Late last week, a three-hour committee meeting on the issue of allowing housing in a small segment of SoDo near the stadiums exposed significant fault lines on the Seattle City Council when it comes to this long-contested idea. Tempers flared and one councilmember lost their cool as the proposal got its first full public airing after months of moving forward quietly behind the scenes.
Council President Sara Nelson put forward the proposed code amendment earlier this month, and it would allow housing within what’s known as the Stadium Transition Overlay District (STOD), an area of around eight square blocks focused around First Avenue S and Occidental Avenue S. The bill would remove a restriction that exists in other industrial areas in the city that prevents housing from being permitted within 200 feet of a major truck street, which in this case includes both First Avenue S, Edgar Martinez Drive S, and Royal Brougham Way S. Nelson’s amendment is being considered outside of the broader Comprehensive Plan process, which has drew criticism from Councilmember Dan Strauss.
The goal is to allow up to 1,000 units of housing above light industrial uses, in what is touted as a potential “maker’s district” full of small business incubator spaces. The current uses in the area, in addition to the 2016 headquarters for KING 5 news, include the Showbox SoDo, and the flagship Filson retail store.
Stadium housing district: A long-time political football
The idea is not new. Allowing housing in the stadium district was studied in 2013 and again several years ago as part of a broad package of industrial zoning reforms, but it was not included in the final regulations approved by the council in 2023, in large part due to opposition from the Port of Seattle and other industrial groups. Allowing hotels in the area was seen as a compromise, and the new Urban Industrial (UI) zones created by the reforms allowed light industrial uses to coexist with mixed-use buildings elsewhere in the city, including in Ballard, Interbay, and Georgetown.
But advocates for the sports stadiums, housing groups, and labor unions representing construction workers have continued to advocate for the maker’s district to move forward. Under city code, at least 50% of the housing built in the district has to be made available for households making less than King County’s area median income, depending on the number of bedrooms included in each unit.
“Union-built affordable housing is a big deal for our members, and we can have it here,” Nicole Grant, political director for The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 46, said during public comment Friday. “I was the co-chair of the industrial lands advisory committee under Mayor Jenny Durkan, and I will tell you that this project was always on the table, but it had to be studied first to make sure that it would not compromise the Port of Seattle. It was studied, and it does not compromise the Port.”
The process Nelson is using to send this change through the council is atypical. Rather than send the bill through the Land Use Committee as customary, she used her power as council president to direct the bill to her own Governance, Accountability, and Economic Development Committee, over the objection of several of her council colleagues. Land Use Committee had been without a chair until the recent appointment of Mark Solomon to fill the vacancy left by former Councilmember Tammy Morales’ resignation. On Friday, she invited a fair of advocates for the change to join city staff at the briefing table, not inviting anyone from the Port of Seattle or the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) to provide their perspective.
“This bill is not good,” ILWU’s Dan McKisson told the Seattle Freight Advisory Board last week. “This was negotiated and voted on just over a year ago, and they’re coming back and simply, it’s the same gentleman who wanted the area there, and that’s Chris Hansen — he owns these 14 acres, he’s getting help from folks, but there’s a campaign to not allow that to happen, because having housing in there is of course not safe. For pedestrians down there, adding more pedestrians without further mitigation is a problem. And it’s really impactful to the ports.”
A California-based hedge fund manager, Hansen snatched up the 14 acres near the stadiums nearly a decade ago in hopes of building an arena complex to one day host NHL hockey and NBA basketball games. However, his plan relied on securing a street vacation from the City to host a multi-block development, which the Seattle City Council turned down in 2016. Instead, Mayor Ed Murray and the city council advanced an alternate plan remodeling the publicly owned Seattle Center Arena, which was rebranded Climate Pledge Arena following the overhaul. As a result, Hansen is still sitting on considerable SoDo land holdings and hoping to build something other than an arena.
