I am really confused as to which of the two developments is the best option.

My understanding is that townhomes would require less land to be cleared (less trees cut down) but could possibly have a negative impact on our property values.

On the other hand, single family homes would require more land (more trees cut down) and may not affect our property values as much. After hearing Jeffrey Hitt's input a while back, I get the impression that a townhome development would be much more profitable for his company, as single family homes would be much more expensive to build.

Both issues...property values, and saving trees...are both important to me. I just really don't know which development option is the better choice. I'd like to hear some thoughts on this.

By the way, I too received a flyer. I still don't know which option is best, but it seems ridiculous that there is no source or person listed on this flyer.

One thing's for sure...I wish the developers would get the hell out of here and just leave the beautiful Woodlands the way it is.

The unknown source

Anonymous saith:
''but it seems ridiculous that there is no source or person listed on this flyer.''
The Midnight Stalker, who delivered the flyer, runs in Stealth Mode.
Sleath Mode is programmed not to leave identification.

Unsigned??

I just had a flyer come in the mail from the 'concerned woodlands homeowners'...unsigned.

I think this is Oscars group...

Care to comment Oscar?

home4sale 'in the woodlands'

Unsigned??

HeyAnonymous:

Please do not take umbrage, but what would you like me to comment on ?