To:  Dan Strauss
Seattle City Council – District 6
PO Box 34025
Seattle, WA 98124-4025

Response re: Draft Proposed Rezoning Plan, Seattle District 6 

Dear Councilman Strauss,

We, the undersigned residents of Seattle District 6, having reviewed Mayor Harrell’s One Seattle Plan and its proposed changes to our neighborhood, strongly oppose and submit the following feedback and recommendations regarding the rezoning plan for the Greenwood Urban Center.

First, we recognize that the City of Seattle is required to comply with HB 1110 to increase density and we appreciate the work done so far and your focus on affordable housing. However, the plan as it stands does not demonstrate any effort in developing a comprehensive or coordinated strategy for increasing density while complying with existing municipal codes regarding lot coverage and preservation of the tree canopy, nor does it address the need for improved and upgraded services and structures to support high-density construction. If this plan is implemented, it will not support its desired goals to make housing more affordable, , mitigate displacement, advance racial equity, support cultural and artistic expression, and meet our climate goals.

Specific to the Greenwood Urban Center, we raise the following serious issues for your attention, along with our recommended modifications to address those significant issues:

Issue 1. Density Increases Outside the Established Greenwood Corridors. Rather than focus density on the existing North-South Greenwood Avenue and East-West corridors that are adjacent to transit options, the plan proposes to expand up-zoning from Neighborhood Residential 3 to Low-rise (LR1-3) into adjacent thriving residential communities. The draft plan does not consider existing neighborhoods or communities, nor does it “support vibrant, inclusive neighborhoods.” Had planners done so, they would have learned that the Greenwood community is an extensive, supportive network of diverse residents living in single- and multi-family housing, apartments, and condominiums anchored by a unique business district of shops, services, restaurants and gathering places. And had planners looked carefully at Greenwood they would have discovered it is an area of nuanced lot dimensions, divisions, and easements. Yet the draft plan arbitrarily allows 4 units to be built on a lot, regardless of lot size, simply because that small piece of land is within a quarter mile walk of any major transit.

Community Response: Your Greenwood constituents are firm in opposing high-density buildings in our residential communities before multi-unit high-rise buildings are first established along the North-South Greenwood Avenue, Route 99, and East-West corridors along N 85th and NW 80th Streets. Additionally, the plan's overall premise is that new homes will be less costly because they will be smaller, yet Seattle's historic record refutes this claim. Homes being built in the Greenwood area are more expensive than the larger homes they replace. If the city wants to press its case regarding affordability, show your constituents examples where this theory has played out.

Recommendations: Implement a phased development approach to increasing density, starting with multi-unit and higher-rise buildings along the corridors identified above. This will allow the community and infrastructure to be upgraded (see Issue 2) and increased density to be absorbed at pace instead of creating massive overwhelming and uncoordinated disruptions to the community. Additionally, establish a Greenwood Urban Center community advisory board to provide ongoing input and feedback throughout the development process as well as evaluating extent to which current community character is being impacted. Ensuring that development is informed by the community's intimate knowledge of the unique characteristics of each block within impacted neighborhoods will create a vibrant and united welcome to appropriate and paced development.

Issue 2. Lack of Planning to Ensure Infrastructure Will Support Density. The proposed localized increase in population density does not consider the current infrastructure (roads, public utilities, etc.) which is already at maximum capacity. Our more frequently occurring heavy rains already increase runoff, overwhelming our aging infrastructure and causing localized flooding. Yet, the One Seattle Plan does not require developers of high-density buildings to pay for aligning streets, sewers, and other public services with the density they create. Existing homeowners and renters would bear the cost instead, which negates the concept of "affordability" the plan purports to support, as it will drive out long-term residents of established communities. In addition, the plan relies on bus service to woo residents of high-density buildings away from car ownership. While ownership of personal motor vehicles has trended down over the years, the current resident-to-vehicle ratio in the Greenwood Urban Area already exceeds available parking. Increased density will overwhelm the street infrastructure, significantly aggravating existing traffic and parking problems. For example, have any of the planners driven north on the very narrow Dayton Ave N towards N 87th St which the plan proposes an upzone to LR3?