This week a group of 31 state legislators, including Seattle Democrats and Eastern Washington Republicans, signed a letter asking city councilmembers to oppose Nelsons’s bill. “[W]e stand together in opposition to the proposed ordinance because we represent an array of constituencies that will be harmed by this proposal,” the letter states. “Our farmers and agricultural exporters rely on the efficient movement of goods and easy access to international trade gateways. Healthy and resilient communities rely on clean, walkable neighborhoods with easy access to green space and public amenities.”
Economic development tool or developer giveaway?
Nelson has called her bill an economic development opportunity, and one that would improve public safety in the area by adding more activity and vibrancy.
“The conditions in that area are not living up to their potential,” Nelson said in presenting her own slides on the proposal, ones that went ahead of any presented by independent city staff, another unusual move.
Nelson didn’t put forward an amendment to allow housing in the STOD in the 2023 industrial lands proposal, and she blamed this oversight on the fact that she was a new councilmember, despite being in office for a year-and-a-half when the legislation was approved.
“I did not want to ruin that stakeholder process at the last minute and blow the whole piece of legislation, and so I did not carry forward an amendment at that point,” Nelson said. “However, the underlying zoning does support housing.”
“This proposal is a spot rezone to benefit one wealthy out-of-state developer,” Port of Seattle Commissioner Fred Felleman said. “The industrial lands package that was transmitted by Mayor Harrell in 2023 was a culmination of over a decade of work, with many stakeholders. Nobody got exactly what we wanted, but we got an agreement. As a compromise, the Port agreed to hotels in the stadium district.[…] but long-term housing in an industrial zone without basic amenities is unacceptable and compromises our ability to attract new tenants.”
“The development of this maker’s zone is critical. We have a huge economic opportunity here,” Seattle Building and Construction Trades Council Executive Secretary Monty Anderson told the committee. Anderson also said that representatives for Mayor Harrell communicated that housing would eventually be allowed in the stadium district, just not in 2023. “I was told by the Mayor’s office to come back in a year, and it’d be simple legislation, and we could support it. That is exactly what I was told,” he said.
Anderson’s account of being promised the change after a delay was backed up by Lizanne Lyons, a consultant for the Washington State Public Stadium Authority, which oversees the operation of Lumen Field and Events Center.
A steaming Kettle
It was in an exchange with Anderson where the meeting almost went off the rails. Councilmember Bob Kettle, a retired naval officer, took offense at an implication from Anderson that he was being fed talking points around why to oppose housing in the stadium district, though that was never actually asserted. Kettle insisted his own background has led him to where he stands on the proposal.
“My position on this, even as a candidate, was from that north star of understanding the international economics,” Kettle said. “It’s nothing to do with dirty tricks, or these kinds of things that you’re insinuating […] the idea that I’m getting talking points and that I’m just mouthing these, if that’s what you’re impugning, is absolutely false.”
Along with Kettle pushing back on Nelson’s bill was Dan Strauss, who shepherded the 2023 legislation as the former Land Use Committee chair, and expressed concerns about both the policy and the process that got the council to this point.
“There is merit to the conversation, and there are important things that need to go forward before I’m comfortable with housing in the stadium district,” Strauss said. “Because the transportation network between the port and I-90, in my opinion, is not working today, much less with any change.”
Strauss doesn’t sit on Nelson’s committee and will not get to weigh in on its recommendation to the full council.
Looking ahead
Meanwhile, Councilmembers Rivera, Saka, and Hollingsworth — the remaining members of Nelson’s committee — avoided staking a clear position during Friday’s meeting, though Rivera did note that she thinks the proposal would improve public safety and Saka praised Nelson for her “leadership and bravery” in putting the bill forward.
A public hearing on the bill is set for Monday, February 24 at 9:30am, with a committee vote likely later that same week.
Correction: A previous version of this article misidentified Nicole Grant as executive director of the MLK Labor Council, a position she no longer holds. Katie Garrow is MLK Labor’s Executive Secretary-Treasurer.
Ryan Packer has been writing for The Urbanist since 2015, and currently reports full-time as Contributing Editor. Their beats are transportation, land use, public space, traffic safety, and obscure community meetings. Packer has also reported for other regional outlets including Capitol Hill Seattle, BikePortland, Seattle Met, and PubliCola. They live in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Seattle.