158 votes
Increase building height limits or create tax incentives for green developers.
make sustainable building economically sustainable by allowing taller buildings, increasing density and creating tax incentives for developers so they can afford to make the more expensive short term design decisions that will result in a greener city in the long run.
atwoods1
There are far too many small buildings ( less than 5 stories ) . If they were replaced with buildings that were at least 10 stories, several benefits would arise - more affordable housing, increased community, less reliance on cars, easier to walk to places, and public transportation can serve more people. Not only that we could add some green space back into neighborhoods. urban sprawl is terrible. just look at los angeles. it's caused so many problems for them. it doesn't have to be that way in seattle.
Dan
Height limits need to be increased throughout the city. Vancouver, B.C. has had success encouraging residential growth in a wide area of the city. This helps to reduce street traffic and urban sprawl as those who work in the city can live in the city and do so at affordable rates. This is when public transportation will start to make sense for more people. Plus, the taller residential buildings we have in Seattle are expensive and rare. It's all supply and demand here.
Phuc Ng
BAD idea. Super bad idea. Dowtown is liquid sand! You want more people to die?
brianblogster
These are all good comments. Density and diversity are the two driving forces of good Urban land use policy - keeping density in the city and not so much in the suburbs. Being able to create walkable, safe and economically vibrant city or neighborhood depends on it. Long term, there will be no affordable housing if no new housing can be built.
Also, by restricting building heights now, what happens is that those sites with new development being built to those lower heights will become unfeasble to demo... more
These are all good comments. Density and diversity are the two driving forces of good Urban land use policy - keeping density in the city and not so much in the suburbs. Being able to create walkable, safe and economically vibrant city or neighborhood depends on it. Long term, there will be no affordable housing if no new housing can be built.
Also, by restricting building heights now, what happens is that those sites with new development being built to those lower heights will become unfeasble to demo in the future when new height limits are needed to accomodate growth, thus preempting the opportunity.
See also www.fremontfreedom.blogspot.com
Harry Hoffman
Density without housing affordability requirements is a recipe for further economic stratification - linking density and affordability as Futurewise does in their new Transit Oriented Communities report is the equitable and smarter approach.
Michael Snyder
For density to work, we also need diversity. It doesn't need to be in the same building, but if we have dense housing on one block, we need places for those people to work, to shop, to eat, to get coffee, to go to the movies, to get groceries, etc. within easy walking distance.
Some of the current downtown density is filled with weekend visitors from Bellevue who use the downtown Seattle condo as a vacation home for the weekends. There isn't community there. We need community, not weekend retreat condos.
Jim Broadus
We should also encourage green roofs, rooftop solar panels, and wind turbines on these buildings.
Art Lewellan
Some limits on building height is necessary for preserving historic, architecturally valuable buildings and neighborhood character. Density alone is counterproductive. Economic 'diversity' is the more important consideration. Density without diversity backfires.
Densifying the inner-city while leaving the much larger metropolitan areas of suburban sprawl, strip mall and parking lot commercial venues 'as is', increases the travel demand from these suburban 'Nowherevilles' to downtown, mostly met by d... more
Some limits on building height is necessary for preserving historic, architecturally valuable buildings and neighborhood character. Density alone is counterproductive. Economic 'diversity' is the more important consideration. Density without diversity backfires.
Densifying the inner-city while leaving the much larger metropolitan areas of suburban sprawl, strip mall and parking lot commercial venues 'as is', increases the travel demand from these suburban 'Nowherevilles' to downtown, mostly met by driving. Economic 'diversity balance' must include the suburbs. Super-densifying the inner-city has backfired.
ser
Height limits are ridiculous and counterproductive.