rg4n

Tom Linehan Representatives of the Allandale Neighborhood Association and RG4N met with Lincoln Properties' attorney Bruce Scrafford Wednesday night to get an overview of the changes planned for the Wal-Mart at Northcross.

The most important change is the store will...

RG4N's Candidate Forum last night was well-attended. We sent the candidates our questions in advance and their responses provided much food for thought.

You can read the questions we asked by clicking here.

From "Dataholic" on this story.

I still owe you guys at least one more installment of "What RG4N cost the city" which will be focused on lost opportunities to do the site better, but in the meantime, please read this:

Now that RG4N has struck out, it's time to assess the damage. RG4N is interpreting the judge's decision not to comment on three of their four complaints as evidence that they were valid which is spectacularly delusional.

Good show, folks. Thanks to the Chronicle for, even now, supporting RG4N's desperate attempt to spin this as something other than a complete truth-slap.

Now that RG4N has struck out, it's time to assess the damage. RG4N is interpreting the judge's decision not to comment on three of their four complaints as evidence that they were valid which is spectacularly delusional.

Good show, folks. Thanks to the Chronicle for, even now, supporting RG4N's desperate attempt to spin this as something other than a complete truth-slap.

Today, the 200th Judicial District Court of Travis County issued its ruling on our lawsuit. The court ruled that the site plan approval was consistent with city ordinances.

RG4N is disappointed with this verdict.

But we are not done fighting.

We are merely back where we were one year ago, when neighbors resoundingly said, "No!" to this irresponsible development.

And in the court of public opinion, Wal-Mart, Lincoln and the City of Austin have been losing since Day One.

One of the many pieces of excrement flung against the wall by RG4N's trained staff of lawyers was an ITE Journal article in which the author asserted a disproportionate (to square footage) traffic impact for "free-standing discount superstores" over 200,000 square feet.

The conclusion, in other words, was that 199,999 square feet stores should have a trip generation figure of X per square foot; while 200,000 square foot stores should have a trip generation figure of Y, where Y is much larger than X.

One of the many pieces of excrement flung against the wall by RG4N in the desperate hope something would stick was an ITE Journal article in which the author asserted a disproportionate (to square footage) traffic impact for "free-standing discount superstores" over 200,000 square feet.

Michael King writes that we should support RG4N even though their case is utterly without merit as even their news staff is beginning to discover, months too late.

Here's a comment I just placed there:

Three organizations (Crestview, Allandale, and RG4N) have taken up funds to support two lawsuits (Allandale and RG4N) against "Big Box" at northcross.

Funds collected by Crestview are donated to Allandale's lawsuit fund.

The big differences between Allandale and RG4N is
1) RG4N's lawsuit is broader (as described below) and
2) RG4N is proposing an alternate view for developing northcross (or a part of the northcross property) to an urban mixed use center.

Please go to their websites for more and better clarification.