The city of Seattle’s proposed 20-year blueprint for growth contains major changes for residential neighborhoods, paving the way for developers to build across lots with little room for shade-providing trees, writes the editorial board. Pictured is the Capitol Hill neighborhood in Seattle. (Ken Lambert / The Seattle Times)
The city of Seattle’s proposed 20-year blueprint for growth contains major changes for residential neighborhoods, paving the way for developers to build across lots with little room for shade-providing trees, writes the… (Ken Lambert / The Seattle Times)By
For Seattleites who appreciate trees, Mayor Bruce Harrell’s “One Seattle” comprehensive plan ought to spark grave concerns.
The city’s proposed 20-year blueprint for growth contains major changes for residential neighborhoods, paving the way for developers to build across lots with little room for shade-providing trees.
Residents have an opportunity to learn more and weigh in. The public comment period for the comprehensive plan closes on Dec. 20. The Seattle City Council is expected to make final decisions in June.
With Seattle failing to meet its own goals of 30% tree canopy by 2037, residents should make sure council members understand what’s at stake. City parks and the strip between streets and sidewalks do not contain enough trees or space to make Seattle green.
A 2021 city study determined that neighborhoods contribute nearly half of Seattle’s tree canopy. Only strong protection and replanting policies will help ensure Seattle maintains the arboreal beauty that defines the city, as well as equitable respite from lethally hot weather.
Here are the some of the lowlights of the what’s being discussed:
Currently, the maximum coverage for a typical 5,000 square foot residential lot is 35%.
Under a proposal floated by the Office of Planning and Community Development, homes could take up 50% of a lot. The city would then mandate 20% of the lot as open space, but that could include walkways with no soil, let alone trees.
Planners propose shrinking setbacks (required space between the edge of a building and the property line) from 20 feet in front and 25 feet in back to 10 feet in front and 10 feet in back — or zero distance if there is an alley. What’s more, planners would allow covered porches to extend six feet into the setback.
That would likely make growing large trees impossible.
So what does this look like in real life? In South Park, which has had this kind of zoning since 2019, developers are building up to six separate, small houses on a single lot, with no room for shade trees to grow.
The effect is a colorless, charmless, heat island that makes money for developers at the expense of everyone else.
You wouldn’t want to live next to it, and chances are, in the next heat wave, you wouldn’t want to live in it, either.
When The Times editorial board asked Birds Connect Seattle (formerly Seattle Audubon Society) about its position on the comprehensive plan, a spokesperson said: “We have yet to issue a formal statement, but I can say that Birds Connect Seattle is concerned that, in addition to reducing average tree canopy cover across the city, the changes seem likely to exacerbate existing tree canopy inequities.”
There is a better way. Trees and development can coexist, if planning is done carefully. Tacoma and Portland are examples of cities that got it right.
To learn more about proposed changed to neighborhood residential zoning, OPCD is hosting a community engagement meeting at 5:30 p.m. on Dec. 10, at the Seattle Center Exhibition Hall, 301 Mercer St. For more information, go to: https://one-seattle-plan-zoning-implementation-seattlecitygis.hub.arcgis.com/pages/engagement
The Trees and People Coalition, which advocates for urban forests, will be hosting an information session on Dec. 11, 5:30 p.m., at Douglass-Truth Library, 2300 E. Yesler Way, Seattle.
Land use planning is often complicated and hard to follow. Take the time to learn about what’s coming down and engage with City Hall.
And remember: Concrete is forever.
Editor’s note: An earlier version of this story misstated how much of a home’s lot the city of Seattle would mandate as open space under a proposal floated by the Office of Planning and Community Development.