Mar

16

Affordability, Sustainablity and Livability: Thoughts on how we debate our future

Filed Under Innovation, Politics, Sustainability, The Bottom Line, Zoning 

Originally posted on Facebook

After spending a lot of time in 2008 watching local land use debates and discussions I found myself feeling more than a little frustrated. Where was all this going? Council discussions seemed to lack focus on a broader agenda for the city. That agenda could be the Comprehensive Plan but that document has become a repository for ‘good ideas’ and political statements. One would often hear “sure put it in the Comp Plan; it doesn’t mean we actually have to do it.”

But what if someone asked me “what should our larger focus be, Roger?” I felt as though I needed to at least think through my answer. At the time it seemed to me that it all came down to making the city affordable to a wide range of people, supporting a self-sufficient and sustainable city and making the city livable.

So I proposed that we create a series based on these three ideas and solicit people’s best and most succinct thoughts on each topic. The Affordability, Sustainability, Livability series was born. Thanks to Shawna at the DJC we were on our way to at least sparking some discussion about the bigger picture. Seattle is missing a determined effort define what we want and measure our progress toward getting it–whatever it is.

That is why the whole series ends up being about definition and measurement. My experience thus far is there isn’t much enthusiasm out there for defining and measuring anything. Defining and measuring doesn’t make for great campaign slogans.”Vote for me and I will work to get us a clear idea of how far we have to go to effectively address the issues we face as a city!” Not exactly “I Like Ike!”

Unfortunately discussion on zoning, for example, tends to fall along party lines, not Democrat or Republican, but various interest groups claiming they will lose if certain legislation passes. Whether its a parking lot in Capitol Hill or incentive zoning its always a scrimmage between the developer who needs to get the project moving, the local neighborhood and parties on either side that see this particular project as representative of “what’s wrong with Seattle.”

If this does not substantially change our city will not be able to make progress on addressing big issues like the viaduct, climate change and the health of Puget Sound. And our city simply cannot prepare for coming growth amid such economic turmoil by having a house to house fight (see Edith Macefield) on issues like land use and housing. It will simply be a case of Bambi Meets Godzilla. We will be crushed by events and we’ll just have to live with whatever happens to our natural and built environment and our economy.

I hope that doesn’t happen.

If you have thoughts on livability (50 words) please submit to them to Shawna (shawnag@djc.com) by Thursday of this week. It would be great to have you and others you know weigh in.

Comments

Leave a Reply