Opinion » Local
Let's hope they made the right choice
Print this story | Email this story
Leander is caught in a firestorm over what type of housing projects the city council wants built. The incidence over a project planned for the Reagan-Parmer corridor won't be the last time Leander says no to a housing development, even one which will bring water and waste water to a part of the city, where little exists. The council's 5-2 decision did not sit well with either landowners in the area or the developers wishing to build the development.
The council's problem is that the builder's plan calls for 50-foot lots. Generally in Leander and Cedar Park in the last 10 years or so, 50-foot lots have meant homes that fit on the lower end of the price scale. Right now there is a feeling on the Leander council that there is already enough of this type of housing in the city and they don't need more in this area.
I don't know if any of the council would make such a politically incorrect statement but this type of thing is happening more and more in this area. Cedar Park neighbors in the area of Old Mill and Lakeline just protested and helped block another apartment complex from coming to their neighborhood.
The biggest difference with this situation in Leander is the city council is the one saying no, not the neighbors. As a matter of record, the neighbors in the Reagan-Parmer Corridor Association want the development as the builder, KB Homes, is going to bring water and wastewater to the area, something which is not currently there and will bring faster growth to that part of town.
Leander has a lot of land that will be developed during the next 20 years and the questions of what type of development we want and where we want them will come.
Leander residents might want to ask their council members exactly why the project was rejected and then decide for themselves whether Leander wanted the development. One thing is certain; every new development in Leander will not look like Crystal Falls.
City planning is important if you want to have the highest quality of life possible. The council obviously didn't think this one was what we needed and they are taking the heat for their decision. I hope it is worth it.
Reader Comments
Mr. Observant wrote on Jul 14, 2008 5:42 PM:
Marci Cannon wrote on Jun 2, 2008 1:59 PM:
- KB voluntarily imposed an 'A' architecture to entire development (never been done before and much higher standards than any housing development approved within recent years).
- KB voluntarily imposed a 'Tree Preservation Policy' (over and beyond city code and again never been done before in a residential development - which would have led to the saving of at least 2,000 trees).
- KB voluntarily imposed a 1585 square feet minimum on the 50-foot lots, which the city code allows for 1,200 square feet.
I just want to make it clear that the proponents of this development were not pushing a 'lower-end' development in order to get water and wastewater. We were in favor of this development because it was the highest and best use that Leander has ever been proposed. It was going to bring multi-use to a very important intersection.
Seeing the state of the economy, we have to ask our council members if this type of development isn't the 'vision' of Leander than bring us one that is better - but do it quick because Leander needs the development dollars to support the planned growth. We would rather quality development projects pay for our infrastructure instead of Leander taxpayers. "
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
MORE Local
- Buddies remember their friend, hero
- Let's hope they made the right choice
- Remembering our fallen hero
MOST COMMENTED STORIES
- Leander election ends - finally! (58)
- Leander candidates drop out of forum (42)
- EARLY VOTING: Leander early voting ends above 600 (38)
- Wild election comes to an end (37)
- BREAKING NEWS: Proposed facility in Leander to provide 4,000 jobs (29)
- Cowman says tax lien a mistake (27)
- Leander Mayor Pro-Tem to hold press conference (23)
- Will they avoid us in tough times? (23)
Mr. Observant wrote on Jul 14, 2008 5:44 PM: