Good evening, and welcome to the first um City of Bellevue Planning Commission meeting of 2026 today, January 14.

This evening's meeting is held via hybrid format.

We are both in person and virtual option reaction.

Tonight's meeting will provide an opportunity for public comments during the oral communication portion of agenda.

All written comments that have been submitted prior to 11 a.m.

today, Wednesday, January 14 will be summarizing into the records.

We have two agenda items tonight, both the study sessions.

First one the introduction to the 2026 comprehensive plan amendment.

And the second, a check-in on the bered look forward land use code amendment.

Now let us forward with the roll call.

Question Lu.

Present.

Commissioner Balabeses.

Present.

Commissioner Kennedy.

President.

Commissioner Nilchian.

Present.

And uh Commissioner Gopel.

Present.

Um Councillor and Mayor Mala Kutian.

Here.

And I'm Chair Hanlu.

Um can I get a motion to approve tonight's agenda?

I'm also here.

My gosh.

Commissioner Ferris.

Yeah.

I think we moved your name.

Just so you know, it's not my fault.

And I wanted to welcome Commissioner Ferris to finish her terms on the planning commission.

I do apologize.

Can I get the motion to approve tonight's agenda?

So any discussion.

All in favor.

Hi.

Congratulations to Mayor Manakutian and his election at the January 6th council meeting.

And um, Mayor Malakutia, do you have any reports for us?

Yes, absolutely.

Uh happy new year to you all.

The first meeting of 2026.

You guys have done an amazing job in 2025, and we are looking forward to all of the reports coming from this body to council in 2026.

Opposite of the chair.

My first note here is welcome you back, Commissioner Ferris and finishing your term.

Uh, as uh not pointing out, you know, have your notes ready for so uh as uh uh you had some conflict, you resigned, we went through a very uh extensive process, and then uh we realized that you can finish your term due to all of your excellent previous work and all of the topic that is coming to us uh and appreciating your amazing work.

Uh you are going to finish your term.

You are really appreciating that you are coming back and you're helping this uh body achieve more stuff that we have.

We had two meetings uh since the uh beginning of the year, January 6th and January 13th.

Uh we have a we have a new leadership mayor and deputy mayor, and every two years uh the mayor go through the process of assigning the new uh liaison for different boards and commission.

This is uh is happening, so we will announce after be going through the process again uh after the all of the appointment is done.

Uh maybe I have the opportunity to be the liaison again, or maybe we give this opportunity to someone else to get some experience and or just know what is going on.

Oh, the topics that I wanted to share with you that came to our uh DOIS is that is important for you all.

Uh, I think is two important things.

One is the parking reform, uh land use code amendment.

Uh, not only do we have some state mandate that is uh forcing us to remove some parking requirements in some areas, but also our code is very old, is belong to the city that we don't have that city anymore.

They said there is a bowling alley and dance floor, and some of those kind of uh requirements or land use need that we don't have that anymore.

So they are going to update that in the DOIS.

We ask for all of the options, not just the state mandate.

So we are going to do very comprehensive about to update our uh parking uh reform land use code.

The other thing that is going to be uh very important for this body is the multi-uh family tax exemption uh program update.

We talk about it in lens.

The city of staff did a great job with all of uh our stakeholders and the ordinance is going to be adopted.

Part of that is going to be uh any more land use code update that we have.

MFT is going to be a component of that.

So, and this body is going to see that as part of that land use code update in HOMA or in any other land use code that we are going to have.

These are the two related uh topic that we talked last night, and I just wanted to share with you, and I'm here to answer any question you have.

Uh, maybe this is a question for staff, but given the MFT updates or where that's headed towards, will we get an update of how that interacts with HOMA for our next uh briefing?

I uh um would anticipate that um Matthew would address that.

Um, but I haven't spoken to him specifically about it.

Okay, that yeah, that would be helpful just given we have another session on HOMA coming up.

Um, and given the recent updates, I feel like that's very important to know.

Definitely you all need to be visible on what is that and how that's impact the land use codes.

I a follow-up question.

You know, the timing of when council is going to consider the different options and where you might when you might make a decision.

So the so we already approved the ordinance that was a staff recommendation with all of the option as an NFT and what they are not recommending.

So that's already done.

The thing that is going to be by the land use code, when the land use code comes, is hasn't come yet.

So when HOMA comes, the portion of MFTE that is going to be additional incentive for if you have a mandatory affordable housing there, then it comes as a combined package to you all first and then to us.

Thank you.

But the overall MFTE is done.

Thank you, Mayor.

Go ahead.

I'm just gonna ask, is it possible for us to get kind of an overview of the whole MFT?

Because I I feel like we probably benefit from just understanding the whole thing, not just the interaction piece.

Yeah, I'll I'll um talk with staff and see if we can um find time in your schedule, or if not, um provide a written update.

That would be helpful.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yep.

Great idea.

I love it.

One last thing that I know it was important for some of the people here.

In the first meeting uh of the council meeting on January 6.

We received a very uh important update on Eastgate campus.

Uh so I know some of you talked to me about that.

The the data is there, the update was great.

What is working, what is not working, and for those things that is not working, what are we doing or what they have been start, what they have started and initiated to address some of the concerns in the Eastgate campus.

So I know at least two of you talked to me about that.

Uh the first session, January 6th, we talk about that, and it's very uh informative session.

That's it for me.

Thank you, Chair.

Thanks, Mayor.

Kate, are there any reports from the boards and commission?

No reports from boards and commissions.

Um, would you mind to provide us with the update of the meeting schedule of 2026?

Yes, as was noted um by some of you that your next meeting you'll be continuing your your discussion on HOMA.

The public hearing was in December.

Um, and in addition, I'll be presenting some of the options for responding to the process improvements that we discussed at your retreat in November.

Um, so some um hopefully helpful decisions to make after discussing HOMA.

Any question from Kate?

Um, would you provide a summary of the rates and communication for us?

Yeah, since your meeting in December, we have not received very many comments.

Uh, your cat packet contained comments that were mostly sent in December around HOMA.

Um we did receive uh one comment um since the packet was published that I sent to you.

Uh I noted right before the meeting that we had received another comment, um, which I'll send on to you.

It was um related to the Bell Red Umka.

So I'll make sure that uh you get that um soon.

Thank you, Kate.

We have a total of 30 minutes for oral communication.

Speaker will have to up to three minutes to speak a staff liaison at Kate Nessie while calling speakers in the order which they have registered, either online or in person.

If anyone from the public has missed the 6 p.m.

registration deadline, you may still provide public comment if there is a remaining time.

Please use the raised hand function in the Zoom if you are attending virtually or motion to the staff if you are in person to indicate that you would like to speak.

There are rules adopted by the city council limiting the topics about which the public may speak during our meetings under ordinance 6752.

The public may only speak during public comment about subject matter that are related to the city of Bellevue government and are within the power and duties of the planning commission.

Additional information about the rules, you can find it on the ordinance 6752.

Kate, can you call in the first speaker?

Sure.

You have five pre-registered speakers, and then uh one who signed up here.

Um the first person is in-person, um Era Pogosova, and the second person also in person is Sandy Vaux.

And if you would turn on your microphone, press the button.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, uh Planning Commission.

Sorry that I'm reading.

Very short time, could memorize it all.

My name is Erica Pagosov and I'm the managing director of Theater 33.

We're a nonprofit community theater located in the heart of the Bellred Arts District.

I want to begin by sincerely thanking the planning commission and the city staff for the long-term vision you set in motion back in 2009.

That decision to designate Bellred as an arts district was bold and forward thinking.

It is incredibly meaningful to stand here, sit here as part of the momentum that vision created and to witness the art district not just existing on paper, but truly beginning to flourish.

For Theater 33, being located in the arts intensive area was serendipitous at first, but was not incidental.

It was essential.

Our mission centers on access, education, community storytelling.

Being physically rooted in a district designated to support creativity allows us to collaborate, to grow sustain uh sustainably, and to serve a diverse and multilingual community that might otherwise be excluded from the arts.

The zoning, the density, the emphasis on mixed use, these are not just abstract policies to us.

They directly shape our ability to operate, to plan seasons, to teach our youth, and to welcome the public.

Looking forward, we're excited about what the future of Bellred can become.

Theater 33 has already expanded its footprint within the district.

We just opened up the new studio 33 on December 6th.

And there's classroom space.

We see enormous potential for deeper partnerships with other arts organizations.

Just today I met with a Hindi community who's looking to use our space for their classes and workshops.

Um, and uh the other creative businesses and residents who want to live work and make art here in the district.

That potential, however, depends on the thoughtful land use decisions that recognize the realities of arts organizations, the need for affordable space, flexible use, visibility, and long-term sustainability and stability.

Art organizations are not temporary tenants.

We invest deeply in place.

We build audiences, train young people, host free community events, and contribute to the cultural and economic vitality of the city.

When the land use policy supports arts-intensive development, it sends a clear message that creativity is not an afterthought, but a core civic value.

Doing so ensures that the district remains distinctive, vibrant, and human-centered, not just another redevelopment area, but a neighborhood with identity and with soul.

Thank you again for your leadership, your vision, and your continued commitment to integrating arts and culture into the future of Bellred.

Theater 33 is proud to be part of this district and the city, and we'll look forward to growing alongside for many years to come.

Thank you for listening.

Thanks.

Turn the button up.

Next we have Sandy Vowe, followed by Cody Lodi, who is virtual.

And I see your hand, Cody.

Thank you.

Hello, Planning Commission.

My name is Sandy Vaux, and I'm the executive director for the Bell Red Arts District Community Alliance.

I'm here with Maria Lau Huey, former Arts Commissioner, uh Community Alliance Board Chair and Architects.

We're here today to share the enthusiasm for the City of Bellevue's Bell Red Land Use Code update process.

We are deeply grateful and for the dedication and thoughtful work for city staff and the planning commission, whose ongoing efforts have shaped the Bell Red area since its designation as an arts village and the 2009 Bellred land use code updates and the Bellred sub-area plan.

While significant strides have been made, we like to express how important this to continue prioritizing preserving arts and culture in our district's ecosystem.

Arts and culture plays a significant role in enhancing quality of life, fueling local economic vitality, and benefiting the broader community.

In order to achieve these outcomes, we must ensure that the Bell Red Arts District remains sustainable.

Together, we can do this by one, ensuring that the proposed arts intensive area provides affordable space for creation, community collaboration, performance, arts education, creative pursuits, and more.

Two, attracting and supporting the growth of creative businesses, organizations, and local artists through affordable live work artist housing and retail spaces.

Three, prioritizing arts and cultural amenities within future developments that are publicly accessible, such as mural, public artworks, building and wall facades, and others to highlight and distinguish the area as a creative and artistic hub.

And four, building a connective environment that makes it easier for visitors, residents, and workers to support businesses across all sectors in the district.

We urge that you continue to prioritize the importance of encompassing arts, culture, and creativity into the future of the Bell Red Arts District, and understand how central it is to the community its economy and the vibrancy of its built environment.

We hope you remain steadfast in the goal you set forth back in 2009 to identify and realize opportunities to integrate arts and cultural works and attractions into Bell Red.

Thank you so much for listening.

Thank you.

Next, we have Cody Lodi, who is virtual and all right.

Thank you.

My name is Cody Lodi.

I'm a design professor, uh design principal and architect at Weber Thompson, and a former co-chair of the AIA Mass Timber Committee.

I'm working on several projects in the Wilburton and Bell Red Overlay, and I applaud the planning commission for the huge changes you've made to the Bellevue land use code.

We're often one of the first um test cases looking at development in these areas, and there's a lot of positive um revisions that have happened in these codes.

I've had a little uh limited time to look at the most recent Luca draft for the Bell Red overlay, and I have a few thoughts.

Specifically on um access and connectivity, um, I think there is an opportunity to provide more optionality for um access corridors through the Bellred overlay to break down the blocks, especially considering that this is a transit-oriented um overlay and looking at ways to um really focus on providing options for pedestrian and bike uh focused access corridor typologies, like the shared use path typology that's in the recent Wilbert and Luca.

