File name:

-

File size:

-

Title:

-

Author:

-

Subject:

-

Keywords:

-

Creation Date:

-

Modification Date:

-

Creator:

-

PDF Producer:

-

PDF Version:

-

Page Count:

-

Page Size:

-

Fast Web View:

-

Choose an option Alt text (alternative text) helps when people can’t see the image or when it doesn’t load.
Aim for 1-2 sentences that describe the subject, setting, or actions.
This is used for ornamental images, like borders or watermarks.
Preparing document for printing…
0%
Document is loading Loading Glossary…

Summary

All Hide

One Seattle Plan—Draft for Public Review

Expand

Introduction

The Introduction to the Draft One Seattle Plan provides an overview of the four “key moves” that describe the priorities and policy changes at the center of this Comprehensive Plan update: 

  • Housing and Affordability: Expand housing opportunities across the city. 

  • Equity and Opportunity: Promote a more equitable Seattle as we grow. 

  • Community and Neighborhoods: Focus growth and investment in complete, walkable communities. 

  • Climate and Sustainability: Meet the challenges of climate change for a resilient future. 

The Introduction also includes background information on state and regional policy frameworks, major challenges facing Seattle, and how the Plan was developed and will be implemented. 

something

Growth Strategy

The Growth Strategy element is foundational to the Draft One Seattle Plan our strategy for accommodating new housing and employment growth over the next 20 years. It describes place types that comprise the strategy and a future land use map that shows the locations of future potential residential, commercial, and industrial development. This element also includes goals and policies that guide planning for smaller areas within the city and potential future annexation of land into Seattle 

something

Land Use

The Land Use element provides policy guidance for how the City regulates land use and development consistent with the growth strategy, including sections on each of several types of residential, commercial, and industrial zoning. The element also includes policies that address urban design, historic and cultural preservation, and environmentally critical areas. 

something

Transportation

The Transportation element guides the investments and other actions that shape how residents and goods and services are able to move about the city as we grow. Policy sections address alignment of our transportation system with the growth strategy, expansion of transportation options to meet future needs, multi-purpose use of the right-of-way, and support for the economy and freight mobility. The element also supports the City’s goals for climate change and safety. Finally, the element provides a policy framework for realizing the investments needed as we grow over the next 20 years. 

something

Housing

This newly expanded Housing element articulates the context and vision for future housing abundance and affordability that meets the needs of current and future residents of Seattle. Goals and policies address housing supply and diversity, fair housing access, housing quality and design, residential displacement, resources to increase the supply of income-restricted affordable housing, and responses to homelessness. 

something

Capital Facilities

The Capital Facilities element guides how we plan for, build, operate, and maintain City-owned land and buildings or coordinate with other public entities with facilities that serve Seattle in a way that meets our growth needs and is sustainable, resilient, and equitable. The goals and policies in this element guide the strategic planning and investment, sustainable design and construction, equitable capital facilities, operations and maintenance, and policies for coordinating with other public agencies that provide schools and other buildings and infrastructure that serve Seattle’s communities. 

something

Utilities

The Utilities element guides City decisions about utility services and addresses emerging issues. It includes City-owned utilities for drinking water, wastewater, drainage, solid waste, and electricity, as well as access to internet services. Other policies address the essential coordination with private utilities such as district energy, natural gas, and communications. 

something

Economic Development

The Economic Development element provides policy direction for various ways that the City works to sustain and grow the local economy with an emphasis on promoting equitable access to opportunity. The element includes goals and policies that address support for neighborhood business districts, growth in key industries at the heart of the regional economy, business retention and growth, workforce development, equitable support for small businesses, and growth of our “green” economic sectors.  

something

Climate and Environment

This newly expanded Climate and Environment element includes policies for how the City will address climate change and support a healthy, resilient community. The goals and policies guide strategies to reduce carbon pollution emitted via our transportation system, buildings and development patterns, energy consumption, and solid waste production. 

