Does my comment matter?

I am a life long resident of Spokane and have lived in the Lincoln Heights Neighborhood for over 25 years. I am secretary of the Neighborhood Council and regularly attend the Land Use Subcommittee meetings of the CA. I am a board member of Spokane Urban Nature (SUN) and have been involved in the committee working with Councilman Dillon to develop a tree ordinance (Friends of Trees, Mary Stohr, Chair). I support aspects of Alternative 2 & 3 and am particularly concerned that the final document includes consideration of the following: First of all, I would like to see initial growth concentrated in the core area of the City and along major arterials where there is already transit, public services and retail outlets. This builds a strong sense of community. However, I think the 1/2 mile from arterials radius that is proposed to too big. It should be reduced to have minimal impact on established neighborhoods until additional housing is needed in the future. There are, for example, many vacant lots and lots that need redevelopment in the East Sprague area. New housing in this area would provide access to transit, retail and public services and should be used to provide housing in what is reported to be the area of most need for the foreseeable future, the 0-80% AMI category. Data shows that the City already has sufficient or surplus housing for all other income types except this category. There are also other areas throughout the city along arterials that would meet these criteria. This would include areas north of the river. On the other hand, building hundreds of homes miles from the City without careful consideration of the infrastructure (schools, fire departments, roads, transit, etc.) such as has happened in the Latah Valley in unconscionable. Not only does it destroy natural areas, but it also it doesn't meet the needs of our current population. Secondly, in past few years, the City has allowed middle housing in R1 neighborhoods with no requirement for parking if within 1/2 mile of a transit stop. This policy is unrealistic and does not take into consideration topography, walkability, traffic congestion, or pedestrian safety. A study needs to be done to show whether or not this policy is achieving the goals it is intended to meet, i.e. provide more low- and middle-income housing. I don't think it is as many units remain vacant or are too extensive to meet the needs of the intended population. I have heard planning staff say there is a "domino" effect in which people moving into more expensive housing leave lower income housing available. I don't think this is true. We have a lot of seniors in our community who are downsizing. The homes they are leaving are expensive homes and not starter homes. This unregulated, unrestricted policy causes confusion and disruption of stable and historical neighborhoods and does not meet the housing needs of low-income residents as intended. Related to this is the fact that most of us still depend on our cars to get to work, appointments, meetings and recreational activities throughout the area. I have family in New York City and Washington DC and have seen firsthand how mass transit can reduce the need for private vehicles. Spokane isn't there yet and won't be for the foreseeable future. A short 10-minute drive in a car can take an hour or more on the bus. In the future, with growth in population and expansion of mass transit, this may become realistic, but not for years. Next, and I hope related, I would like to see a requirement that neighborhoods be informed when multifamily developments are proposed by developers in residential neighborhoods. For example, 16 town homes were proposed for construction on the corner of E Mount Vernon Dr and S Mount Vernon St on the south hill. If neighbors had not noticed and followed up on surveying and other pre-construction activities on the property these units may have been built with no consideration for the protection of the wetlands that drain onto the property, access to Lincoln Park and impact on the infrastructure if no parking was required. This property is on a hill, there are no sidewalks, the streets are already congested with parents dropping off and picking up students at Franklin School, and, because of the hill, there is limited access to the bus stop on 17th in the winter when streets are icy. Finally, in support of the goals of SUN and the Friends of Trees, I would like to see urban forests and wildlife corridors protected as much as possible, from the arbitrary destruction of the tree canopy when clear cutting is allowed with no requirement for replacing the trees. I believe the tree ordinance, if adopted will address many of these concerns. To address climate change, including air and water pollutions, we need to preserve not only our urban forests, but also expand planting and care of neighborhood trees. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for your attention to these concerns. Carol Landa-McVicker "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." (Martin Luther King, Jr.) [Personal contact details omitted from the reading text.]