This seemed like a longshot - a coalition of community and union groups tried to get a restraining order on construction of the Walmart grocery, despite the retailer having all the necessary permits and approvals. Opponents say that the store will endanger the neighborhood's character and create financial hardships for smaller merchants. They also say that Walmart failed to provide the required public notices. They sound like thin arguments. Does anyone believe this would be happening if the name of the store were anything other than Walmart? At a hearing this morning, Judge James Chalfant said that the construction isn't causing irreparable harm to the environment (h/t KPCC). This isn't the end of it - a court hearing will be held in November on the project. For now, construction carries on.
More by Mark Lacter:
American-US Air settlement with DOJ includes small tweak at LAXSocal housing market going nowhere fast
Amazon keeps pushing for faster L.A. delivery
Another rugged quarter for Tribune Co. papers
How does Stanford compete with the big boys?
Those awful infographics that promise to explain and only distort
Best to low-ball today's employment report
Further fallout from airport shootings
Crazy opening for Twitter*
Should Twitter be valued at $18 billion?
Recent Retail stories:
Sears store and warehouse in Boyle Heights soldAmazon keeps pushing for faster L.A. delivery
Holiday shopping: On your marks, get set... spend!
Ron Burkle buying most of Fresh & Easy chain
More than a third of all electric car sales come from L.A., S.F.
New at LA Observed
On the Politics Page
Go to Politics
Sign up for daily email from LA Observed