SEATTLE — Sharp divisions emerged Wednesday as Seattle residents, housing advocates and environmental activists sparred over a proposal that would dramatically reshape the city’s land-use appeals process.

At issue is legislation proposed by Seattle City Councilmember Eddie Lin. The bill would eliminate State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) appeals to the city’s Hearing Examiner for major legislative actions, including Comprehensive Plan amendments and development regulations.

It prompted impassioned testimony at a public hearing before the Seattle City Council’s Land Use Committee, which Lin chairs.

Lin said his bill would prevent costly delays that have slowed housing production and climate-focused planning. Opponents countered that it would strip residents of one of their few affordable avenues for holding city government accountable on environmental issues before projects move forward.

Lin said that concentrating new housing in dense, walkable neighborhoods near transit reduces suburban sprawl, preserves forests and farmland, lowers greenhouse gas emissions and limits pollution harmful to salmon and orcas.

Lin said Seattle can achieve both affordable housing and a healthy urban tree canopy through thoughtful planning. However, having projects repeatedly delayed by appeals that ultimately have little legal standing is something the city cannot afford, Lin said.

Over the past several years, Washington lawmakers have expanded exemptions within SEPA specifically to reduce red tape for housing production. But Seattle’s municipal code still allows administrative appeals on many actions that state law has already exempted.

Although those appeals are frequently dismissed because of state law, city officials said the process itself can significantly delay legislation.

Under Lin’s proposal, residents could no longer file administrative SEPA appeals before the Hearing Examiner for major legislative actions. Instead, challenges would have to be brought before the Washington Growth Management Hearings Board or King County Superior Court.

During the public hearing, opponents said such a change would effectively place environmental appeals beyond the reach of many residents because pursuing litigation requires attorneys and substantially higher costs.

Several speakers warned that raising the financial barrier to appeals would disproportionately silence neighborhoods and community groups with limited resources.

Environmental advocates also argued the legislation removes an important layer of independent oversight before major decisions become law. They said appeals have historically uncovered flaws in Environmental Impact Statements, revealed previously undisclosed information and prompted improvements before projects advance.

The debate is expected to intensify as Seattle prepares for the next phase of updating its Comprehensive Plan under Mayor Katie Wilson’s administration. The forthcoming environmental review of the plan, which includes proposals for taller and denser development across the city, is likely to make the question of who can challenge environmental reviews a central issue in the coming year.

No vote was taken following Wednesday’s public hearing. The legislation will return to the City Council for further consideration.