Cousins Presentation Monday Night

Tim Hendricks, Senior VP, Cousins Properties, spoke to the neighborhood at a meeting Monday (11/17). He presented visualizations of the two towers from various perspectives, as well as two other options for development of the land (all PUDs). Unfortunately, he gave us present no handouts and no permission to reproduce anything he presented. If any thing is made available, I'll pass it on to you.

Two things he said that I want to comment on:

1. While I can't remember his exact words, in response to a question of why there was nothing in his proposed PUD for the neighborhood, he stated that PUDs were designed for the benefit of the land owner and the developer, not the neighborhood, or community at large. This is not true. The concept of a PUD was originated in the U.S., recognizing the power it provided, that:  “PUDs have not been recognized explicitly under state statutory law.  The establishment of any PUD must correspond with the general authority delegated to local governments by the state.  Thus, under Town Law for example, the PUD must "promot[e] the health, safety, morals, or the general welfare of the community" and it must be created "in accordance with a comprehensive plan”."
2. He stated that he was reading our blogs and that they had errors in them. First, as far as I know this is the only blog addressing this issue. His plural blogs also might refer to Next Door Lost Creek. If that's so, then he is unethically reading correspondence specifically controlled to Lost Creek residents only. If that expectation of privacy is non existent, then I have a real problem with Next Door. As far is this blog is concerned, it's open for anyone to read and comment on. If he sees an error, then comment on it in public. I'm reduced to calculating or estimating all the variables around Cousins development of the Marshall Tract because I've not been given any information from Cousins. And, if Cousins has provided information to the LCNA, and they have kept it secret...