Can't build without infrastructure

As a resident of Western Washington for over 50 years, I have watched the continued denuding of trees and brush from a good percent of the area.

I have seen wetlands filled in (Alderwood Mall) and large tracts of land logged, dozed, stripped of topsoil, built on and paved. This means that all the shade and oxygen-producing greenery is gone, replaced with blacktop, roofs, cars and people.

We have rural clusters that have green areas, but what happens to the greenery when the nearest city expands its growth management area to encompass the rural clusters? It all gets developed! Rural clusters are a steppingstone for sprawl. The clusters in our area have the houses, wells and septic systems clumped together on 1-acre lots. Sewer goes down, water is pumped out ...

Now it's fully contained communites. In this time of global warming we are talking about denuding thousands of acres to build thousands of homes. Our country is losing millions of acres to development as it is. This is not good thinking. How about infrastructure? Snohomish County can't afford to widen and add a safety barrier to U.S. 2, so what about infrastructure for an FCC? I believe that before any FCC is built, the infrastructure needs to be in place, including high speed light rail like Europe has. Are the developers going to pay for this? This type of transportation will be needed when gas gets more expensive.

Do these FCCs plan to preserve and maintain farmland for their own food supplies? This will be needed also.

So let's see...

Preserve the farmland, trees and brush, build homes on at least 3-5 acres, with solar panels that feed the grid and provide hot water, provide infrastructure that includes electric fast light rail.

If this can't be done, then how about densifying housing in older developed areas?

MARK DUELL
Arlington