It’s not unusual for people to use the wrong word in describing things. Most of the time, it’s harmless, but not always. As Mark Twain wrote, “The difference between the right word and the almost right word is really a large matter — it is the difference between the lightning and the lightning bug.”

One of the more common examples of this is the use of the word “anxious” (worried) when the right word is “eager” (excited).

On Wednesday, the Columbus Redevelopment Authority revealed that an unidentified developer has submitted a commercial letter of intent to the CRA to purchase two adjacent parcels in the Burns Bottom project area. CRA’s board discussed the offer in executive session, voting to send a counter offer letter with additional provisions to the prospective developer. The details of the offer are not being publicly disclosed at this time.

Given the lack of details, we are not sure whether we should be eager or anxious to see how this plays out.

On one hand, we are eager to see that, seven years after the CRA was formed to purchase and redevelop a five-block area near the Lowndes County Soccer Complex commonly known as Burns Bottom, a developer has emerged.

We have long said on these pages that the Burns Bottom redevelopment stands to be a transformative project for Columbus, a city lacking new housing options.

On the other hand, we are a bit anxious about the details of the deal.

The CRA’s vision for the project thus far has been on the right track: The size of the project area is large enough to make an impact; the location would tie the vibrant soccer complex to a bustling downtown; establishing design standards for the development will ensure a unified appearance and lean in the direction of new urbanism: walkable with diverse housing and job options.

As part of the process to secure developers for the project, the CRA hired architect Mike Thompson of Brandon to draw up renderings of what the development could look like and to establish a look-book, a design standard which would prevent a hodge-podge of individual projects that deter from the overall vision the CRA established.

We hope the CRA steadfastly holds this unidentified developer to such standards. The first project sets the tone for those that follow. If the CRA, in its understandable eagerness to get the project off the ground, allows the developer to deviate from its design mandates, we fear the guidelines will evolve from requirements to suggestions.

Similarly, we hope the negotiation points include a performance clause. It would be a shame to have a developer snap up lots and then not develop them, something that is entirely possible, especially with interest rates skyrocketing.

The CRA should show some flexibility in working with developers, but only to a point.

A good plan is in place; let’s follow through with it.

That’s why, as we await more details about this first offer, we are simultaneously eager and anxious to see what comes of this.

The Dispatch Editorial Board is made up of publisher Peter Imes, columnist Slim Smith, managing editor Zack Plair and senior newsroom staff.