This provides flexibility for creating vibrant pedestrian-related connections that can support gathering and public space tied to the arts district.

I also want to applaud the city for incentivizing mass timber construction as it provides a more carbon responsible way to develop.

What we are finding is that the economic sweet spot for mass timber at scale and density is at the at an 180-foot-tall um building height due to building code requirements.

In order to make this uh pencil out from a developer's perspective, you need larger floor plates to get an efficient structural grid, especially with residential uses.

While the 20,000 square foot floor plate limit for mass timber uh residential uses um is positive, I do believe that going to a 25,000 square foot plate will provide more um flexibility for residential uses to create the density needed in these overlays.

Third, um, I also think it's worth considering striking the floor-to-floor height requirements and flat plate uh requirements for above-grade parking.

This unnecessarily adds cost to projects already challenged by hydrology and typology, especially in the Bell Red overlay.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Next, we have Cosmos Darwin, who is in person and uh followed by Jesse Clausen, who is also in person.

Uh good evening, Planning Commission.

Thanks for the opportunity to speak with you.

My name's Cosmos.

I live downtown.

And one of the things I love about living downtown is that I can walk places because we have such a robust grid of streets and sidewalks and crosswalks.

If the Bell Red Corridor is going to become a truly urban neighborhood, it also needs to be walkable.

I'm here tonight because I saw the revised Bell Red Street Network in the agenda materials.

And upon comparing the working draft map to the one that's currently in the land use code, I realized that we're considering dropping something like a third of the required streets.

So I want to share some feedback and suggestions about that.

Uh, number one, I totally get that in some instances a required street takes up almost a whole parcel, and so it's like makes that parcel not developable.

I get that problem.

Um, but like speaking as a resident and a taxpayer and a pedestrian, honestly, I would rather see the city just finish the job in those instances and acquire the right-of-way, like buy the parcel if it's so small.

An example of this would be the southern end of the future 131st Avenue.

There's like an 80-foot wide parcel that the street goes right through.

Rather than having the street grid never connect to Bell Red Road, I would rather just see the city build that out themselves.

Number two, there are a bunch of other streets that are dropped from the working draft map that don't have this problem.

And so frankly, I just don't understand why.

And I'd love for someone to ask like why are those streets being dropped?

An example would be the northern end of the future 131st Avenue.

It seems like a textbook case where it follows the property lines really neatly.

Both sides could be developed and build the street.

So I'd love to understand why that's being dropped.

And I guess I worry it could be sort of a slippery slope.

Like if any developer can just play the waiting game and over time we whittle away at the street grid, we're not going to get an urban street grid in Bell Red.

Number three, if we do end up dropping some of the streets, I would love to at least see the city assert like a pedestrian connection in its place.

An example of this could be near the Vicino development.

They have built their part of Northeast 19th Street.

They've also built a nice little playground.

It would be a real bummer if there was no way to reach that playground directly from 130th Avenue, but what do you know?

That is one of the streets that's dropped in the working draft.

So it would be great to have at least a pedestrian connection in its place.

Okay, all of that to say I get that we want to juice redevelopment in Bell Red.

Uh, I also want to see more development in Bell Red, but I hope that giving up on a truly walkable urban street network is going to be kind of our last resort, and that we'll try everything else first.

Uh thanks for the opportunity to share my perspective.

Thanks.

Next, we have Jesse Clausen, followed by Rebecca Bloom.

Mr.

Mayor, Chair, and Commissioners, hello, this evening.

Um, I'm going to talk about two things.

The first thing I'm going to talk about is the comprehensive plan amendment that is before you tonight, uh submitted on behalf of Steve Malsum, who's in the back with McKenzie.

Um, this proposed plan amendment changes the comprehensive plan from general commercial to low rise to mixed use, mainly so that we can do mixed use with residential on top in that location.

Um, the city is proposing or is asking you all to uh potentially add a parcel to that uh proposed amendment.

We are fine with that.

We did not submit that parcel because we don't own it.

Um, but we just want to let you know that we're fine with whatever you do.

We think it nicely squares it off.

Um, and we're also, you know, we'll be participating throughout the process and we'll hear if you have any questions about um what future plans, which there aren't any actual uh concrete plans yet.

The second thing I wanted to talk about is the Bell Red uh code amendment before you.

Obviously, it's very early.

We're very excited to see the uh code.

Um, and we're very excited uh to see a code when it's done that is ready for development on day one.

And to me, that means um a street grid that is actually achievable.

We actually applaud some of the changes that the uh staff made to the street grid.

We think that um the staff looked at some of the very difficult uh grade changes and connection issues in Bell Red.

Um and so we applaud some of those changes, and we think that we can go even further and make sure that there are walkable connections that go right to the light red line.

Um, we also want to advocate for the most flexible uses possible.

So sometimes there's a tendency to say, well, we really want residential in this area, we really want commercial in this area.

Um, it would be great if just mostly all of the uses are allowed in most of the places, similar to Wilberson.

Um we also want to advocate for floor sizes or floor plate sizes that make sense to those that will build them.

So you heard Cody talk about mass timber.

Those uh mass timber floor plates really do need to be larger.

And finally, an amenity incentive system that incentivizes the behaviors that you're looking for.

So that includes stream daylighting, open space, affordable housing, all the good things that we're trying to incentivize developers to do.

If you give additional FAR and height in exchange for those things, um, you will see those things happen.

You just went through this in Wilmerton.

We all did, and I think that code uh turned out fairly successfully.

So we hope that you know you can use that as a template as we're going through for some of the decisions that you're gonna make.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next, we have uh Rebecca Bloom.

Good evening.

Uh I'm Rebecca Bloom.

I'm the chief investment officer for real estate equity at Columbia Pacific Advisors.

And my comments are on the Bell Red uh Luca.

We are working through a master development plan for a large nine-acre assemblage in the heart of Bell Red, just south of Spring Boulevard, directly adjacent to Light Rail.

Firstly, I'd like to express our thanks to city staff and the commission for all the hard work that went into the drafting of the Bell Red Luca, and we're really excited to be at this critical point in the process.

There are several projects already in the pipeline in Bell Red.

We submitted our MDP last year, and similar to the recent HOMA discussions.

We would urge you to ensure that submitted MDPs and ADRs are both vested against the new code, but can also opt into the new code if desired.

We're very happy to see that many of the suggestions around incentivizing and daylighting of streams were incorporated into the draft Luca and the new critical areas ordinance.

Daylighting is very complicated and expensive undertaking and proper incentives are critical to delivering the desired outcomes.

We're working through the draft language now and thinks that there are uh we think that there are very big steps in the right direction here.

So thank you.

And we'll be providing further comment on this topic in the future.

Uh, with respect to the street grid, there's been considerable work with staff around the location of streets.

Uh, we believe that streets should be more pedestrian in nature, and the commission should be asking whether many of the roads are truly necessary for auto-circulation.

Uh, there is uh necessary additional height in FAR allowed in many of the new land use zones in Bell Red.

Uh the intensity of future development may continue to be constrained due to the high water table uh and what that means for the cost of below grade structured parking.

So urge you to continue to consider flexibility for parking requirements, particularly adjacent to light rail.

We encourage the commission to ask for additional study on floor plate sizes and tower separation.

It appears that the current draft does not allow for averaging of floor plates over 55 feet in most zones.

And I would encourage you to allow for uh larger floor plates in general.

And lastly, uh uses need to be as flexible as possible uh after the last several years of turbulence in commercial real estate and the economy as a whole.

I think we've all learned that flexibility is the key to success over and over again.

So uh thank you for all the work to date, and we are excited to continue working on this in the future.

Thank you.

Chair, we have a little bit of time left.

I can open it up to the floor.

Yeah, that'd be perfect.

Is there anybody in person who would like to speak?

Is there anybody online who would like to speak if you could raise your hand?

I see one person online.

Just a moment, I will allow you to speak.

Right.

Can you hear me?

I can hear you.

Can you hear me?

Yes, go ahead.

Uh state your name, please.

Hi, my name's uh Isaac Patterson.

Um I'm a land use attorney.

I work now with uh Tharsus uh law PS.

And I just wanted to testify in my personal capacity about the Bell Red Luca and just wanted to state that we we really want to support the maximum flexibility.

Uh we think that the Luca's headed in the right direction.

And also just that just wanted to encourage the commission to consider and support um developing an MFTE supercharger for Bell Red along the lines with the Wilburton uh supercharger program that councils indicated it supported last night.

That's all I have.

Uh thanks for all your work on this.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That is all of the speakers, Chair.

Thank you, everybody.

Um tonight we have a study session item on 2026 comprehensive plan amendment.

There has been one privately initiated CPA for 2026 for Evans uh Plaza.

At this session, staff will give an overview for uh of the application and ask the planning commission to give a direction on the geographic scope of the CPA and set the public hearing for the threshold review.

Treshold review is determined whether it should be part of 2026 CPA work program.

Comprehensive plan uh planner um tune uh will provide a presentation on Avens Plaza.

Hi Tian.

Hi, good evening.

Uh yeah, good evening, Chair Khan Lu, uh Vice Chair Liu and uh Mayor Melakutin and the commissioners.

Um so yeah, uh tonight's let me just minimize this real quick.

So at the night study session, a privately initiated plan amendment, Evans Plaza will be introduced to the planning commission, uh including a review of the proposal's geographic uh scope.

Um, and just to go over the agenda real quick.

Um, first we'll just sort of level set with a quick overview of the amendment process for privately initiated amendments.

Um, and secondly, we'll focus on the application itself, the one privately initiated application that was submitted ahead of the September 15 deadline.

And then we'll go into uh a review and sort of staff analysis and review of uh the geographic scope, and then lastly, sort of planning commission review and and next steps.

Um there staff uh request planning commission direction on two items.

Um so first after review of the staff recommendation to provide direction on the geographic scope uh of the proposed amendment, and then secondly to provide direction to schedule public hearing for threshold review, which is the next step in the uh amendment process.

Uh more on that to come uh for February 11th.

So, in terms of the annual amendment process, um, it consists of two steps for privately initiated amendments.

So for city initiated amendments, for instance, the uh neighborhood area uh plans for Eastgate and Factoria, those are sort of separate from the privately initiated uh amendments.

They have their own processes, two-step process.

And the first process step is threshold review, and that is really meant to determine whether applications should be included in the annual work program.

Uh, and then the second step, final review, that is uh when planning commission uh as well as city council will review the actual sort of merits of a proposal.

So, first is more like should it be included in the work program, and then secondly um the actual evaluation.

Um the uh planning commission's review of the merits of the proposal will follow after uh city council will uh make the decision to include it in the annual work program uh after reviewing a recommendation from planning commission on that.

Um and it's important to note like step one is threshold review.

Uh we're not even there there yet at this point.

Uh tonight is really like an introduction and the geographic scope.

Um if planning commission decides to set the date for threshold review, that will sort of be the actual first step in the process.

It's more like a an introductory uh uh uh sort of a precursor to the to the process.

As I said, uh one amendment uh proposal was submitted ahead of the September 15th deadline.

Um Evans Plaza.

Um and this amendment is a proposed map amendment um and requests a change in the land use designation from general commercial to low rise to mixed use on uh what is uh about 10 acres site in the bridal trails neighborhood area.

It's immediately north of State Route 520, um, also immediately north of the Bell Red uh neighborhood area.

And here's a map.

So uh I think this came up during oral comment as well.

Um so the proposed amendment site covers uh pretty much everything that's included uh in that block bound by 136th, northeast 24th, 140th, and then um sort of uh state route 520 to the to the south.

Um there's also uh the um 520 trail that runs immediately south of the sort of the project here outlined in uh red.

Um and Evans Plaza is a commercial complex, as you can see um on this aerial, it it has like sort of a complex of buildings, um, one-story commercial buildings with a range of different uses, mostly uh retail services, uh restaurants.

