Editor’s note: This guest post originally appeared on Chuck Wolfe’s Resurgence: A Journey blog.
Here’s a break from discussions and contemplations of our relationships with urban places and a return to the governance level, where fine-tuning urban livability is a challenging ordeal.
Recreating a Jane Jacobs, people-oriented overlay on a post-pandemic downtown requires various tools. One much-discussed bit of alchemy morphs offices into residences via wizards that include city mayors.
The politics of place
In legislation tied to Seattle’s Downtown Activation Plan, Seattle took a step forward last week with Mayor Bruce Harrell’s proposal to incentivize converting existing commercial buildings to residential uses. While usually a problematic and expensive process — applicable to a relatively small percentage of empty or partially occupied buildings — these conversions have been at the forefront of post-pandemic policies at all levels of government.
Using now-familiar jargon, the legislation explicitly removes perceived “barriers” to such conversions and cuts costs (and perhaps limits appeals) during the conversion process. The logic is appealing: more residents, more foot flow, more eyes on the street, and a more livable city.
The new legislation — which will now be debated by Seattle’s City Council — provides broad exemptions from design review standards when an existing structure is converted to housing from another use or residential uses are added within an existing building. It also aims to offset the conversion cost to residential use by exempting qualifying projects from the City’s Mandatory Housing Affordability (MHA) requirements.
These exemptions may seem counterintuitive to a progressive city that prides itself on championing affordability and inclusiveness and champions its natural setting and quality of life. In fairness, the legislation implicitly assumes affordability will flow from other city programs, along with a recent state-authorized sales tax exemption for office-to-residential conversions.
Design review in Seattle has been vilified in recent years as a classic bugaboo of delay. Design review exemptions have become a familiar incentive for prioritized policy initiatives such as development around transit hubs (if specific criteria exist or conditions are met).
A resurgence cross-check
Last June, writing in GeekWire, I developed a set of indicators of a genuinely resurgent city with livability parameters beyond the quantitative indicators important to public and private economic development boosters. I intended them to be more qualitative measuring sticks beyond “Amazon’s Great Return” to the office, which was then a news cycle essential.
It seems appropriate to recall those proposed indicators nine months later to re-emphasize office conversions’ role in downtown recovery. Here’s a quick interim take on this chapter of the mayor’s proposed legislation against the 10 indicators of a resurgent downtown:
- Innovative interventions. The legislation is an innovative intervention, with some unique Seattle twists aiming to repurpose vacant and underused commercial property for residential use.
- Mixed-use spaces. The legislation supports the creation of mixed-use spaces by allowing existing commercial buildings to be converted into residential uses in zones where both uses are permitted.
- Artistic expression. While the legislation doesn’t directly address artistic expression, converting spaces could provide opportunities for creative endeavors consistent with the mayor’s Downtown Activation Plan.
- Community subsidies: The legislation is partially premised on state sales tax incentives and is, in a sense, a community subsidy (given the proposed exemptions).
- Safety assurance. While not explicitly mentioned, the legislation implies creating a community for families and residents of all backgrounds consistent with the Downtown Activation Plan and an associated safety focus.
- Embracing creativity and colors. The legislation does not explicitly address this issue.
- Enhancing street sounds and scents. The legislation does not explicitly address this issue.
- Encouraging children’s participation. The legislation does not explicitly address this issue.
- Highlighting scenic views. While not explicitly mentioned, converting office buildings to residential may enhance scenic views depending on project design.
- Developing a “places worth visiting” mindset. The legislation makes downtown a place worth visiting by transforming vacant or underused office spaces into residential communities.
Do the exemptions make sense?
The exemptions from the Mandatory Housing Affordability program and design review processes will be subject to further discussion and debate among housing advocates and the City Council.
Here’s an explainer:
- MHA Exemption: The MHA program requires new developments to contribute to affordable housing by providing brick-and-mortar affordable units or through payment to an affordable housing fund. By exempting conversions from these MHA requirements, the city may be surrendering opportunities to increase the supply of affordable housing and assure more diverse communities. This could compound the city’s existing affordability crisis.
- Design Review Exemption: The design review process in Seattle (and other cities) is intended to ensure positive aesthetic contribution to the built environment responsive to policies, guidelines, and community input. Exempting conversions from this process may risk compromised design quality as an aspect of livability.
While these exemptions are aimed at streamlining and reducing costs, their benefits must be balanced against potential drawbacks. A more nuanced approach might involve partial exemptions or clarifying alternative mechanisms to ensure affordable housing and design quality.
Examples might include a scaled MHA contribution (based on project size). Likewise, a custom or simplified design review process might allow for expedited forms of community input. In Seattle’s recent history, such horse-trading is not new.
The balance
While the Mayor’s Office provided several supportive quotations in its rollout last week, the politics of place in post-pandemic times require careful implementation. City leaders must allow for co-creation that positively impacts the city’s housing landscape and built environment.
The mayor’s latest effort is a good start. But it may need refinement.
Like the London I described the other day, Seattle is a shape-shifting, evolving, and adapting entity, and I expect the proposal will morph, too.
After all, post-pandemic, Seattle government has a tall order. The wizards within must ensure that the city will remain a place where people want to be.