The element charts a course for advancing healthy, resilient communities in the face of rapid climate change impacts. It aims to: 

  • Expand the role of community-based climate change strategies 

  • Plan for and respond to localized climate impacts such as extreme heat and wildfire smoke, sea-level rise and flooding, more intense storms, and longer dry periods 

  • Protect and restore natural resources like our tree canopy and water systems 

  • Create an accessible and zero-waste food system 

something

Parks and Open Space

The Parks and Open Space element guides how we plan for, build, operate, and maintain City-owned parks and recreation facilities. It includes policies that guide an equitable provision of public space; a variety of culturally relevant and affordable recreation activities and events; and accessible, safe, and inclusive public space. Other policies address partnerships in design, activation and stewardship, and making climate-resilient public space.

something

Arts and Culture

Arts and culture play a vital role in community wellbeing, especially when artists are integrated into community engagement efforts that shape change in our neighborhoods. This element focuses on how we can create culturally relevant spaces throughout Seattle’s neighborhoods; invest in public art that reflects our communities; strengthen our creative economy and mitigate displacement; and provide more opportunities for youth development through arts education. The goals and policies of this element aim to guide growth so that Indigenous and all cultural communities feel a sense of belonging and interconnectedness.

something

Container Port

No changes are proposed for this element. This section provides a link to the currently adopted element and provides space for you to share your comments.

something

Shoreline Areas

The Shorelines Areas element will be updated as part of the Shoreline Master Program update process in 2024-2026. This section provides a link to the currently adopted element and provides space for you to share your comments both on the current element and about the 2024-2026 update process.

something

Community Involvement

The Community Involvement element includes goals and policies that guide how the City involves community members and stakeholders in developing and implementing policies and programs. The policies collectively work to strengthen the City’s goal to conduct equitable engagement, which means prioritizing resources that ensure that communities most vulnerable to the impacts of City decisions understand and are meaningfully involved in the decision-making processes that impact their communities. The element includes a new section highlighting approaches to engagement with the Indigenous community in Seattle and Tribes in the region. 

Glossary

Defines terms used in the draft Plan. Definitions are also available by hovering over glossary terms in this document.

Appendices

The final Plan will include technical appendices that will be completed later in 2024. This section outlines each of the technical appendices and provides space for you to share your comments.

Regional Center Subarea Plans

Subarea Plans for Regional Centers are currently being developed and will be adopted in coming years as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The Subarea Plans are intended to meet the planning requirements for regional designation by the Puget Sound Regional Council. This section provides space for you to share your comments about the Subarea Planning processes.

Manufacturing & Industrial Center Subarea Plans

Subarea Plans for regional Manufacturing and Industrial Centers are currently being developed. Completed plans will be adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The Subarea Plans are intended to meet the planning requirements for regional designation by the Puget Sound Regional Council. This section provides space for you to share your comments about the Subarea Planning processes.

Urban Center Profiles

Profiles of Urban Centers will be included as an appendix to the final One Seattle Plan. The profiles will include data on existing conditions, planned growth, and recent and ongoing area planning. The profiles will support requirements for designation as Countywide Centers by the King County Growth Management Planning Council. This section lists the 23 Urban Centers and provides space for you to share your comments.

Acknowledgements

Thanks to all the people and organizations that helped shape the draft One Seattle Plan.

Demographic Questions (Optional)

Hide

Please help us understand who's participating by providing some information about yourself before getting started:

Powered by Konveio
View all

Comments

Close

Commenting is closed for this document.


