Tempe — Dozens of Shalimar neighborhood residents told the Tempe City Council on Tuesday they oppose a developer plan to rezone the Shalimar Golf Course property for a dense housing project, saying the proposal would alter the neighborhood’s character and create traffic and environmental harms.

Speakers asked the council to preserve the area’s current one‑house‑per‑acre zoning and reject plans they said would replace many single‑family homes with rental units. “This drastic shift threatens the stability and close‑knit character of our community,” resident Bill Fox said, referencing a plan he said would build 244 units on the site and that “approximately 88% of the homes in Shalimar are currently owner occupied.”

The residents said the development would remove hundreds of trees and wildlife habitat. “The trees are showing stress as the heat increases,” Dr. Maria Hertz said, adding she observed foxes and coyotes more frequently since, she said, the property’s water had been shut off. Dr. Hertz also identified the developers as Bibiq Living and Cache Homes and described what she called “scorched earth” actions by the owners intended to pressure neighbors.

The Tempe Parks, Recreation, Golf and Double Butte Cemetery Advisory Board submitted a written statement to the council thanking city employees and noting the importance of parks and open space, a civic official reading the board’s appreciation at the podium. Supporters of keeping the golf course as open space included longtime area residents who described the course as local history and a habitat and urged the council to preserve it.

Speakers raised traffic and emergency access concerns tied to the project. Fox said the proposed plan would add “well over 500 cars entering and exiting daily onto the small arterial roads of Gulf Avenue and Country Club Way,” and warned that increased traffic could impede emergency responders.

Council members did not vote on the rezoning at the meeting; the speakers’ remarks were delivered during the public comment portion of the regular council meeting. No staff presentation or formal agenda item on the Shalimar rezoning appeared on the council’s printed consent or non‑consent agenda that evening.

The public comments referenced the ownership and stewardship of the course and urged the city to require developers to preserve the area’s character if redevelopment moves forward. Several speakers asked the council to keep the current one‑house‑per‑acre zoning in place and to seek alternative solutions that would preserve trees, habitat and neighborhood character while addressing housing needs.

The council did not take formal action on the Shalimar matter during the meeting. Council members did not make motions or direct staff on the record in the public session about the specific Shalimar proposal during the time public comments were given.