That's what's included in uh uh in the complex today.

And here are some uh photos recently taken at this site.

Uh so here you're looking sort of southwest uh to the west behind these buildings is state route 520.

Um and here you can see uh uh a few of the buildings that are part of the Evans Plaza complex, as you can see on the on the sign there.

Uh and here's another photo again, sort of looking this time in northwesterly direction, uh taken from 140th Av as well, uh, with another building with uh with commercial tenants there.

Um so again, the rec the proposed amendment is a change in the future land use map uh as it applies to the site outlined um in uh sort of white gray.

Um it's important to sort of uh provide a little bit of context about what that means, sort of the the future land use map.

Um the future land use map is policy oriented, um, and a future land use designation, like you can see here on the screen, the existing land use designation, general commercial, um, that represents the community's long-term vision for that area for that specific area.

And those land use designations are meant to provide a broad direction on the general uses that are um permitted um on that site, and also like sort of the intensity, scale, and density uh of uses on that on in that area.

Um the future land use designation is part of the comprehensive plan.

So that's the long range uh sort of vision policy for the city of Bellevue, and like more detailed requirements is like how you can you like develop your property like in terms of uses and the buildings that you can build, like that is um further defined uh in the land use code and and the zoning map.

So that's more like implementation of that vision.

Um and the future land use designation then links together that land use vision with specific land use districts that live in the land use code.

Um, and here um I there's a future land use map key in the land use element of the comprehensive plan, and the language taken here um is is from that same key, and then you can see the difference between the existing um uh land use designation, general commercial, and then the proposed uh designation, low rise to mixed use.

Um general commercial, both the land use designation and the related land use district, sort of in a general sense don't allow for um uh residential uses.

Um, I think you can only have like residential uses when it's like sort of uh uh an accessory or subordinate use to a commercial uh use, but not like standalone residential.

And then low rise to mixed use is sort of a mixed use district, but then uh does include housing or a residential uses, and then at like uh the higher end of the low scale uh and density that you can find in the comprehensive plan.

Um so one another element to point out here is for low rise to mixed use.

Uh, that was one of the land use designations that was created with the sort of the large update to the comprehensive plan and sort of the 2022-2024 time frame that most of you are very involved with.

Um the related land use district, um, sort of the land use district in the land use code to implement that land use designation doesn't exist today, but is part of the HOMA LUCA or housing opportunities in mixed use areas, um, land use code amendment.

Um that is in development, uh, I think at the at the next planning commission meeting on January 28th, uh on January 28th.

That's again on the on the agenda for a study session item.

Um, and so it's just important to know that we're often um proposed map amendments do include sort of a concurrent rezone application.

That is not the case for the specific application because you can't apply for a rezone as that land use district doesn't exist today in the land use code.

So that is still under development with the HOMA proposal.

Um so that's just an important one to note.

And again, sort of the CPA process or the comprehensive plan amendment process is a separate process from rezone applications, uh, different type of process, uh, different um uh goes through a uh hearing examiner and city council uh planning commission is very involved with uh comprehensive plan amendments as uh as we can see here tonight.

Um moving on to then um the question of geographic scope.

Um so before that first step, that threshold review planning commission reviews the geographic scope of what will be discussed at the public hearing.

Um and the geographic scope, the land use code sets a limited set of criteria of what should be considered when considering the scope of a proposed amendment, and that is property that is nearby, similarly situated that shares characteristics of the proposed amendment sites, and then sort of a last overarching criterion is to sort of avoid being over-inclusive when considering the geographic scope.

And we'll just sort of peel off those different criteria step by step and sort of narrow it down to uh what is in the end captured by the staff recommendation.

Um the first step is to look at nearby properties.

And what does that mean nearby?

That means parcels that share a parcel boundary.

Um there's one of those right there, or that are located across from a public right-of-way from the proposed amendment site.

And this is then sort of the basis, the properties identified here on the screen with those axes are sort of the basis for the analysis of the second and the third uh criterion.

And as I said, just peeling it off layer after layer.

So not all nearby properties are similarly situated.

And um, sort of two characteristics are key here is that properties are located in the bridal trails neighborhood area.

And then secondly, that they're um in sort of part of what is identified as the Pine View neighborhood center in the comprehensive plan.

In the land use element, um, several neighborhood centers are identified.

Neighborhood centers uh are commercial mixed use areas that are meant to um serve uh um some, if not all, of sort of the daily needs of the surrounding communities, surrounding residential neighborhoods.

Um what is different here is like compared to the last slide, you'll see that all the sort of properties to the south have sort of uh are no longer included.

Those properties are in the Bell Red area, and Bell Red is a very uh different area than bridal trails in terms of sort of land use vision.

Uh, it's also a study session item later tonight.

Um so they have their own future land use designations, uh sub-area plan policies to guide future development there in Bell Red.

So those are not similarly situated properties to the ones um that are part of the proposed amendment site.

Uh, then all the other uh, in other words, uh the the remaining properties are all in the bridal trails area, but then some are not part of um the Pine View neighborhood center and um the Westminster Chapel, that large uh church property uh to the northeast, where it sort of says bridal trails, a large parking lot and a large building immediately to the east.

Um that is not part of the area identified as the Pineview neighborhood center and is therefore not similarly situated to the proposed amendment site.

And then the third uh criterion is uh similarly situated.

Umperties don't share sort of the same key uh site characteristics that the proposed amendment site has.

Um so as I said before, the Evans Plaza, the commercial complex is um sort of single-story commercial buildings with a range of like restaurants, retail uses, and so on.

And three properties, um, the one at the corner, sort of located on the same block, and two on the opposite side of uh 140 that share those same characteristics, and then other properties um either have like are different in terms of like development patterns and land use, or they are in an area that um has a different future land use designation today, a future land use designation that already allows for mixed use, including residential, sort of different from um the area here that has that general commercial designation.

And maybe I'll just quickly go back to this map to highlight uh that so you can see uh the land use designation to the parcel immediately west, which is like a wooded parcel uh west of 136th, uh, and also the area north of Northeast 24th.

Um, that's all low rise, office mixed use, which already allows for residential uses and therefore does not share those same characteristics as the proposed amendment sites and these three remaining properties that you see highlighted on the on the screen.

And then sort of the last um criteria is um the minimum necessary, uh the minimum necessary to expand the geographic scope uh of the proposed amendment site, if if at all.

Um there are some, there were two other properties that were sort of similar in character and shared, like um, you know, same characteristics in terms of land use, development patterns, access.

But um, while those properties are similar, um, the outcome uh if uh to decide if it would be decided to include those properties would be to include another block with a general commercial land use designation consisting of additional parcels and measuring a total area of about five acres, and just a shared uh general commercial land use designation would then be also insufficient for for expanding the geographic scope of the proposal.

Um and then to conclude um the staff recommendation is to expand the geographic scope of the amendment to include that one adjacent of immediately adjacent parcel, uh the corner parcel that's uh a half acre in size.

Um as that parcel shares key characteristics of access, land use um, and development patterns, and is also similarly situated to the proposed amendment side.

Um so we're nearing the end of the presentation.

So like after reviewing the staff recommendation, uh it is uh up to the planning commission to provide direction, and there are uh several options there is to um expand the geographic scope or the staff recommendation or to not expand the geographic scope, and then the third option would be to identify additional properties uh to include.

And before closing out, just uh quickly on sort of public notice and comment.

This is a process for um application.

Uh that means there's like a whole process in terms of noticing, uh public hearings and so on.

So notice of application um was published um uh uh last year.

Uh signs went up as you can see here on the screen.

And then throughout the process, throughout this uh comprehensive plan amendment process, public comments can come in.

Um we've had some inquiries, there's some questions for clarification from community members.

We haven't received like sort of the more formal written comments as in like I'm for or against what is proposed.

Um, and in terms of sort of city engagement, so the city is reviewing the application, it's not the applicant, but um uh staff will provide a presentation to membership of the bridal trails community club to just give an overview of what the comprehensive plan amendment process is about uh and to identify opportunities for the community to um to engage and and weigh in on on the application also in future public hearings.

And with that, um sort of next steps.

Um first thing would be um in this two-step process is to set the date for the public hearing, uh, also after uh reviewing the geographic scope.

Um, and then lastly, which would take place later this year if um this proposal were to proceed through the process uh is final review in the summer or fall of 2026.

But I'll just go back to slide number three to the two items uh for direction uh here tonight.

But that concludes the presentation.

Thanks, Tim.

Um is that okay if we go round of one question and then second round follow-up question count as a second question?

Um, whoa.

I don't know, you're good.

Um thank you to and I appreciate the uh the presentation.

Uh I'll I'll maybe ask the basic one here.

Uh so what are the downsides for the property owner of the uh the additional parcel if we choose to include them uh within this?

Like they they can they opt out if they choose not to, but if you could just highlight kind of what the impact would be to the property owner, that'd be helpful.

Yes, that's a good question.

Um it's a two-step process.

First, like, of course, the application for amending the comprehensive plan, which would then um, you know, if approved and going through the whole process with planning commission and and city council would still need to be followed by a rezone application.

Um the existing use on site is consistent with the proposed is a as a commercial use, it's uh consistent with uh both the current and the proposed land use designation, and it would be up to that property owner uh if at all to decide to move forward with a separate reasonable application for their for their property.

Right.

And have they given indication on where they stand?

I know we heard a little bit from the other group, but I'm just curious if you heard anything from their property owner.

I have not heard directly from them.

Um all property owners that have property within a 500 foot radius from this uh amendment side.

So in considerate of any like expanded scope, um, they receive written notice of the notice of application, and we'll also um if planning commission decides to set the public hearing, uh, we'll also receive written notice of that specifically.

Okay, but nothing yet.

Okay, thank you.

I appreciate that.

Commissioner Ferris.

Sorry again, I forgot your name.

No problem.

Um, I certainly appreciate your presentation, and I also support the addition of that one parcel.

But I wonder, could we go back?

I'm gonna guess it was about slide 14, just to see some of those parcels.

Let's see where I'm yeah, that's just whichever one.

Like, so the parcel that is to the north of 140th and I'm sorry, north of 520 and east of 140th.

I know you've not included that in the scope, and it was under the understanding that's more than what's minimum.

I understand that, but can we just revisit quickly what is just um I I guess I'm leaning towards if the one in the Evans Plaza is changed designation, I would likely like to include that other parcel as well.

Um so I guess I'd like to hear a little bit more uh from your perspective of whether that's even feasible to consider.

Um if that was planning commission direction to include, I think it would be feasible to consider.

Um I think what I said during the presentation is sort of like the key point.

It it does meet all those uh first three criteria.

It's just more that the expanding geographic scope of the amendment to include that would like sort of open up the whole block and go from like a 10-acre site to a five-acre site where um yeah, they are similarly situated, they are nearby.

Um, but then uh it sort of starts to go throughout like the whole the wider area to include all the general commercial um designated properties, um, and that would then not be uh sort of aligned with what is in the land use code is only doing the minimum necessary, but it really hinges upon that assessment, whether it's um considered minimum necessary to stick to that one corner pro property.

Just as a quick comment, obviously my uh design is to be able to increase housing supply, and it seems logical to me that that might also apply.

So thank you for your comment.

Thank you.

Um Commissioner Gapot.

Yeah, I I wanted to ask um, I'm gonna ask a compound question, and it's kind of a follow-up to uh Commissioner Ferris's um question because I had the same question about that um parcel across the street.

One of the things that I would I would like to know though in trying to um figure out how to interpret a term like minimum necessary, which is not particularly clear, um, is um I'd like to know a little bit more about how low rise to um uh uh mixed use is currently defined in the draft HOMA.

What does that allow in terms of the number of stories and density?

And I'd also like to know um the uh um the transit um connections for that um for that area.

Literally with five questions, but that's that's that's that's two questions.

That's a compound question, single in a single sentence.

Yes, to start off with that.

