[The following letter was shared for posting to the Davisite by the author]
October 12, 2025
Dear Mayor Vaitla, Social Services Commission Chair Sverdlov, Planning Commission Chair Weiss and to all the council and commission members and Community Development Director Sherri Metzker.
I saw last week in a recent Davis Enterprise the city’s public notice re
The Lumberyard Revised Affordable Housing Plan.
The core elements of the revision are as follows;
The number of units will drop from 226 units to 205 units
A reduction of 21 units
However, the number of bedrooms will increase from 322 to 444
An increase of 122 bedrooms and therefore at least 122 more people at one person per bedroom but many more if any of the bedrooms allow 2 people
If various fees are based upon people and vehicle usage, then the project will;
Reduce project income to the city by about 10%
While increasing the number of noncontributing municipal users by 37+%.
It appears to me therefore that the reduction of 21 units, the city will have a measurable loss of project-based income to cover the long-term costs while substantially subsidizing and increasing dollars spent on the wear and tear on the city.
I would like one of you to pose this question to the Community Development Director;
“How much income will the city and other entities lose across the board in various city fees such as parks, schools, utilities, special districts, etc., and in development project costs assessed by the city due to the decrease of about 10% in applicable units?
Therefore, what is the economic loss to the city in every applicable category by having 21 less units to be charged for?
It is my assumption that the loss to the city could be sizeable and the cost of the city accommodating 37% more municipal usage is measurable.
If that is the case, then I request that the city review its project fee structure and adopt a scale that at minimum covers the city’s project and long term true costs.
Due to this project there could be up to 444 vehicles soon to have to find parking spaces on city streets mainly in the downtown and using those vehicles throughout the town.
Is that additional cost to the city covered?
And how many of those up to 444 vehicles parked on city streets will lessen the ability for a number of shoppers to park downtown and thereby likely diminish business income and sales tax revenue.
Has the city found a way to recapture the dollars lost for these reasons?
I also think that the city should revise the number of affordable units required from 11 upwards. The applicant has added 122 additional bedrooms. Surely the affordable unit number should go up.
It seems to me that the city’s cost format has major loopholes. And that the city is unknowingly neglecting to pursue equity on behalf of tax paying citizens and local downtown businesses.
David J Thompson
Citizen, taxpayer and affordable housing advocate
Ps: I may be using some wrong terms so I hope you will get the essence of my questions
Davisite 
Leave a reply to South of Davis Cancel reply