Combatting disinformation

Summerset Meadows Resident Response to disinformation

I hope this letter finds you well. My name is [removed], and I am a resident of the Summerset Meadows neighborhood. I am writing to express my strong opposition to the recent application submitted by Bestall Collaborative Ltd to increase the number of houses in the proposed development behind my residence.

As you may recall, the initial proposal for 24 houses was met with significant objection from our community. The developer revised the plan to reduce the housing density to 22 units, citing a commitment to accommodating the concerns of the neighboring residents. This revision was approved by the city council, and we appreciated the apparent willingness of the developer to engage with our community, although were disappointed that the density was still too high given the contrasting character of our neighborhood and the one proposed by the developer. However, Bestall has now submitted a new application seeking to revert to their original proposal to construct 24-houses. This abrupt change appears disingenuous and raises serious questions about the integrity of the developer's intentions. It is concerning that an apparent compromise made to appease the community is now being reconsidered after the original application was approved by the City. 

The application also makes no logical sense in that it decreases the density along the northern boundary, which has a large buffer owned by the HOA with the proposed development, at the expense of increasing the density elsewhere. So, not only is the overall density increasing from 22 lots on 6.83 acres to 24 lots/6.83 ac, but the redistribution of lots away from the northern bounder exacerbates the density concerns of residents on the southern and western boundaries. 

Our neighborhood values transparency, honesty, and collaboration. We believe that the approval process should reflect a genuine commitment to community input and should not be manipulated to suit the developer's changing preferences and win approval of the City Council and Planning Commission. It is also concerning that residents were given less than a month of time to visit the City’s Planning Division and during the Christmas and New Year’s holidays, to learn of the details of the new proposal and submit feedback. Reverting to the higher housing density and the approach by which the City has limited the ability of residents to respond undermines our trust in the developer or the City to seriously consider our interests. 

I urge you to carefully consider the impact of this proposal on our community and to weigh the concerns of the residents who will be directly affected by the development. It is crucial that the approval process remains fair, consistent, and aligned with the best interests of the community.

Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I trust that you will make decisions that uphold the principles of fairness and community engagement.