Say his name.

Start off with transit access.

And again, like just want to sort of reiterate like the two-step process about like first seeing whether this should be included in the in the work program, and then secondly, evaluating more the the merits of the proposal.

Um for in terms of transit access, I don't know exactly for bus access.

I did go to the site by light rail, and that was a 20-minute walk from the Bell Red station.

Um and I think it's sort of equidistant between that station and like the site is equidistant between like the the Belrott station and the overlake village uh station further east.

Uh so 20 minute walk to to uh either of them.

Um and then the other question about like how it's defined in HOMA.

So just to bring it back to sort of like the land use designation question.

So the land use designation is really like the the community's long-term vision, uh like land use vision for um for Bellevue.

Um so what is in the future land use map key for what is um uh requested or or or proposed is low rise to mixed use.

So the definition there that is sort of fixed and settled in the comprehensive plan, but then that related land use district, um, which is let me grab my notes.

Uh which is part of the HOMA proposal right now is um up to seven stories of mixed use development.

Um so that is the related one, but that's under um yeah, under development and under review by the by the planning commission.

Um so that is the related one but that's under um yeah under development and under review by the by the planning commission so it's yeah seven stories of of mixed use development okay great thank you commissioner kennedy thank you for the presentation I thought this was really clear and very helpful I very much appreciate the maps so thank you um on this picture where is the half acre parcel that we're bringing into it that the owner is not here and hasn't applying what where is it can you remind me?

The small square one east one it's the blue X it's the blue X on the corner.

Everyone I said blue X everybody all right um okay and and just a point of clarification for what I I got a little confused in the exchange with Commissioner Ferris.

So the parcel that is not being considered that Commissioner Ferris you were recommending be included is um on the opposite side of one for got it okay okay and that's a five acre parcel that's currently general commercial no it's a it's it's a it's a block um sort of bound by 140th to the west 24th to the north and then sort of 520 wraps around it it's sort of a triangular shape okay um uh block uh and there are I think five or six different parcels in there and then the ones on the western end um there are three not four parcels but they um like they function together as one site it's the Dun Lumber um warehouse and store and okay uh parking lot got it I I think this has been incredibly clear particularly for the question of should this be considered as part of the work plan so that we can consider it on the the merits it appears that there are enough questions associated with um you know that that this could be an opportunity to me so appreciate the presentation I'll have a lot more questions when we get to the merits but I think that's probably more appropriate then so thanks.

Yeah um commissioner Valvestis thank you I have a similar comment to Commissioner Ferris.

So if we look at the past uh parcel to the west that's already zone for uh low rise and then if we can consider that block to the east then you could consolidate the entire wedge right between 520 and north 24 MV point park as just one uh area that you could unlock housing so I would be interested to know if that could be considered uh otherwise I agree with the proposal from staff um yes again I think that would be they share the same characteristics um sort of similar land use and development patterns within an area that has the same land use designation general commercial um I think here just like the staff recommendation looking at that um sort of minimum necessary is not to go too far beyond the scope of what was applied for uh by the applicant um um so yeah that's really not it it does really like sort of uh hinge on the determination direction from planning commission whether that is the minimum necessary or that additional properties should be considered there.

Commissioner thank you um everyone's preempted my my questions here already uh I agree with Commissioner Ferris and Commissioner Volavesis I'd like to see uh staff explore including that uh kind of oddly shaped triangular area there I I get the concerns about um not wanting to exceed scope but uh we might end up with just that one little area that's zoned or that's that's designated a little bit differently than the others and I'd I'd rather see it all as one kind of contiguous um designation there um so I don't have any question but I I support that um that uh that look into it thank you I have a quick question um that's triangle ish on the left side of the parcel is all trees is it's what is what is happening there I know you guys your Google map was all the bit sketchy when I was opening my Google map it was like all full of trees what is happening in that parcel I cannot recall it um yes it's uh um wooded parcel um it is owned by Puget Sound Energy um I'm not aware of any plans for that specific site I went out last week to the site and it yeah it's just very wooded no no activity in that Google I think is your slide um I don't know nine or whatever I think slide night can we like make that Google map better I just feel it's deceiving that it looks like a empty ugly lot but um I don't know there was one Google map um I don't know which yeah uh here we go this one I feel when you open the Google map it doesn't look like that I just want that

question um that's triangle ish on the left side of the parcel is all trees is it's what is what is happening there I know you guys your Google map was all the bit sketchy when I was opening my Google map it was like all full of trees what is happening in that parcel I cannot recall it um yes it's uh uh wooded parcel um it is owned by Puget Sound Energy um I'm not aware of any plans for that specific site I went out last week to the site and it yeah it's just very wooded no activity and that Google I think is your slide um I don't know nine or whatever I think slide nine can we like make that Google map better I just feel it's deceiving that it looks like an empty ugly lot but um I don't know there was one Google map um I don't know which yeah uh here we go this one I feel when you open a Google map it doesn't look like that I just want that area looks green because I feel it's interesting to know that just like a really green area uh which is good for two floor um yeah thank you sorry I'm defending Google map yeah for you um I think that's my that's my uh first question should we go second round okay um share Lou um uh maybe I'm gonna get to the root here of that minimum necessary uh framework I guess is the is the intention of that framework that you put before us to reduce the overall impact to the like you know the the residents the neighborhoods like what I used it'd be helpful for us to know why um exactly where we using that framework to apply this yeah sure um it is really um when I also look back at past comprehensive plan amendments um uh expanding the geographic scope of proposed amendments is um not done uh uh that that often and and when the geographic scope is excluded is expanded um um it's only with like minimal uh properties to be added I think it's also here is that the property owner for the complex that is outlined here in red does come forward with sort of um in the end uh um uh although from what I've heard also during oral common no concrete plans but like there's in the end some intent to do something with that property um that is for other properties to the further to the east um but also including that one corner property I'm not familiar um with with any sort of intent to um develop or add any housing to to that area um it would just increase the scope of the of the proposal and like the review that is necessary for that um I think here that corner property specifically was included also to have a future land use map that sort of reads and feels as something coherent um not leaving out very small because this is then sort of the the you know community's long-term vision for an area so then leaving for instance one corner uh property on a much large larger block to say like oh well there um um we have a different vision for what how that area should develop um it's more for consistency and for for for making it coherent more what I'm getting at is like with the the eastern property or the eastern lots there you know if we're applying a minimum necessary lens to this to basically prevent scope creep I I get that also but uh if there's like a bigger reason why we want to reduce the changes that we're applying to the comprehensive plan like that I guess I was more getting to that like are we significantly altering other parts of the content with cascading effects if we do this or is it more just we generally don't want to expand the scope of something that we're reviewing.

I I just want to add on a little bit about the purpose of um privately initiated comprehensive plan amendments.

So council starts uh sort of broader work programs so like the update to the sub-area plans and in those broader work programs we you know look at an entire neighborhood center and talk about the the future and how it should be arranged um that type of thing um but be between those updates you know we we can't do everything all at once so between those updates the code recognizes that there may be needs uh need to tweak the map or to tweak the comprehensive plan and so it allows for people to bring forward uh proposals for amendments um and the reason that there it's minimum necessary is so that exactly as you were saying the scope creep it doesn't start moving toward well we should just in you know consider the entire neighborhood center um it's really just this is kind of uh something that we should consider a tweak we should consider between or we could I won't pass judgment we could consider between the update to the comprehensive plan.

Okay thank you yeah Commissioner Farris thank you um appreciate all of the input um I'm still inclined to say I would like to have staff look at expand that scope to that those lots it and again I think uh Commissioner Nietzsche also mentioned that if we don't do it that's gonna be that one parcel that's a one off and doesn't that doesn't feel quite right and and I would I'm assuming that with the change in designation nobody's mandating anything it's just allowing essentially more flexibility in what could go there in the future.

And doesn't that doesn't feel quite right?

And and I would I'm assuming that with the change in designation, nobody's mandating anything.

It's just allowing essentially more flexibility in what could go there in the future.

So again, from my perspective, I would like to have us increase the scope, geographic scope to include those lots.

Sorry, just to um make sure I understand to include those lots east of 140th or just a corner parcel.

Correct.

Right.

The east of so we'd have essentially those three parcel, two parcels.

Thank you.

Um Commissioner Keppel.

Yeah.

Can you um can you pull up the um the uh map with the X's on it that shows the parcels east of uh 140th?

Yeah.

Um and then you had some ones that with progressively less Xs.

Yeah, there's one.

Yeah.

Um I'd I'd like to just plus one um Commissioner Ferris's um comments as well.

This is what I would um suggest in terms of additions um as well.

That's it.

Yeah, I can't believe that.

Just kidding.

Can we shake Kennedy?

Okay.

Yeah.

Uh so just a two-part question, one question.

Um so uh one was I just wanted to clarify the intent that we are considering today.

Uh what I understood was we're considering whether or not the proposed amendment is sufficiently nearby, similarly situated, shares characteristics and avoids being overly comprehensive enough for us to say, yes, we should move to step one in the CPA privately initiated amendment process.

Is that correct on what we're we're considering?

Um believe so, like, just to summarize the point in my own words, is like the next step would be to have threshold review public hearing.

Um one of the things was to set the date, and then um it is the other questions here.

What should be the geographic scope of the proposed amendment?

Should that, for instance, as staff recommended be that one corner parcel added to what is outlined in red on the screen.

Okay.

Okay, super helpful.

I didn't realize we were also giving guidance uh today on the geographic scope.

Is that something that we can also modify in the future when we consider the merits, or is this the decision?

This is the decisional.

Um today is the decision.

Got it.

Okay, very helpful.

Thank you.

Um so then I have a couple additional questions to this one question.

Um, which is when we think about general commercial, I thought it was really helpful to see the key on your prior slide from the comp plan amendment.

Um what is hard to tell from that language is what is not allowed in a low rise to mixed use that is allowed in general commercial.

What are we preventing these landowners from doing by moving to it?

One of them wants this.

Um what can't be done in the future if we change this?

Yeah, that's a good question.

So yeah, the future land use designation is sort of at the at the vision level, sort of that is uh described, or these descriptions on the screen, uh uh speak to that.

I think then in um year forward's the HOMA proposal that would implement that future land use vision in like code and and you know, what can you build and how can you use property under that code?

Um that would be like a further analysis for older properties further east to see how they would fare under uh what is like uh right now in the strike draft of HOMA.

Um I don't I don't have like an immediate answer for all those properties about if they would be consistent later on.

Um I think so with um you know that's all commercial uses, so they would be um aligned with what is uh listed for the future land use designation.

Uh if they were to go forward with a rezone application in the future, those potentially added properties, I would have to check what that would mean for their existing uses.

But that's sort of a more of a implementation question than then sort of a uh future land use question.

Uh kind of I think for me it really significantly relates to the decision on the geographic scope.

Um if if this let this lens isn't comprehensive, but if if we were to rezone that entire section of parcels, is there any general commercial left in the bridal trails area?

If someone had a use that we're preventing from this change, could they still do it in bridal trails?

Uh so two things there.

Uh I believe there's more land uh within the general commercial land use designation further west on like North of Way and bridal trails.

That wouldn't be impacted.

No, that would be beyond the the scope of the proposal.

And then secondly, I think what is important to note here that like unless a property owner moves forward with the rezone application.

They can continue their current use.

Yes, and even so, even after rezoning is adopted, like usually like in the code, like non-conforming uses, um, you know, there are provisions for for those uses to and buildings to continue.

Um, but here right now I think it's important to consider it's like versus the future land use designation question, like a rezone application, like you do not, you're not as a property owner forced uh or required to move forward with the rezone application uh um after that.

So yeah.

Okay.

It would be really helpful to understand a more comprehensive definition of general commercial and uh if even if current uses would fall within the more limited commercial uses that may be allowed in low rise to um maybe there's future uses that are not we're not thinking of that's not a restaurant or a small retail um that are currently allowed to be helpful to understand that.