Non-Indigenous City staff will not be able to implement these engagement practices, no matter how much training or experience they have. In order to build a sense of safety and trust with Indigenous community members, the City should really be contracting with or hiring Native and Indigenous community members to lead the engagement process.
0 replies
The City should work on defining what they mean by partnership. Holding a one-off listening session is not the same as a partnership and the City should focus on sharing power, funding, support, and decision-making with community members and community organizations. The City needs to invest in long-term relationship building with communities that have been historically disinvested and ignored.
0 replies
Use Lushootseed font and do not Anglicize Lushootseed words - this was done with the dᶻidᶻəlal̓ič honorary name signs by the Seattle Waterfront and that choice has been brought up as a complaint to me by many Coast Salish people. City of Seattle staff need to do a better job of being aware of the harm they can do through their ignorance. Using Lushootseed font should be the standard and Anglicizing words is not done for signs in the International District, why would Lushootseed be treated any differently?
0 replies
Definitely need more affordable housing in Seattle. I design affordable housing for work, and would love to see zoning change to allow affordable housing not just along transit corridors. Not everyone wants to live in the middle of the action. Need options for every pace of life.
0 replies
This foreword would be wonderful at the beginning of the entire comp plan!
0 replies
Need to create more urban centers and not rely as much on the existing nodes. I live in Miller Park, and that scale of commercial/transit development could happen in many more residential neighborhoods.
0 replies
Yes, need more effort into engaging underrepresented communities and reducing their barriers to involvement.
0 replies
Support for Native American businesses and enterprises in Seattle should not be regulated to one neighborhood location and should support Native and Indigenous small business owners and investors across the city.
0 replies
Make downtown car-free and add more park& ride options near light rail stations.
0 replies
Need better east-west bus connections: faster, more consistent, and more route versions.
0 replies
One thing that needs to be addressed is the problem of changing zones within a block. For example, I have a house at 1425 26th Ave, and there is a zone change midblock. Townhouses were built very tall to the west of my house, and they create a light-blocking wall. It's really not fair to allow that without changing the entire block to Lowrise, so that my parcel can go higher too and have access to the western sunlight again.
0 replies
Bring back corner stores! Need more walkable community amenities distributed throughout the city for equity, as well as to spread out desirable neighborhoods to reduce demand on housing on neighborhoods that already have amenities.
0 replies
The growth strategy has devolved into something that's disrespectful and irresponsible. PLEASE: Bring back the corridor upzones (of at least 1/4 mile) around frequent transit for 6+ story development. Also expand these crucial apartment and condo-friendly areas to radiate from schools, parks, and community centers. Bring back the ~26 neighborhood centers that appeared in the initial growth strategy map Step up the middle housing approach to be a State leader: at minimum, embrace the FAR limits in the model code or, better yet, don't regulate with FAR at all. Middle housing in NR zones MUST also be exempt from MHA. Eliminate parking requirements citywide
0 replies
Both my maternal great-grandparents built their houses when they came to Seattle. I've lived in this area all my life (born on First Hill, like my mom) and graduated from UW (just like my grandmother). I love Seattle and want to see our city get better in the future. I think we need to face our growth and add more density & more housing -- let's embrace our future.
0 replies
This is not at all reflective of community input. Bring back the corridor upzones (of at least 1/4 mile) around frequent transit for 6+ story development. Also expand these crucial apartment and condo-friendly areas to radiate from schools, parks, and community centers. Bring back the ~26 neighborhood centers that appeared in the initial growth strategy map Step up the middle housing approach to be a State leader: at minimum, embrace the FAR limits in the model code or, better yet, don't regulate with FAR at all. Middle housing in NR zones MUST also be exempt from MHA. Eliminate parking requirements citywide
0 replies
The current draft doesn't effectively address the real harms of displacement or provide an effective way to prevent future displacement and provide access for previously displaced families to return. CANDC has been considering approaches for some time, given how profoundly the CD has been affected - especially the Black community. I urge you to review their proposal and consider ways to integrate their ideas into the comp plan.
0 replies
I am a renter in Miller Park, and I believe that the City of Seattle did not listen to the overwhelming majority’s call for an Alternative 6 vision, which would welcome more neighbors in areas with low displacement risk and high opportunity. Instead the current draft plan will force out existing communities in high displacement risk areas. To create a more equitable city, the plan should enable permanently afford social, cross-class housing to be developed in all neighborhoods. If the City of Seattle adopted my above proposed changes, then we would be able to slow gentrification and displacement.
