Friday, Jan. 11, 2008

Letters to the Editor

Dear Editor:

It was interesting to read the brief comments from the Mayor of Highland Village on the expansion of 2499. It wasn’t a surprise that she focused on traffic and development and not on the safety of the citizens of Highland Village. The Mayor and the members of the City Council ignore the damage this will cause to the citizens of Highland Village.

All the politicians ignore the fact that a complete environmental impact statement was not done, even though it’s required and the citizens have asked for it to be completed. They avoid the discussion on the impact this will have on the environment. They avoid the discussion on how close the road will be to the houses. They avoid the discussion on the pollution this expansion will cause.

What is really upsetting, is the lack of concern she (they) have for the children of Highland Village. They are aware of reports – documented proof – that this expansion will cause irreversible damage to the lungs of the children of Highland Village. With this information in hand they sit calmly and put the children of Highland Village in harm’s way. I doubt they would do this to their children.

Ron Halbach,

Highland Village

Dear Editor:

It was amazing to see the streams of students and parents walking last October on “Walk to School Day,” but nothing much changed after that one day demonstration of feasibility.

Every morning hundreds of cars and SUVs line up outside of our neighborhood elementary and middle schools.

Four unintended consequences of this practice: polluted air from all the idling emissions; wasted gas from standing in line waiting to drop off students at the front door of the school; children sitting and getting less exercise than they could if their parents did not deliver them so directly; and, congested traffic for other cars not involved in delivering their children.

Possible solutions: stagger delivery/pick-up times over say a 20-minute period with four or five alphabetical groups over five or four time periods; have other drop-off/pick-up points within a reasonable walking distance to the schools; and, have more children walk or ride to school by providing some sort of incentive system for doing so.

The costs of pollution, waste of gas, lost opportunities to be active and congestion in the streets call for creative thinking on this subject. Some students do walk or ride bikes or scooters to school now. Is there a way we can reward them for their healthy and environmentally-friendly practices?

Margaret Aten,

Flower Mound

Dear Editor:

I read with interest Jeff Ramsey’s letter to the editor printed in The Messenger on December 28, 2007.

In it Mr. Ramsey chastised Flower Mound for opposing the Hodges’ recent proposed change in the town’s master plan density restrictions which would have allowed for the building of town homes in Flower Mound. He suggests that Flower Mound “needs” increased density in order to attract better restaurants and more “Dallas-type” shops. Further he implies that adding this density would mean a lower tax base for residents.

Superficially, Mr. Ramsey’s suggestions might strike a chord with some residents. However, I believe he missed a few important considerations.

First, the very restrictions on density that the Hodges wish to overturn are the reason many residents were attracted to Flower Mound. I did not move to Flower Mound because I believed one day it would have better or trendy restaurants or in hopes of more “Dallas-type” shopping. I came because the town was approaching growth cautiously in an effort to preserve and enhance the distinctive community character and quality of life in Flower Mound. If I must get in my car and travel a short distance to eat or shop in order to avoid urbanization of Flower Mound, I am happy to do it. I surely do not feel stifled. Besides, I – unlike Mr. Ramsey – see nothing wrong with the fine eating establishments in Flower Mound. I might even be insulted if I owned one of them.

Second, if density restrictions were changed or amended to allow for increased density, the theoretical increased tax revenue certainly would not go in the pockets of residents, as Mr. Ramsey would suggest. Rather, with more people (both residents and visitors to the new fine restaurants and shops) comes an increased need for infrastructure and services to include law enforcement and firefighters. Suggesting financial benefit to residents of Flower Mound for such unrestricted growth seems misleading. Near as I can tell, the only pockets being filled would be those of the developers proposing these and similar changes.

Brian Casey,

Flower Mound