So thank you.

Thanks, Commissioner Velavesis.

Yeah, one question.

Does uh expanding the geographic scope pose any risk to the owner that is uh submitting the applications?

Like in terms of uh less likely to be approved or more time for approval.

I mean, this is uh almost year-long process.

So yeah, so a proposal would need to be reviewed on also for like environmental impacts, so SEPA review.

Um so increasing the size of the proposed site um would also result in from a theoretical point of view and from an analysis point of view and potentially more development.

Um so if you increase the this like this is like a sort of a 10-acre site, um, staff recommendations to add a half acre site that wouldn't mean so much for the scope of what you need to analyze under CEPA.

If you were to add another um block, the one block to the east, five acres, that would theoretically generate a lot of extra development that wouldn't then have to be studied and that would could have like more environmental impacts, and those areas are beyond what uh applicant is also controlling and uh looking to in the end do something differently with under the proposed future land use designation.

So is it uh possible that there's an expansion and then the application moves forward and then it gets rejected because of CPA or something else, and then the owner needs to start again without like it just gets rejected outright, or or maybe gets just approved for his own parcel.

Does that make sense?

Uh I don't want to be in a position where we encourage an expansion and then this expansion uh create some constraints that result in the rejection for his application and not no fault of his own.

That's a that's a good question.

Like, yeah, as I said, it would increase the scope of the sort of the the amendment and therefore could have implications.

I I don't know like of if later on at some point it would then result in like the proposed amendment site being scaled back, if that's an option at all.

I'm not aware of that.

Um I do think what is important to note that if an application uh does not get approved, that then there's a three-year limitation on um uh sort of that same side being proposed again for a comprehensive uh uh plan amendment.

That's it.

Thank you.

Um Commissioner Yeah, I I guess I just have a follow-up on that then Kate, this might be a question for you.

Do you know if later on if we expand the scope on this and we go through CEPA and there's some issue with the additional bits that we want to add here?

Can we amend it to just have the original or Matt, can I ask you to weigh in on this?

Hello, Matt.

Happy 2026 to you.

I have never seen that happen before.

Um typically the planning commission would use a very, very light touch because this is a privately initiated comp plan amendment, and you have a property owner that's asking the city to consider it.

Um I do think that everything Toon said is a factor.

I think if the planning commission were to unilaterally decide to expand the scope, that also could affect some of the neighbors and potential opposition to it, which also could end up being a situation where if it's very narrow and just the application, you may not have as much opposition to it.

But if you expand the scope, it might be more than surrounding properties are comfortable with.

I don't know off the top of my head though whether uh you could then retract the scope after you expanded it, but I can go and look at that and try to probably figure it out while you're having your discussion too.

But in general, I would caution on overreaching for a privately initiated comp plan amendment.

It's an application from a private property owner.

Thank you, Matt.

Um I think for me personally, that was my actual next question about what are the risks we are taking by adding more parcels and like maybe that church on the north side wants to come and they want to say we want to upsell and this get expanded and expanded.

And then uh I personally don't want to take a risk.

I'm even not happy about like adding that to small one.

I understand they said they're fine with it if necessary.

I feel whatever is caused to be a fast process for them to we see more housing.

That's my that's my goal personally.

And it's like literally 21 minutes walk to Bell Red, 27 minutes walk to village um um station, which is like good.

It's like good walkable, it's a good location to have um the um low rise.

Um can you guys nod about if you want to add those a side parcels or no?

Because I want to see how where you are standing.

This is no, no.

Okay.

Oh, you are just backing up.

Okay, good.

Um, should we go another round or you're feeling comfortable about taking motion?

Commissioner Ferris.

Ninja, do you have a question?

You go.

You go.

Um I'd like to like to make a question that we direct staff to have a public hearing on February 11th on this land use code amendment.

You can I do first the geography if we're gonna add that's a small parcel first, or no?

Yeah, I was going.

In that case, I would like to make a motion that we accept uh staff's recommendation to include the one parcel that um they recommended in the geographic scope.

Second.

Any uh discussion?

All in favor?

Uh and then now just second motion for the public.

I mean the first one other than another round of motion.

Jeez.

Motion to direct staff to schedule the public hearing on February 11th for this land use code amendment.

Second.

Second.

Second.

And discussion?

All in favor?

I thank you so much.

Thanks.

Thanks.

Great discussion.

Thanks for keeping one.

Okay.

Sorry, let me go to my paperworks.

Do we need to take a break or we're good to power to win?

Power to run.

Bray?

Okay.

Oh my gosh, we have we need that.

We need a small break.

Let's have a five minutes break and come back.

Thank you.

Sorry.

Okay, we are back.

Our second association um item tonight is a check-in on the Bud Red Road forward Luca.

The planning commissioner reviewed the proposal look at scope in uh May last year.

Shh.

The first phase of engagement has come to the close.

And a draft of the code has been released to the public.

This is a session will provide a briefing on the scope and approach for the Bell Red um look forward look up, as well as progress update on the outreach analysis uh completed so far.

Thank you so much for code and policy assistant director Nick and planning manager Christina.

Um they will present us the Bell Red.

Thank you.

Great, thank you.

And uh good evening, uh Chair Conlu, Vice Chair Liu, uh Mayor Malikutian, and members of the commission.

Um excited to be here tonight with an update on the Bell Red look forward Luca or land use code amendment.

Um, as noted, um, it's been a bit since we've been in front of you on this topic.

Last study session was back in May.

That was when we were about to embark on our outreach.

And so we're excited to kind of report some of the findings from our phase one outreach approach.

I think what you're going to hear is a challenge and balancing the long-term vision for Bellred with the various stakeholder perspectives that we've been hearing.

So we do expect that's going to continue to be a challenge as we move into our phase two engagement.

But the way we've set this up is phase one is resulting in a draft code.

It is a working draft.

So we've got some incomplete sections, we've got just some general policy concepts, but we really want it to be transparent in our work, get that out there for some feedback and reaction, then dive deep with some of our stakeholders as we embark on phase two.

And then we'll come back to you with a revised draft and start working through it back in March.

So give us a little time to work through the draft, but we do want to orient you to kind of the changes so you have a clear understanding of just what's being addressed in the Bell Red Look Forward Luca.

So with that, I'll pass it over to Christina.

Thank you.

You're always so fast with that.

Thank you.

So again, this evening we are information only, as Nick noted.

So the components we're going to be covering tonight.

Again, a recap of the vision and policy framework that we've been working within.

We will do a little bit of a summary on our phase one engagement process and then the bulk of the content, because we do have that working draft out.

We'll give a bit of an orientation towards how to navigate that draft, some of the key concepts that are structuring it, and then wrap it up with our next steps.

So first, really high-level context with Bellred.

It's really interesting to see it in geographic context with some of our other growth centers.

So we do have this kind of contiguous growth corridor, but Bell Red really takes up quite a bit of that land area, even compared to Wilburton and downtown.

So we're working with quite a bit of variation and diversity within the district, as well as a lot of potential with our two light rail stations.

And also worth noting, while it's not on the map, the city of Redmond also has quite a bit of development planned around that overlake station in the Northeast.

So again, looking back to the 2009 sub-area plan, which we are now working on that look forward, uh look back to look forward, now the look forward.

Um that an original vision was set uh in the at that time far distant uh future looking forward to light rail, um, ultimately with the vision of transforming this uh light industrial area into a transit-oriented development and green space uh district.

Uh and a lot has happened since then, uh, since that updated code came in.

We've had more than a million square feet of office in the spring district.

Uh the city's invested more than 300 million in improvements towards um public transportation in those art that arterial system.

I've had around 3,000 new housing units constructed, um, and I did a little back of the math uh looking at Sound Transit's uh data dashboard, uh, the two lines exceeding expectations, even without the 90 connection, um averaging roughly almost 9,000 daily boardings since the Redmond extension happened last year.

So very, very exciting to see.

Um, but now on to the Bell Red Look Forward.

I offer all of that up to say this isn't a situation where we're we're throwing a whole lot out and starting fresh.

Uh, we have an affirmed vision, we have new opportunities, we also have some clear areas for improvement.

Um, but it's uh it's a refinement and a look forward.

Uh we do have an updated that came in that updated affirmed vision came in through our updated sub-area policies and map adopted October 2024.

Um, we're also working with some fresh uh increased housing and jobs targets.

Uh so again, more on that vision.

It Bell Red, it's a compact, walkable mixed-use corridor, a community sort supported by LightRail and a robust multimodal transportation network that supports sustainability, placemaking, and the arts, a broad range of housing at various levels of affordability, comprehensive connected parks and open space system, and an area emphasizing environmental and stream corridor restoration.

So a big area, but also a lot to accomplish within that area.

Uh so core topic areas that were advanced through the updated policy and will be trickling through into the code.

Not everything is going to be reflected in the land use code.

We also have functional plans, kind of programmatic work addressing some of these pieces, but number of changes to land use, housing, and urban design, cultural and community connections, transportation and utilities, and streams, some significant improvements across all of those areas.

The LUCA was launched by council last year, back in February 2025.

And at the initiation, the priorities that council shared were calling for stronger incentives for stream daylighting, directing us to explore incentives for affordable commercial space and performance venues to support arts, culture, and small businesses.

And finally, emphasize the need to strengthen the multimodal transportation network to improve walking, biking, transit, and connectivity.

So now on to the phase one of outreach that happened roughly over last fall and winter.

As Nick noted, the general goal was to build the shared understanding, gather some early feedback from the community and stakeholders, build relationships.

We held internally a number of listening sessions with key staff implementing portions of the code.

We engaged with the Bellevue Development Committee over multiple meetings last year.

That group is includes a lot of developers and property owners in the area, among others.

The staff participated in a number of tabling at certain in-person events, tabling at Meta, other kind of community events in the area.

We did an online questionnaire that went out to all addresses in Bell Red.

And we, as is always the case, a lot of direct outreach with interested parties, kind of one-off meetings, conversations, that kind of thing.

And we see the four that really stood out.

Parks and open space, affordable housing, and arts and cultural spaces.

Across all of our engagement, a number of really common themes and insights that we've been hearing, a lot of comments on safety and mobility concerns for people walking and biking through the district, and associated as well, you know, really wanting to see that desire for more human-scale design and walkability, comfort in the pedestrian environment, a strong desire for arts and a vibrant, vibrant connected public spaces, reinforcing the importance of preserving local identity and small businesses.

We also heard a lot of support for the local streets concept, seeing that that kind of walking permeability is essential for safety, walkability, economic vitality, and equitable access.

But that, you know, this is a really complicated topic.

So in our the initial rollout of local streets with the very uh rigid grid system that was originally set, acknowledging we also heard a lot of practical concerns on how that layout should really reflect and respond to parcel boundaries, site constraints, but also noting the importance of addressing a lot of those connectivity gaps within the district.

So wanting to find a way to strike a balance between those strict requirements and also ensuring that we get those vital connections.

So now on to the components of the working draft.

So this draft was released December 31st.

It's exciting to see people engaging with it.

We're really going to be using this as a as a tool for engagement over the next uh couple months here.

Uh and now structurally, there's a there's something important to note.

So with the introduction of Wilburton, the way that we approached that was to set up what we call generally mixed-use land use districts.

And the vision is that while they were initially rolled out in Wilburton, that those could be applied more broadly in places where we have the higher intensity kind of uses.

And as a related note, in general, we're as a team kind of looking for more opportunities to consolidate and make things more consistent across.

So this is an effort along that way.

Um as it stands now, Bell RED is uh as an overlay section, it is quite isolated.

There's a lot of that code that's written very differently than other parts of our code, a lot of approaches that are different, and not necessarily in a way that's really beneficial.

So structurally, what we've done is we have pulled the components of that mixed use land use district section introduced with Wilburton that we see as common across mixed-use land use districts into their own section.

And we've brought in some additional new mixed-use land use districts there as well.

And now components that are truly distinct to either Bellred or Wilburton are in respective overlays that apply.