0 replies
I am a homeowner in Madrona , and I believe that the City of Seattle did not listen to the overwhelming majority’s call for an Alternative 6 vision, which would save more trees and green space by building higher. Instead the current draft plan will remove trees by preventing construction of more efficient, sustainable, and taller buildings. To create a more equitable, sustainable, just city, the plan should add many more 'Neighborhood Centers', especially in Urban Neighborhoods. In Madrona in particular, I think that the plan should encourage more density! I've lived here for 27 years and allowing only single-family homes is absurd and not popular. We want apartments! If the City of Seattle adopted my above proposed changes, then we would be able to allow for more opportunities for small businesses.
0 replies
Link to the letter from Mercer Island City Council to state representatives on why HB 1110 will fail to create affordable housing and instead create mostly market-rate housing while worsening problems of traffic, parking, and access to public transportation: link’s-impacts
0 replies
Yes! And add economic development to this list because the urban Native and Indigenous community would also like to increase their earning potential.
0 replies
FARs, height limits and setbacks need to be flexible to accommodate different home shapes, including more accessible stacked flats and family-sized units.
0 replies
Failing to incorporate the social housing initiative (I-135) that was passed by voters many months ago into this proposal speaks poorly to the Mayor’s interest in actually following the will and creativity of our residents.
0 replies
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is too small for multiplexes. Require a minimum 1.2 for 4-plexes and 1.6 for 6-plexes.
0 replies
Yes! I would love to see more types of housing like duplexes or cottages or even moderate-size flats all over -- not just on major corridors. In the past couple of years I have been responsible for finding places to live for both my mother and MIL as they age -- both are retired but still very active & working/volunteering part of their time. We've wanted them to be close (but not too close) to us in Ballard so that we can support and visit them (and they us). But we also want them to be able to have independent lives that are less car-dependent and can access their healthcare providers, domestic help, or community through senior centers or social activity. They both have very different needs and it has been really difficult to find the right variety of housing that will fit them in Seattle -- I would love to have more options that isn't necessarily a single-family house that would suit their needs and help them (and us) thrive.
0 replies
The city should include a way to protect the funding that EDI makes available to community groups so we do not lose this vital capital resource.
0 replies
Allow multifamily housing everywhere, no single -family carveouts. We not only need to provide a variety of housing types throughout the city for people today but for all the people to come. The burden of density should be shared across the city as should the benefits of density.
0 replies
Allow midrises up to 85 feet in transit corridors and Neighborhood Centers, to maximize the potential of wood-frame construction
0 replies
Tall buildings are necessary to provide enough housing for everyone to live within the city. These buildings need to be allowed in every single neighborhood.
0 replies
Increase height limits to 12-18 stories in Regional Centers such as Capitol Hill, the U District, Northgate, and Ballard
0 replies
Increase the radius of Neighborhood Centers from 800 feet to ¼ mile
0 replies
Allow midrise and mixed-use housing within a 5-minute walk of frequent buses.
0 replies
800 feet is simply not enough of a walkshed to be serious about creating a vibrant, dense, and mixed use community. These neighborhood centers are not going to change overnight. Plan for what you want to see by the end of 20 years by increasing the walkshed to 10 or 15 minutes, and then incentivize local development to rise to meet the needs of the neighborhood within that space. The point of this plan is to create a vision for a future that does not already exist in people's minds. If we try to hard to not scare off the NIMBY crowd, we are missing a big opportunity to imagine our city as something different than it currently is - a place that is not struggling with an insane housing crisis driven by exclusionary zoning and housing as a commodity.
0 replies
Speed limits already fail to limit speeds. We need to redesign our streets to inhibit dangerously fast travel
0 replies
The goals are good, but this plan doesn't help us reach them. We need more diverse housing everywhere in the city, not just along arterials or in designated urban centers. Every neighborhood should allow for multifamily housing (duplexes and triplexes at the minimum) and for some commercial spaces offering neighborhood amenities: bodegas, hairdressers, childcare, restaurants and cafes, banks and credit unions, and definitely grocery stores and farmers markets. Every neighborhood should have access to medical care without relying on a bridge (someday The Big One will hit -- let's ensure all of our neighborhood communities will have what they need in a crisis.)
