As I understand it, the chief opposition to this particular zone change proposal is that it does not include high or mixed density housing.
I suspect that, among the residents of my Fort Utah neighborhood, I am probably among the most sympathetic to this concern. I can see several compelling reasons for us to be thinking about a vision of a future Provo which involves both more high density and more mixed density housing options. That said, for several reasons, I still support this proposed zone change.
First, while I am sympathetic to higher and more mixed density housing in Provo, I am yet to hear a clear vision of how that should look throughout Provo, let alone in the Fort Utah neighborhood. Such a vision could make a clear and quantitative case for such development (economic, environmental, cultural, etc.) and address concerns about costs and infrastructure needs (which are already close to binding in the Fort Utah area as is). If there is a genuine desire to revisit the future urban plan for Provo, I would be excited to hear the details of this vision articulated clearly and carefully (with construction, infrastructure, economic detail and more). It could then be made publicly and clearly available for voters to respond to, both in comment and at the ballot box. But since no such plan has yet to be clearly stated, it seems premature to be used as the basis for zoning policy.
Second, not only is a new vision for Provo yet to be articulated, there is an existing vision that has been put in writing, particularly for this region of the city (as spelled out in the Southwest area plan). While I acknowledge there has been some disagreement as to what that vision allows for and how binding it is, the fact is, it exists and this proposed development is perfectly consistent with that plan/vision. Much work has gone into crafting this plan and I believe it should be honored, as it reflects input from many stakeholders. It is hard to see how allowing for higher and more mixed density housing (as has been shown in varied proposals over the last 5 years) would be consistent with the qualitative character of that plan.
Lastly, the truth is, the neighborhood is overwhelmingly in favor of this proposal. While that shouldn't always be the basis for zoning policy, I am yet to hear an objection which carefully articulates why the neighborhood's desires and the existing development plans are not in the best interests of Provo as a whole (including and especially these residents). If such objections exist, it would be great to hear them and be able to engage with them in open discussion. But barring such well-formed objections, it seems like a natural choice to respect the desires of the residents of the neighborhood in this matter.
Therefore, I support the proposal for the zone change for the Halladay Lakeshore property.