So there's kind of this base mixed use districts, and then if you're in Wilburton, there's some specifics there.

And if you're in Bell Red, there's some specifics there.

So think things like the amenity incentive systems.

That's where you really get at a lot of that district specific detail, but getting a lot more consistency by kind of drawing from the mixed use districts here.

Okay.

Also with this draft, we are proposing updating our zoning to track one to one with the future land use map, which you can see here for Bell Red.

So today we have the Bell Red land use districts are kind of hyper specific.

So everything is BR.

We have retained a few districts that are do remain more specific, looking at some of the medical districts and the Bell Red General Commercial.

The Bell Red General Commercial used to extend much further across the district to the south.

Now it's more limited to north of Northup, kind of serving as a buffer to 520 up there.

But otherwise across the district, we've uh the sub-area plan update a comprehensive plan has expanded significantly the areas where we have high-rise and mid-rise development, really capitalizing on the opportunity in our station areas.

So when you look at the draft, you will see these updated uh updated memes for land use districts to align.

All right.

And another big concept introduced with the sub-area plan are both the arts district intensive area, which you heard about in comment, as well as neighborhood districts.

So the sub-area plan introduced seven separate neighborhood districts with slightly different kind of policy approaches and visions for each.

So an amenity that we might think is a higher priority in one district compared to another, will earn you more FAR in that district where it's identified as a priority.

And there's a similar approach to that downtown currently.

We're using a similar structure there.

The arts district intensive area, we are also we'll get to the amenity incentive system in a bit.

That is one area where we see that coming in the land use code.

Is we've uh selected a set of amenities to that are prioritized within that district for development.

On land use flexibility, uh, we are recommending shifting towards an approach where all uses are permitted unless they are specifically prohibited or subject to conditions.

Uh, same as Wilburton.

We are also going to be implementing the approach, the citywide approach to non-conforming uses structures and sites that's moving forward with uh HOMA.

Uh so on to lock local streets, again, this is this is a big topic.

So we're saying this is driven in policy, it's been refined, still evolving.

Uh so we see this, this has been a really important policy.

We're continuing to bring forward, not a new concept geared around supporting walkability, connectivity, multimodal access.

Um the revised map we're about to show is the result of a lot of internal review.

Um our goal with these revisions was to think about what are those connections that are most critical to uh be provided as public street segments, and where are the areas where we can be more flexible on how connections happen.

So under the current system, it's a grid that is um exclusively public streets and more limited typologies.

And for areas outside of that, we have clarified that there is an area where block size limits apply.

So if you have a larger site, a site larger than 105,000 square feet, uh you can uh you will be needing to break down that site into blocks.

But if you're in developing a large site that is not otherwise having to require public streets that are very specific, you have some more flexibility to define those blocks using private street typologies.

So it's adding really considerable flexibility there and still getting some connections.

Um we just only wanted to show those segments on the map that are more specifically defined would need to be publicly dedicated and meet uh standards for publicly dedicated streets.

Uh so ultimately our goal here is to be focused more on outcomes rather than rigid grids, really prioritizing connectivity, smaller blocks, and access where it's most important.

So this is the current map, just to get us thinking.

So as you look at this, you might think those are very even.

They are.

Uh, and when you look at parcels, when you look at the topography, um, it a lot of these are quite challenging, do run through the middle of sites.

Um now moving on to the revised map.

I didn't get them at the similar scale, so we can't flip quite back and forth.

Uh, but our our major priorities were uh, you know, really maintaining those those green street east-west connections, um, and then also maintaining selected other uh selected other uh um connections to the north and south.

Um but we will see, you know, looking at those property boundaries, um a number of those uh larger sites we do know are going to be broken up further through the block requirements through the legislative.

Oh, yes, yes, yeah, because it's quite there.

Um so the the dark pink, those are our uh local streets.

So that is a um publicly dedicated street typology, more of a traditional um two-lane street with sidewalks.

Uh, and then the dashed pink, those are local streets that are in the permitting process that are you know going to be uh going to be built out.

The black dash are cases where uh we have interim streets that have been built.

This has been one of the really complicated parts of implementing Bell Red because with these street requirements, we have cases where uh the first project to move forward uh won't be building out the full street.

We had previously said called these half streets.

Uh in reality, when you're going in first, that first person has to provide quite a bit more in terms of the infrastructure and the area.

They also get to kind of set the alignment and the elevations.

There's a trade-off, but we are updating our language to call those interim streets instead, because the reality is they're more than half streets.

Um, but we've got those connections.

So those dashed areas are either half built out or going to be uh building out soon.

Uh and then the peach kind of brown, that is the area where those block size limits would apply.

So that's tracking with roughly uh the area where previously we'd had that full grid extended.

Um you can also see there are some areas where the grid's been fully built out.

So the the uh spring district lower left there, um, that's that's reflecting more of the updated uh street grid.

So it's a working draft in progress, but um uh reflecting quite a bit of analysis on the city end.

So now onto building design and affordable housing.

Uh we are aligning with uh a Wilburton design standards for height, floor plates, flexibility for mass timber and life science.

Uh we have uh increase this will be increasing FAR and heights in the TOD overlay.

Uh we are recommending uh, well, previously the plan had been to move forward with both mandatory and voluntary options for affordable housing.

We are recommending um moving forward with one mandatory affordable housing concept.

Um it would be moving forward the same approach that was brought forward with Wilburton.

So that's um for rental, 10% at 80%, and then you can you can drop your percentage of units when going deeper on affordability, similar similar approach for for sale units.

Um there will be options for on-site, off-site land transfer or fee and lieu.

We do anticipate the MFT up MFTE updates underway will support feasibility.

That we are coordinating closely with the Office of Housing team working on that, though acknowledging that those changes are outside the planning commission review.

So onto the amenity incentive system.

So both today and in the future, uh participation is required in order to exceed the base FAR for a project.

Currently in Bell Red, we have a tiered system where projects have to first go through providing a certain amount of affordable housing, a certain amount of parks improvements.

It's quite complex.

And what we've been seeing is that the way that it's structured often rarely results in projects going forward with other amenities beyond affordable housing and parks, which in some cases can come at the expense of things like stream daylighting.

So we have restructured the amenity system to set be set up more similar to downtown.

So the tiers system would go away, though there is the mandatory housing component, which is always going to be required.

And then again, we'll have adjusted scoring reflecting different priorities in different neighborhood districts.

We have also narrowed the list to set um certain amenities which must be prioritized within the arts district intensive area, with the caveat that even in that area for projects that are daylighting streams or providing a designated planned park or trail amenity in the sub-area plan that those can take precedence.

So if you giving giving the flexibility there, knowing that those stream daylighting improvements will be really uh really uh costly for projects to provide.

Uh so this is the list of amenity options.

Uh substantially, a lot of these are the same as today, um, but we're going to be updating the scoring.

A few of these that I will note.

So in orange, these are uh basically fully new options.

So the affordable commercial space, this was introduced with Wilburton.

Uh, same concept here that will now be an option in Bell Red as well.

Uh, with green building today, uh, the incentive system just gives credit for either um uh lead lead green, uh lead gold or platinum.

Um so this would instead be updating to give our more comprehensive green building rule.

Um, and a few options, which we're doing substantial updates for as well.

We're working with King County on updating our provisions for um regional TDR.

Um, we're also updating the design, the um uh requirements for public art to align using the standards from downtown instead that we were recommended as being better.

Uh, and we've updated the provisions for outdoor plazas as well.

Uh there will be ongoing supporting analysis to uh inform the next draft.

So continued economic and development feasibility analysis, looking at cost drivers and financial import performance, um, also informed by others in development services, the Office of Housing, and uh developer input.

Um, we do have an updated affordable housing nexus study, which is going to be setting that legal basis for inclusionary zoning, uh calculating our maximum supportable fee in lieu.

Uh, and then ongoing implementation review.

We'll be continuing to identify your tent technical issues and opportunities to improve clarity, working across departments, um, potentially adding or refining building and site standards.

Uh, so starting to wrap it up now.

Uh, as noted, we are um fully underway on phase two of our work, uh refining the draft.

So there's earlier this morning we had a quick presentation with the BDC.

We're gonna be doing a deep dive with the BDC next month.

We're also gearing up for an in-person open house towards the end of February.

Details to come for those in the audience.

Um coordinating a number of other meetings, continue direct outreach.

We're also doing a series of internal deep dives, paging through the draft with internal staff to work through the code, uh, and then gearing up for a full review on that revised draft, hopefully launching end of March, which then would carry us through our council action.

And with that, I'm always thrown when it's an information only presentation.

I was going to say that.

Yeah.

Um, thank you so much.

I really appreciate it.

Is it okay if we go like one round and okay?

Great.

Um, West Chou.

Your name is that the first is time.

Um are we doing one question or are we just doing one round?

I have a few questions, but one question, because maybe the next person asked you our second question and then we can save some time.

So I want to explore a little bit of this commercial uh affordable commercial space.

Uh it's a you know, uh it makes sense to me when we talk about affordable housing because there's a mechanism to actually enforce that.

But I feel like we're still lacking that both on a city and a county level for affordable commercial.

So could you define what you exactly you're talking about when you mean yes, yeah.

And thanks for pointing that out because this is something that it gets brought up all the time and it's very difficult.

Um, but fortunately our economic development team has come up with a concept that uh we're we're pretty excited about.

Uh and there is an uh a rule getting finalized with the details.

But essentially, and please correct me if I'm omitting something.

Um it defines standards for an eligible business.

And so this would be vetted by the economic development team.

So it's geared at small businesses, and I think that's defined by both employees and revenue, don't recall exactly.

Um, but for driving the rent, um the affordable rent uh would be determined by uh it sets a cap based on uh ratio of operating expenses.

So I think the rent can't exceed double the operating expenses for that space.

So um the economic development staff would help with the vetting for eligible tenants uh and also confirming that red cap.

Uh maybe just a comment on that.

Uh if you're gonna separate uh affordable commercial or actually if you if you're gonna do that and go through a vetting process for affordable commercial, you could consider combining your metrics or your criteria for child care.

I think it was in nonprofits into that criteria and just putting it together because otherwise you're separating two specific businesses away from other that are others that are also probably subject to the same, you know, operating expense ratios.

You may as well just put that as a one review.

Yeah, that's a good point.

That had been uh I think that the child care and nonprofit space had been a legacy one in Bell Red, and I agree it makes sense to to consolidate there.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Ferris.

Similarly, I also have a couple things, but I'll try the limit this time around.

Um so one question, uh kind of two sections.

One, um, of course, housing and specifically, you you talked about there's 3,000 housing units that were developed.

What was the goal back then?

That's a great question.

We don't know.

Okay, we can get back to you.

Yeah.

Um, we know for sure that it was very likely underdeveloped.

Um, and we know for sure that the um buildings were not maximizing the height that was allowed by code.

So I'm assuming that you all are looking at, you know, what's happened there?

What are there things that we can tweak to make sure that we can maximize development potential?

So again, you maybe even get back to me on that looks like.

Yeah, we are definitely looking at that.

And some of the heights, um, you know, they were they were awkward.

Um, I think uh Commissioner Villavesis can probably attest to this, um, where the the heights were, you know, maybe 110, 120 feet, and people were wanting to stay in that wood frame category versus capture that additional floor and then switch construction type and incur a bunch of extra costs.

So we've tried to align as much as possible with the standards that were pretty well vetted with the development community with you all as um we worked on Wilburton, and so hoping that that addresses some of those concerns.

Also, the heights were quite low in in Bell Red.

It was a pretty um bold kind of change in 2009, but looking at it compared to what we've done in other areas of our transit corridor, um, they're pretty modest.

Um we had we have 40 foot building height limits in our TOD areas.

Um that's changing with this code.

So I'm hoping that those um standards um are really going to unlock some of the housing as well.

Great.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Commissioner Geppel.

I have one question.

It's not a compound question.

