deaths in the SLO County jail?

Yes, there are obviously some very severe problems and we need a change in leadership.
Yes, but more people die in local hospitals than in our jail. A few deaths per year is to be expected.
No, I think the press is exaggerating. These things happen.
No, I'm not concerned. These people are criminals.

Vote! | Poll Results

RSS Feeds

Latest News RSS
Current Issue RSS

Special Features
Search or post SLO County food and wine establishments

New Times / News

The following article was posted on April 24th, 2013, in the New Times - Volume 27, Issue 39 [ Submit a Story ]
The following articles were printed from New Times [] - Volume 27, Issue 39

Judge tentatively clears the way for Wal-Mart


Legal efforts to halt the construction of a Wal-Mart supercenter north of downtown Atascadero appear defeated for the moment. Judge Jac Crawford issued a preliminary ruling on April 19 denying citizens group Save Atascadero’s petition to force city officials to redo the environmental assessment of the project.

The ruling, if adopted as a final decision, will allow Wal-Mart to begin construction on the 129,560-square-foot box store. Members of the city council who unanimously approved the Wal-Mart project in June 2012 thanked city attorney Brian Pierik, who argued the case in the Paso Robles county courthouse March 19.

“Thank you for a job well done,” Mayor Tom O’Malley told Pierik at the council’s April 23 meeting. “It was a very long process.”

Some Atascadero residents, including neighbors of the project, have complained since plans to build the store surfaced in 2006 that the project threatens to increase traffic congestion and degrade air quality in the area.

Save Atascadero’s lawsuit claimed violations to the California Environmental Quality Act for the city’s alleged failure to include one particular air study in its final report, and for punting a review of how the project will impact air quality in combination with neighboring development.

Crawford disagreed. The judge stated in the opinion that the city adequately disclosed information and properly relied on the expertise of an outside agency in finding that the project wouldn’t pose significant air quality impacts.

“The City did not fail to proceed as required by law,” Crawford wrote.

Save Atascadero also unsuccessfully claimed that the city improperly amended its general plan to accommodate the supercenter project.

Group spokesman Tom Comar said he didn’t expect another hearing before Crawford adopts the tentative ruling. Save Atascadero lawyers haven’t yet decided whether to appeal the decision.