Plan a green, equitable Seattle that embraces mixed uses and incomes

Seattle hasn’t been a sleepy town for decades. From a tech boom that brought thousands of new jobs, to our city’s bustling arts scene that supports thousands of people in the creative industries, Seattle’s population grew 21% over the last decade. This growth rate marks the city’s fastest since the 1940s and the city is expected to continue growing — reaching 1 million people by 2040.

In anticipation of this, one thing is clear: Planning the city of the future requires a dramatic change from how we’ve planned in the past. That means planning for greater local resilience in the face of a climate emergency. It means acting with urgency to address our housing crisis. It also requires that we acknowledge the mistakes of our past and act with intention to repair the harm done to Black and Indigenous neighbors and communities of color.

Seattle residents have demanded that we take bold steps to address inequities in our land use plans. For the past year, housing and climate advocates, architects and planners alike have been calling on the City Council and our Office of Planning and Community Development (OPCD) to study a vision for the Comprehensive Plan that they are calling the Alternative 6 proposal.

The proposal, submitted by Real Change, seeks a more just and equitable city guided by values of anti-displacement and racial equity. It calls for a city where kids can play together, neighbors know one another, elders can age in place and have neighbors who look out for them. Moving toward that vision requires that we embrace Alternative 6 and move away from our Urban Village strategy.

Seattle has been following the Urban Village strategy since 1994; however, the strategy is deeply flawed. Adherence to Urban Villages has created a tale of two cities — where wealthy homeowners live in mostly single-family neighborhoods, while people who rent are pushed to unsafe, unhealthy, high-traffic corridors. Growth patterns are not equitable if they place renters along busy arterials to serve as a buffer for homeowners. It is unacceptable to consider any form of this strategy as a viable option for the city. Instead, Seattle planning policies should move toward a vision of land use that increases access to resources for neighborhoods most historically under-resourced.

This shift in policy could open up new ways of creating housing. For example, Seattle could make a meaningful impact on reducing displacement and increasing affordable housing production by taking city land off the market and leasing it for social housing development. This would keep housing permanently affordable by removing or dramatically reducing the cost of land from a project.

In a report released last February, the Seattle Planning Commission emphasized the need for well-resourced, well-connected neighborhoods that create a 15-minute city. The concept is for walkable neighborhoods that offer a mix of housing types and commercial spaces with transit and other mobility options, parks and open space — places where most of residents’ daily needs are within a 15-minute walk or bike ride.

The report also called for explicit anti-displacement policies and centering racial equity in our growth management strategy.

Imagine the vibrant neighborhoods we can create if we reduce social isolation, allow more types of homes throughout the city and encourage small businesses to sprout up to serve nearby communities. This comprehensive plan update offers a chance to set a vision for healthy, resilient neighborhoods; to rethink how we manage growth so that our kids, our elders, our communities can enjoy their own neighborhoods without necessarily having to drive or be driven everywhere.

Planning for our future means planning for the green infrastructure required to become a carbon-free Seattle. Alternative 6 proposes that we intentionally develop neighborhoods to create ecosystems that are green, that include more housing mixes, schools, day cares, car-free areas that are compact, climate friendly and equitable.

Our next comprehensive plan requires clear anti-displacement strategies centered on racial equity. Strategies should include creating opportunities to build community wealth as well as community ownership of our local economy. They also include investing in public transit and housing infrastructure that meets the needs of working people while also allowing for homeownership opportunities that can close the racial wealth gap.

Increasing density everywhere will not turn Seattle into Manhattan. But what’s wrong with Philadelphia or Montreal or other dense cities with mixed uses and people of mixed incomes living in the same more interesting and more livable neighborhood? Seattleites deserve to live in well-resourced neighborhoods where essential goods and services are within reach of their homes.

Our neighbors deserve to see us fulfill that vision. By studying Alternative 6, we can begin to deliver it.