It's um and um and I wanted to say too um that I really appreciate um some of the work that you're doing to try and bring consistency between um the different sections.

I know that's a challenging thing, but I think they'll pay dividends in the long term.

So kudos to you for doing that.

Um my question has to do with on the um affordability requirements.

Are we thinking about anything similar to the pioneer program that we did for Wilburton for Bell Red?

And if so, why?

If not, why not?

Uh not at this time.

I think the thinking we've seen, I will say the reaction to the pioneer program.

We did uh exhaust that program quite quickly.

Um, so we haven't really seen the need at this point.

Don't know if you'd share more on the well, and just so we're the terms are accurate here.

The pioneer provision is a separate uh in the amenity incentive program.

It allows kind of extra um FAR to be earned for certain amount of units.

And then the catalyst provision which was um the temporary one that Christina was noting that was exhausted pretty quickly um in Wilburton.

And so that's something we are not proposing at this time.

But what we did note and what we included in the memo as well is we are very closely coordinating with our Office of Housing group um and we're also relying on some of their inputs as it relates to the economic analysis and some of the feasibility to support the mandatory approach with all of the other kind of expectations of development to determine for you all if we think that it's warranted.

We're not there right now the first draft has kind of just been kicked out but we've got a lot of meetings to come and discussion to come to help inform you all on whether that is a worthy kind of consideration.

Yeah Wilburton also had a number of uh requirements that uh aren't required in Bell Red under this draft, particularly the open space requirement um so I think we see more flexibility to work within in the the Bell red framework that might not warrant that same approach here.

Yeah and thanks for correcting my uh uh wording I I was referring to the to the to the catalyst program.

I mean the only only follow-up I'd say is um you might want to consider I'd say um sort of catalyst light um you know if if the uh um Wilburton experience um you know created a a gold rush mentality maybe we need to just uh um you know dial it back some but I I I like the idea of people um going out there and getting started so I I like in general the catalyst um the catalyst idea but maybe it was too generous as originally proposed.

Thank you.

Can we share Kennedy um yeah thank you just one question.

Uh I wanted to better understand um the private roads that are going to fall within the grid I thought the map that you showed earlier was really helpful.

We received a few comments um already around grid planning um and the need to ensure pedestrian access came out loud and clear in your outreach to the community so I wanted to understand how the plan is supporting pedestrian access with the different um tiers of roads that you had on the on the screen yeah um so the the uh uh the the the starting with the public roads so we have uh local streets which provide for um uh kind of to full city standard sidewalks um two uh travel lanes uh and then green streets um are uh also again providing for a high quality pedestrian environment uh the uh the key challenge we run into with those uh public um road kind of public roads built to public standards is that there isn't uh as much flexibility for the widths in the travel lanes um so one option that is available on the private side would be to have for almost something like an alley typology so one of the private typologies is called um it's called an access corridor and it basically just provides for um a a two-lane road that can be used for private access to a site um in in the draft we have also have noted that um the that that that is only acceptable for bordering one side of a block so that's an an acknowledgement that there are sites where it can be really challenging to get that full width could be helpful to just have that kind of an alley access but that we don't want to see that becoming the norm to fully uh bound blocks because that specific typology is not really um providing for that quality of pedestrian environment um the other private option um is an active transportation typology that still provides for pedestrian access but gives a little bit more flexibility um ultimately those trade-offs you know there are requirements for and the hours that that um private street has to be open but um you know it it kind of it goes out of the city's hands so um kind of some trade-offs there don't have anything else to add on the uh just that we're gonna do a deep dive on this specific topic so appreciate you surfacing maybe some of the questions that you're you're having now so that we can be really well positioned to kind of dive into that discussion that would be welcomed um I think just uh graphical you know or visual representation that would be really helpful of the differentiation between the widths in acts and access for vehicles and pedestrians and bikes would be super helpful for me so I can picture what is an alley versus a well you called it something else but alley stuck in my head.

That would be welcomed.

Um I think just uh graphical, you know, or visual representation that would be really helpful of the differentiation between the widths in acts and access for vehicles and pedestrians and bikes would be super helpful for me.

So I can picture what is an alley versus a well, you called it something else, but alley stuck in my head.

Yeah.

Um surface.

Yeah, so that that has such a great ring to it.

Um so yeah, um, I I think it'd just be really helpful to understand, you know, is it gonna be something like when I tried to go for a run around the casinos in Las Vegas and you can't connect anywhere trying to avoid wait, like who does that?

But like I think it we in Bellevue, you would.

So how how how do you how do you get through and how are we ensuring access?

Yeah, that'd be a really helpful description.

Yeah, like um how will those connect, even if they're not as wide as a public access street.

Can I go for a run through that development and get to the other side?

And I think that may be helpful to other commenters that um we're looking for that pedestrian access too.

So thank you.

And with the map segments, we certainly have more confidence that they will connect.

And to reinforce kind of the slide that Christina was sharing around the 300 million dollars of of city funded investments in our our arterial system, the local streets are really intended to complement that taxpayer investment that's been provided and to help support kind of the denser development that's being provided within the same areas that we're expecting these local streets to also be provided.

And not only do they serve that circulation purpose and then the certainty around reliable maintenance and upkeep of it, but it's also opportunities for arts to be able to um use that space.

And we have just better control.

Um it's it's our streets, it's public streets for the community for the public.

So we view it as really integral to the vision.

Um, but we'll be sure to also kind of get into some of the details around the cross sections and what it means for the experience as well.

Thanks.

Commissioner Nilshia.

Thank you.

I can I ask two really quick ones.

Um the first, just a clarifying question, because I I might have just missed this in the presentation.

Can you explain it what a green street actually is, like compared to another street?

Yes.

Um, and I will say I uh I do better when I'm working off of our um uh working off of our streetscape plan.

Um, but a green street is one that has um kind of enhanced facilities for pedestrians and bikes, so wider widths there, and it also builds in um uh more of that uh natural drainage system.

Stormwater is a big, you know, natural stormwater management is a big component of green streets as well.

So um we see these as being really important, both um they're both kind of uh environmental and utilities assets, and they're helping with that place making and definition for the district.

Great, thank you.

And then just one more really quick one.

Um you mentioned the affordability, uh the affordable housing nexus study and how that's gonna impact this.

Can you just give me a rundown of the timeline of when we're expecting that to come out and how it kind of relates to the timeline for I think it's just about done.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, we'll be able to share that.

Um, we'll post it to the webpage likely at the end of this month.

Um, do you want to talk about the how it impacts or influences?

Sure.

Yeah.

So the um the Nexus study is um uh it's a it's a legal requirement.

So basically it's saying um uh calculating what is the maximum that we can justify asking for in exchange for um providing a certain public benefit.

So in this case, um the approach that was used for our affordable housing nexus study was to look at um you know what is the demand for lower wage jobs that's driven by this um these additions in um commercial space and what uh is driven by um you know by adding these higher price units where you have um new residents driving demand for those lower wage jobs, what housing would be required to offset that impact roughly.

Um and so that sets a ceiling, which is usually quite high as to how much we could look to, and then it becomes a policy decision of what an appropriate um fee might be within that floor ceiling.

Thank you.

I'm really sharp today.

Thank you.

Commissioner Blemisus.

Thank you.

There's a lot of detail in here, and uh it looks like it's really off to a great start.

We have a lot of work already done.

So this is exciting to see.

I'd like to zoom out a little bit.

Uh could you go to the street uh grid?

Yeah.

So um I've been seeing these local street maps for a while and uh hearing about it.

And I'm just always surprised that we're not putting the streams in as part of this network of public space.

Uh the club plan when when we talked about it a couple years ago, uh indicated that we wanted to uh use the streams as linear parks that would serve as the organizing main public space in Bellrid.

So I think this is something that we shouldn't set aside.

We I think it needs to be incorporated here.

Uh this local streets, it would be great to have perhaps a little bit more detail on this maps, uh, really to understand what the I guess the urban fabric is gonna be here and how we're gonna be able to move uh within the district without the use of a car, right?

Now on that sense, there's a huge opportunity here because the the district is bound by 520 by Belbridge Road by 116th and one by 148.

Like there's it's small enough to be quickly accessed anywhere by car, but it's big enough that you can really move a lot of people within the district without a car.

You have the train stations, you have the streams that are gonna be probably and hopefully lean our parks.

And there's I mean, if there's an art district, you wanna uh avoid a situation when people only drive there because that's it's not gonna be fun, right?

So I would uh would love to see uh an overlay of pedestrian and bike network and hopefully segregated bike network, which has not been possible in the city of Bellevue, but maybe this is where we can do it.

And people can take the train here or take uh East Rail and get to Bell Red, and then they can walk or bike or go on a scooter anywhere within the district, go to the galleries, go to the shows and go to all these things, and then go back home.

Uh and it looks like that's all gonna be done at this scale at this level and is gonna take a little bit more detail.

Everything else, like we're gonna put the code, the amenities separating the overlays and having kind of a blanket uh rule for Wilburton, like all that sounds great.

But I this is the one area that I think it's really gonna need some uh insight.

So I would love to see some some progress on that.

I plus one, the catalyst program.

I mean, if it was exhausted very quickly, I guess it was a success, right?

So we shouldn't shy away from it.

I would love to see if that can be done.

And uh yeah, that's that's it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um it's good to go last, everybody cover everything.

Great.

Um I think one of the questions that I have um or the comment, I know we um promised the art district team who are sitting there, um, that we're gonna go have some type of housing that is like a studio house for artists.

Um I think we covered in comprehensive plan too in some lines about the policies.

Are we gonna go have something in incentive um program, maybe specifically for that art district in that area um to just motivate?

I mean, I just want all the developer pick that.

I literally want the artists have that ability to live in that area, like a paris that they have an art, you know, just make that everybody walks there up the hill, pretty not accessible.

Uh, but something like that.

I want our artists be able to live and have a studio, or um, we can have that like really as an art district.

Like if we can have that incentive program motivative, that's for that art district area that'd be um enforced.

Um, it's more incentive program.

Should we go second round?

Uh do you want to add anything or are you good here?

Um, Nick or Christina, are we gone?

Do we have anything in your mind at this point?

Okay.

Should we go second round?

Okay, John Eli.

I I have one one or I guess like two requests more than anything.

Uh, the next time we we check, could we are you able to pull data from Sound Transit on what the behavior of the ADA Andrew Daily Boardings is?

Because I'd be really curious how much of that is for work and like commuting versus like just kind of recreational.

And I think that would help us as we're you know approaching both like you know, street grid and each of those regions near the uh the light rail stations of what the best use case would be for those.

So if you're able to find anything for sound transit, that'd be really helpful for us to kind of see what the commuter or what the light rail uh use behavior has been so far.

Sure.

Um the second thing is uh I think for the last Nexus study there was a financial model that came out.

Um I'm assuming this will get updated with the newest one.

Would you be able to provide that to us for us to play around with?

I think the last one focused on the uh impact of affordability requirements on um the overall price of housing or uh per unit built and the uh residual land use value.

But if you could find that, that'd be really helpful to have.

Thanks.

Kosha Ferris.

I have one question and a couple comments.

Um just the hopefully easy question.

Uh you I totally support you talking about different incentives and how you weight them differently depending on where it is, etc.

And if I'm not mistaken, that arts area district, I'm sure you're gonna have incentives for like the loft space for affordable spaces, but if I'm not mistaken, that's also where a lot of our streams need to be daylighted.

So and maybe you can get back to me on this, but how are you balancing that?

Those are both really difficult to achieve, and yeah, how are you balancing that?

So that's one question.

Yeah, so the the initial take in the draft, um, the way it's set up, and let me go back to the list here so I I won't forget one.

Um the the way that it's set up currently is that you have this list to choose from.

However, within the arts district intensive area, we've established that um 75% of your amenity FAR has to include uh at least two items on a narrowed list.

So that for that narrowed list right now, we've included um affordable housing, affordable commercial, um, nonprofit space, public art, outdoor plazas.

