City of Seattle Office of Sustainability and Environment

The City of Seattle began conservation and environmental programs approximately 40 years ago, but the Office of Sustainability was only created in the year 2000. They have a lot of interesting programs and initiatives in the works, their main focus being energy and climate protection. Currently, they are updating their Climate Action Plan with a goal to be carbon neutral by 2050. They have also proposed energy districts throughout the city, in which districts will produce and consume their own energy rather than relying on city utilities (i.e., hospital district using steam to power their operations). Community Power Works is a federally-funded energy upgrade program designed to improve the energy efficiency of homes and businesses across the city. The Office of Sustainability coordinates with several other city departments to achieve some of their goals. For example, through the Urban Forest Management Plan, they are working with the Urban Forestry Department (which itself consists of approximately 9 smaller departments) to build the tree canopy back to 30% in 30 years from 23% now.

Other programs include electric vehicle infrastructure development, a food action plan, recycling and composting to redirect 70% of waste from landfill by 2022 (from 50% now), building programs, and even deconstruction programs, in which building permits are expedited in exchange for an agreement to deconstruct and reuse portions of existing buildings rather than demolishing and scrapping entire buildings. Portland and Seattle both push recycling and composting and make it easy for citizens to do their part by clearly labeling public waste receptacles for trash/landfill, recycle, and compost. Often "landfill" is actually printed on trash cans to help make the connection that trash isn't actually being thrown "away".

Actually located at McKinstry Innovation Center,
but it illustrates the point

Interestingly, as was common throughout the region, Seattle doesn't focus so much on LEED standards for buildings as they do combinations of other green building standards. A very large number of buildings and tenant spaces are actually LEED certified (various levels), but it is not as noticeable as in Texas because it is not a point of pride so much as it is just the way they build in Seattle. I recall being surprised by several spaces as we exited and I saw an inconspicuous LEED plaque almost hidden from view, while in Texas, LEED plaques are prominently displayed and most often impossible to miss.

A very ambitious project that was mentioned briefly is the Seattle 2030 District, which would create a high-performance central business district. According to the website:

"Through collaboration among diverse stakeholders, leverage of existing and development of new incentives and financing mechanisms, and development and communication of shared resources, the 2030 District seeks to prove the business case for sustainability. Property owners will not be required to achieve the goals of the District by legislative mandates, or as individuals.  Rather, this type of goal achievement requires sharing of resources and ongoing collaboration to make high-performance buildings the most profitable building type in Seattle."

It is ambitious to say the least, and I will certainly keep an interested eye on its progress.

Also interesting to note was that they actually appear to be a little behind the City of Austin in requiring reporting by building owners of energy performance to current and prospective commercial tenants. Through the Energy Benchmarking Program, they do require benchmarking and monitoring of energy and water usage through the EPA/Energy Star Portfolio Manager by large commercial owners as well as requiring reporting to the city. Austin currently requires commercial owners to report that information to prospective tenants and is working toward making it mandatory for multi-family owners as well. Uncertain is whether Seattle is behind the curve, or if Austin is forced to "shame" building owners who are not as efficient due to greater reluctance to cooperate in energy-efficiency programs, while Seattle enjoys greater cooperation and does not feel the need to require that kind of reporting.