Community Response: Your Greenwood constituents are firm in opposing the plan's lack of coordination between development of high-density buildings and creating the infrastructure to support that increased population density. The expectation that existing residents should carry the burden of financing these upgrades runs counter to the goals of mitigating displacement and making housing for everyone—not just newcomers—more affordable.

Recommendations: Conduct a thorough infrastructure assessment that includes documentation of collapsed/collapsing sewer lines, burying the electric distribution grid, current vehicular carrying capacity and proximity to services and amenities. Based on these assessments, develop a coherent and coordinated strategy with input from and in collaboration with the Greenwood Urban Center community advisory board to upgrade the infrastructure to accommodate up-zoning in the Greenwood Urban Area. In addition, the One Seattle Plan needs to be revised to ensure that developers carry the financial burden for the necessary upgrades that benefit them.

Issue 3. Environmental and Health Impacts and Lack of Protection for the Tree Canopy and Greenspace. The high-density construction proposed for the Greenwood Urban Area will destroy an established canopy that is necessary for the microclimate and our city's moniker as the "Emerald City."  Multi-story buildings significantly reduce established old-growth trees, which reduce noise, improve air quality by removing pollutants, reduce urban heat through shade, filter storm water run-off, enhance property values, boost wildlife habitats, and improve mental health. A further point is that increasing building height will reduce sunlight. In addition to providing Vitamin D for human health, all levels of government are encouraging homeowners to take advantage of sunlight as a carbon-neutral source of power. If sunlight cannot reach residential solar panels long enough to generate electricity, the use of carbon-rich electricity will have to increase. Residents want more greenspace, not less. Increasing density results in housing that takes up all buildable space on a lot, deforests and destroys the city tree canopy, and utilize designs that severely reduce any usable backyard. The city's Department of Construction and Land Inspection has already demonstrated its ineffectiveness in enforcing Seattle Municipal Code 23.24.040 to protect the tree canopy and maximize the retention of existing trees when approving lot subdivisions. The One Seattle Plan further erodes those protections and provides loop holes for developers to continue decimating the canopy. An additional environmental point is the plan's lack of examining the hidden (embodied carbon) costs of new construction and the resulting impact of manufacturing, transportation, installation, maintenance, and disposing of building materials which account for nearly 15% of global emissions. The One Seattle Plan makes no effort to reduce embodied carbon in the built environment with alternatives such as low carbon materials, adaptive reuse incentives, and construction waste policies. Seattle would be wise to study Portland, OR's Recommendations to Reduce Embodied Carbon in the Built Environment and incorporate mechanisms successfully used by Portland’s Deconstruction Program which preserves valuable building materials for reuse by requiring homes built before 1941 to be manually deconstructed instead of mechanically demolished.

Community Response: Your Greenwood constituents are firm in opposing both the plan's violations of the existing municipal code and its clear undermining of our climate goals. The importance of green space to mental and physical health is well documented and Seattle residents value the tree canopy for cooling neighborhoods and keeping carbon out of the atmosphere. If the city is serious about reducing carbon emissions, why propose a plan that would keep trees and greenspaces from doing it naturally? If the city believes high-density is aligned with our climate goals, why propose a plan that does not enforce using principles of low carbon construction to build?

Recommendations: Revise the overall plan to: emphasize utilization of sustainable building practices, such as energy-efficient designs, green roofs, rainwater harvesting, and solar energy; include protocols for measuring the carbon impact of buildings; provide incentives to developers for participating in carbon-reducing adaptive reuse and construction waste programs; and incorporate enforceable canopy protection/enhancement protocols to minimize the environmental impact of new developments.

In summary, we strongly oppose Mayor Harrell’s One Seattle Plan’s rezoning expansion of the Greenwood Urban Center and appreciate your consideration of our concerns and recommendations in the spirit of working collaboratively to create a plan that benefits your district and all of Seattle.

Your Seattle District 6 Constituents and all Seattle residents deserve a comprehensive, coordinated, and better plan for the Greenwood Urban Area as part of Mayor Harrell’s One Seattle Plan.