In the April 13 story “Anatomy of a housing project the neighbors stopped dead,” the writers refer to a “similar scenario” in Auburn, “where a developer abandoned ambitious plans for a housing development after local residents rose in opposition and elected a new mayor whose campaign was built around fighting the project.”

I assume the writers are referring to the 1,100-unit development that was going to be situated right on Lake Auburn — the lake that supplies the drinking water for Lewiston and Auburn. Lake Auburn is currently exempt from federal filtration requirements but is under stress from climate change, among other things. The Protect Lake Auburn committee did an amazing job of educating the public about the threat to the lake from development and the expense of a filtration plant should the lake lose its exemption.

This mini village would have greatly increased traffic on a quiet country road in a city with miles of such roads that are perennially in disrepair, and would have required extensive DOT involvement. Further, the mayor, who had a relationship with the developer, lost his reelection bid by a large margin, and his interpersonal style did not make the project any more popular.

I respectfully suggest that rather than tossing in a vague reference to an “ambitious” development plan in Auburn opposed by the neighbors, the writers should have given it a fuller description or left it out altogether.

Renee Cote
Auburn