Note: This letter was written by Genevieve Serna, a member or Arcata’s Transportation Safety Committee. She does not identify herself as a member of the TSC in this letter. 

I am not against a well-designed 7-story building. But to say that this building in Spokane does not shade adjacent buildings is false. This particular 7-story building is NOT a good example.

In the letter, she wrote: “While the rendered building is taller and newer than its neighbors, what’s more important is what I don’t see. The road beneath isn’t shrouded in darkness.”

The key here is that the image of the 7-story building is a rendering — that is, a drawing. It’s a fictitious marketing representation. The sunlight shown on the building in this rendering exists in reality for a brief time of the day, in the early morning in July or August. We can also note that the roof garden shown on the two-story building to the left is entirely fictitious. That existing building is on a separate parcel. The rendering also does not show a cell-antenna tower placed on the roof of that 7-story building.

In terms of solar shading, this building does indeed shade its own sidewalk, and for large portions of the year, the sidewalk and buildings on the oher side of the street.

This letter was printed in the Mad River Union in their September 6th issue. As a rebuttle, I wrote:

Regarding the 7-story building in Spokane, I’ll say this. The image is a rendering, not a photograph. I did the solar shading diagrams for this building. Even in August it shades its own sidewalk for 9 hours a day. For six months of the year, it shades its sidewalk and the sidewalk on other side of the street for 8 hours a day. Across the street is a one-block-deep city park. For a third of the year, it shades half of this park — on the OTHER side of the street — for four hours a day. In the middle of Winter, it can shade ALL of this park.

As the author noted, it has no stepbacks. It rises in a vertical wall from the sidewalk. This building can do without a street-frontage stepback because it is only one-quarter city block wide – about 85 feet, or about one-third of an Arcata city block. The Spokane block has a 3-story building, the 7-story building, a parking lot, and a 3-story building. On the other side of the street is a 3-story building, two 1-story buildings, and the city park. The height of the 7-story building does not dominate the block.

In the Gateway area, we may be seeing buildings that are one full block long. Without a suitable deep stepback, a block-long building will indeed create a canyon-like feel.

Note:  What is shown below is a copy of the original letter, made for this website.  It is included here only so that the contents of the original letter can be searchable.  (The PDF received from the City is in the form of an image, and so is not a searchable document.)

What is below is not the letter sent by the letter-writer. It may contain typographical errors and other departures from the original.  The PDF displayed above is accurate.  The text below is not accurate.  It is printed here for indexing purposes, so that each word can be indexed and included in the search.

Good Evening Arcata City Council,
My name is Genevieve Serna and I’m a resident and home owner here in the city of Arcata. Before, I begin I first want to thank all of the hard work and discussion you’ve participated in regarding the Gateway Plan these past few years. This is a big change for the city and your input isn’t going unappreciated.
As the subject implies, I wanted to write-in expressing my support of the Planning Commission and staff’s recommendation of building heights and massing laid out in the current plan. I understand the fear that surrounds such a big potential change in the landscape of the city. I would be lying if I didn’t, at one time, also let those fears inform my own opinions of that change. But after some discussion with some very good friends about what the city would lose if we didn’t accept those changes, scared me more.
Without density, Arcata will not be able to meet its goals of walkable, bikeable streets.
Arcata won’t be able to address its housing shortage in any meaningful way.
Arcata won’t be able to stave off the suburban sprawl that consumes our precious green space.

Whether we recognize it or not, Arcata has always been in a state of change and growth. It’s different from the city it was 20 years ago and 20 years before that and so on. With this in mind I hope we also recognize that change and growth isn’t inherently negative. That it won’t dissolve what we love so much about our city.
Having grown up in the rural Central Valley, I’ve lived in small towns all my life and I can tell you first hand, the heart of Arcata has nothing to do with its small size or short buildings. But rather it’s has everything to do with the people who come here to connect, to contribute and to live out the principles of equality, sustainability and community that Arcata encourages.

Before I wrap up I looked up some renderings of 7-story buildings and found this proposed construction (with no step-backs) next to two existing 2 & 3 story buildings in Spokane. While the rendered building is taller and newer than its neighbors, what’s more important is what I don’t see. The road beneath isn’t shrouded in darkness. The people in front of it aren’t eclipsed by its height. And the look of the apartments aren’t reminiscent of the Section 8 housing of the 70’s and 80’s.
It’s just a building. Pretty unremarkable and similar to ones I’ve seen before and ones I’ll likely see in the
future. What it does have is potential. Potential to house new Arcatans or the next essential North Country
business. All good things that I hope for the city’s future.
Please feel free to add this to your next meetings public comment and comments on your next Gateway
Plan meeting.

Thanks again,
Genevieve E Serna