0 replies
Encourage a diverse mix of home sizes and types suitable for families that could be built by market-rate developers
0 replies
Implement plans for innovative housing types including the voter supported Social Housing Initiative
0 replies
Increase the number and size of neighborhood centers where 5-story multifamily buildings are allowed
0 replies
Allow 4 story multi-family buildings and mixed-use zoning broadly in all neighborhoods
0 replies
allow a higher FAR than 0.9
0 replies
I’m completely unconvinced that restricting the number of units per lot in the neighborhoods that are more vulnerable to displacement of traditionally marginalized communities would be a useful strategy. In fact, quite the opposite. For the households from those communities who have managed to stay in the city either as renters or owners, why would fewer available units and less opportunity to add more units to one’s property help?
0 replies
This is fine, but coupled with the measly floor to area ratio of 0.9 and virtually unchanged height limits, this will not meaningfully encourage development of non-single family housing in existing single family neighborhoods. This plan needs to get serious about encouraging and incentivizing development of housing in the city. That means broad upzoning, increased FAR and height limits (to at least what the State Model Code suggests, but maybe even higher), and allowed commercial uses in residential areas.
0 replies
My wife is an artist whose business is conducted in Ballard where we live. Her art is printed in our neighborhood by a local printer and wholesales to businesses in Ballard. We love getting to contribute to a cyclical economy in our local neighborhood. But, there’s a huge issue of affordability. We pay over a third of our income just to rent. Every rent increase we have to have a long discussion about how we can afford to stay here or if we move away. This plan constraints growth and makes it even more unlikely for us to afford a home, more unlikely for us to afford to stay and keep patronizing our local businesses and small business suppliers, and makes it so that any new growth has to replace current multifamily housing which will drive rent even higher. I don’t see the way that this plan is going to stop displacement or support artists, or support its stated goals of living, working, and recreation in our neighborhoods without more density and using all the tools at our disposal.
0 replies
I grew up in Seattle and I'd love to be able to raise a family here someday. My understanding is that all the housing I might actually be able to afford in urban neighborhoods (4 and 6 plexes) is way too small for familes bc of the way this plan is written. What possible excuse could you have for trying to prevent families from living in family oriented neighborhoods? Why does Seattle want my future children to grow up in a different city than their grandparents? Why do you want to force me to be potentially thousands of miles away from my parents when I have young children and need their help the most? My family has lived in Seattle for 4 generations and I'm really proud of that. Why do you want me to be the last generation raised in this city?
0 replies
The listed public development authorities are not "independent" as they are chartered by the City of Seattle and should have stronger relationships with the city government. The city can and should do more to provide technical assistance and financial support to the PDAs that they've initiated.
0 replies
Reduce barriers to building permanent supportive housing (PSH) and emergency housing in more areas of the city. The City should document in the Housing Appendix known barriers to siting different types of PSH and emergency housing in consultation with developers and operators of those housing types and include needed policy changes to remove those barriers in the Plan. Identifying and removing these types of barriers is called for in both the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.020(2)) and the Countywide Planning Policies H-1, H-2, H-4, H-12, and H-13).
0 replies
Throught the "urban neighborhood" place type, zoning should allow triplexes, fourplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, and stacked flats to allow for more housing distributed throughout our residential neiborhoods and a variety of housing types.
0 replies
Housing needs to expand astronomically in order to be sufficient. There is likely no future that Seattle expands housing in a way that is sufficient to our projected growth that does not include much more than what we have seen in this draft.
0 replies
If even our dream map has massive areas where car access is a given and bike facilities are completely absent, what does that say about our commitment to reducing car dependency?
0 replies
Implement "Complete Streets" projects citywide and not just in neighborhood streets.
0 replies
Yes -- I love the idea of a more walkable neighborhood with little shops and services. I'm mobility impaired and currently unable to drive my car. It would be such a tremendous improvement in my day-to-day if I could pop out and walk/wheel to a corner coffeeshop or store by myself to pick up missing ingredients for dinner or a caffeinated beverage on a break from a busy day in front of my computer.
0 replies