Um so that's one path.

However, we've included a caveat that if you're even if you're in the the arts district intensive area, if you're proposing to daylight a stream, because there are a couple streams that go through that area, or you're providing um a uh a parks dedication or a trail dedication that's been identified on our sub-area plan, because we also have those, those can take precedence.

Um so hopefully we'd still see you know, if they've got additional amenities, they might look towards this list.

Um, but it's just kind of giving that flexibility.

So wanting to say, you know, if you don't have that kind of stream opportunity, we've narrowed the focus for the arts.

Um, because it is a large area, we will have a lot of sites moving forward that don't have those considerations.

But um, we do have to acknowledge that that stream daylighting is is really impactful and we want to free up capacity to to make that happen.

For sure.

Thank you.

Uh so one quick comment.

Um we heard comments from public testimony earlier tonight about um the floor plate size, and I would love to hear from your perspective whether that has merit to increase that.

Uh obviously we talk a lot about pedestrian connections.

And then lastly, I would like to know when you can come back.

You don't need to tell me right now, but obviously council is looking at this whole parking requirement update, and I'd like to better understand how does that impact Bell Red specifically.

Oh five question, but can we extend the meeting if we are going everybody at like question?

Like let's look extend to what 15 minutes if it's okay.

That we extend our meeting until 9.15 or yeah, 9.15.

Second.

Any discussion?

All in favor?

Aye.

Thanks.

Um, so let me make sure I I captured.

We had a uh question on floor plates, also the parking was uh what else am I missing?

Yep, yeah.

Okay.

Um yeah.

Can we go back to the slide that um Commissioner Belvasis um asked about just on streams?

Uh I think the comment about trying to use streams as ways that you know, long streams, you know, as as ways for people to um, you know, walk through and get connections, I think is a great idea, actually.

And I'm I'm wondering if um I'm wondering if there's some way as part of the stream daylighting initiative that we can incorporate um you know paths along streams, you know, pedestrian paths where people can go, because with resources like this, if people see them, if they have access to them, they will value them.

And if um if we daylight those streams, that's a good thing in and of itself.

But if we also help to create a constituency that actually values them and benefits from them, that will continue to pay benefits in terms of a recognition of the importance of these resources.

So I'm I'm wondering if as part of our daylining effort, can we give any kind of extra incentives for people who not only create um you know create those situations of daylighting, but also um help to you know produce that access or corridors where people could travel along streams.

That's it for me.

Thank you.

Commissioner Kennedy.

Um thank you.

I actually did want to know the answers to Commissioner Vance's question.

Um if it's not a lengthy uh Yeah, yeah.

We can we can there'll be the answer now and then the follow-up.

So um on floor plates, so we are um, and I I know a lot of the comments were specific to Mass Timber.

We have provided um quite a bit more flexibility on floor plates with Wilburton and now propose for Bellred than we have in other areas.

I think when we come back, we can give a bit of a comparison there.

Um we also have um uh some really substantial flexibility specifically for buildings under um a hundred feet in height, you know, hearing that that mid-rise typology is really the most feasible where the most affordable housing happens.

Um so we've really done away with a lot of barriers for mid-rise.

It's really when you get into tower construction that um we do start to introduce some more limits.

Um we feel that the where the the way that they're structured now, that was the result of a lot of feedback and back and forth with the development community through Wilburton.

Um, I think we can give more concept more context, but um, you know, I I don't really think this is really going to be the make or break to extend it just a little bit further.

Um, but we can we can give more context on how they compare to other areas.

I think that would help.

Um with parking, uh so uh the the uh parking Luca was actually just initiated by council last night.

Um so the council has um set staff with a direction to um not just start with that state minimum, but look at expanding our parking reductions um further into other kind of transit-rich areas, other places where the pedestrian environment really supports it.

So there's gonna be I think some exciting work there that will definitely um flow into Bell Red.

So for now, we have um we've brought forward the um Wilburton approach of just pointing to the citywide standards and then applying a flat 75% reduction, um, which brings down parking quite considerably in Bell Red.

Um, and I anticipate um with that uh the parking reform Luca coming through, that'll reduce things further.

But we're just kind of keeping all parking topics to the parking project.

Um, but yeah, just more to add there.

Just to add um, because the direction was to you know, comply with state law and then look at opportunities to go beyond.

And so we're clear on state law.

The parking requirement is zero if you're within a half mile walking distance of a light rail station.

And then the uh outside of that walk shed, the state law requirement will be 0.5 spaces per dwelling unit and then two space maximum per 1,000 square feet of commercial development.

So that's kind of the we know that.

And then the question for you all is going to be outside of that walk shed where we do have minimum parking, what should we do?

Should we go further?

Um, and would love to kind of get into that not only in parking reform, but then like to hear kind of the perspective as we work through uh Bell Red.

That's that's so helpful.

Technically wasn't my question.

I will go, I will finish it around and then come back to you if you need it.

Maybe next person and other people ask it, okay.

Um Commissioner Ninja.

Thank you.

Um I don't have an actual question, but I want to just highlight a couple of things that I I thought sounded great to me.

I first uh Commissioner Geppel, um, I fully agree with the finding some way to add incentives for paths and uh walkability around streams.

Um, you know, I think we have a a great resource in this area, so we might as well use it.

Um then I I'm also curious to hear a little bit more about the the the four plates um analysis they were talking about.

You don't have to answer this now, this for later on at a different meeting, but um, I am curious about the the distinction between the 20,000 and the 25,000 number there.

Yeah, and that's a fairly new con.

I mean, we were open to any suggestion during Wilburton.

And I think if 25 would have come forward then, it'd probably be 25, but it didn't come forward.

Um is what my memory was.

So um happy to entertain that with the commission as we work through this.

We'll have to just think about if that's a a one-off for Bell Red or if that's what's good for Bell Red is good for Wilburton because that's the impact when we're trying to, as Christina noted, um, consolidate standards um when those districts are adjacent to each other, such as this.

Thank you.

Commissioner Malaysis.

Thank you.

Um, arts district, I think it would be really helpful to see what our districts in the world we would like to emulate.

I think we've touched based on this before.

There's Winwood Miami's a very, very good example.

There's uh Williamsburg and Bushwick in New York.

There's there's different places in the world that have different conditions, and it would be great to see what we want to emulate.

What can we learn from those places?

I uh I would love to see some like specific examples of what you're considering when you're planning this.

Uh the other thing is going back to Wilburton and and Nick would appreciate this, I think.

Uh it would be great to understand and know now what the development capacity is of Bellred, so that can help inform the requirements for fee and rule and affordability because that that can help us understand what is the maximum that we can obtain.

Uh and it's is just a good sense of scale to understand what's what's the development capacity of Bellrid.

Um that's that's it today.

Yeah, thank you.

I think for me, um, I know everybody likes Wilburton Code SO Planning Commission.

Um, but I want to if you guys think it's uh good, um, it's gonna go be a year after Wilburton, right?

Like I want to see what is what is a progress in Bilberton that everybody loves it, because I'm curious if we ended up selling more parcels or we really helped um more development happen because that's like gonna go be interesting.

And I understand the market is not good for building all of those, but I'm curious about what was the result coming out of the Wilburton.

And I think for new planning commissioner, I don't know.

I'm just suggesting if you think you need a briefing about Wilberton, because half of people who are studying here memorize Wilburton line by line.

Uh but I think if if you guys are gonna go present a come like comparison between those two good, but if you feel that'd be good for a new commissioner to just know about what's happening in Wilburton and what we agreed at what council um uh adopted, that'd be like I in my opinion helpful.

Um I know you guys coming back for here for March 22nd or something.

Um maybe like in I don't know, February you have debriefing meetings or something.

Should we go the third round or chair?

Can I just add something?

You do have coming before you um the Wilburton sustainable district, which might be a good venue to sort of update what has happened in in Wilburton and Yeah, that'd be good.

Yeah.

How we can look forward.

Like I feel if I was not part of Wilburton, probably half of this stuff be a little bit interesting.

Yeah, okay, that's good.

If you guys wanted to do that, that'd be perfect.

And then if you felt uh you want more, uh I might even use a refresher.

Um, but um, should we go the third round?

Johnny Lou.

Um I just had one quick is that is the the street grid going directly down.

Is that connecting to the Bell Red station?

Or I I can't see where you're pointing to.

Yeah, like the very, very the very, very bottom street that goes like directly down.

Is this is this connecting the Bell Red station or is that uh no Bellred stations?

Yeah, it's higher on under 30 and 132, and then like that thick area, right?

Station still I think that's helpful you guys put the number off the street, honestly, there.

Yeah, yeah.

I know it's maybe add the stations there and then we have other maps with the station.

But generally, you know, that the the light rail alignment kind of goes along spring there.

So yeah.

Yeah, I'm just thinking like, you know, we we should be maximizing connectivity to the to the library station with the street grid.

Um I agree with the stream's comment for sure.

I think the other thing to prioritize is public transit.

Um also why I asked the sound translate question of like I want to know how many people are actually commuting in.

Um, but yeah, I think that overlay would help, and then we can probably have another discussion on streaker later on.

That's it.

Thanks.

Um, Commissioner Geppo.

Yes.

Pass Commissioner Um Kennedy.

Just a quick add-on to the conversation around um our future briefing associated with uh incentives for linear parks and enhancements around the stream, be really helpful from my perspective.

I know we talked about this in the conversation around the CAO, but to better understand the overlay of the CAO in relation to that.

Um would be very helpful.

Uh things are coming to mind that I'm not sure are accurate around how that would actually play out.

So if I were a developer who had a stream going through my parcel, and we were considering an incentive for linear parks under the CAO, I know that there were incentives or opportunities to meet the criteria for the CAO by working with other adjacent landowners, understanding how that would work with an incentive specific to Bell Red would be very helpful, perhaps an example.

And then plus one on the briefing for Wilburton.

Thank you for the idea.

Very much appreciated if that's possible.

And um, yeah, if you could just include that that that example of how we can consider the incentives across Bell Red.

You had quite the list, but the perks was one of them.

Thanks.

Commissioner Ninchan.

Uh I'd love a presentation on Wilburton.

But that's it.

Okay, yeah, welcome.

Commissioner of Emises.

Okay, thank you.

One more.

Uh for this being an arts district, uh something we don't have in Wilburton is city developed projects, public amenities.

And this being in our district makes me think like, why don't we have a museum or something like that, right?

Where do we gonna see an outdoor plaza with like music?

It would be awesome to see the city obtaining some three or four strategic parcels where public amenities can be built that generate what uh council member Bargawa used to refer to as urban magnets that would create that tension between the different areas in the district where you're gonna start driving people um and pedestrians to keep this this district alive.

And there's one in particular on the upper, I guess, westernmost nort northwest corner where the stream joins the uh the Eastrail.

That's a pretty important note and we shouldn't uh forget about that.

Like uh I think we should show the East Rail as well, because if you if you live in Bell Red and you work in Google in Kirkland, you could drive ride your bike down to on the stream, go to Eastrail and then go all the way to Kirkland Downtown to work or go all the way to Wilburton and then take I mean you could you you're very well connected.

So we should identify which nodes those are, and maybe does it make sense that there's some special public amenities in these places and that generate that tension between uh between the district two to pull pedestrians into it.

And I do want to expand so when it comes to the the public investments for the arts.

Um we we definitely at this moment are not the ones to answer that question, but we do have a team that is working on just those topics so we can coordinate with our our arts folks to give some more on uh what they are working on in terms of um those kind of public investments and programming and assets.

So, but yeah, great points.

Okay, thank you.

That's it.

And we also have a couple city sites um that we have uh RFPs um that were locked in now with developers.

Um so we can highlight those um as well, just for additional context of um what that partnership is looking like.

So I think for me, um the last comment is again about the art and the artist.

And uh as you mentioned, when you walk or ride your bike through the Ace Rail Trail, and you can go to the different neighborhoods, Spring District uh or Barret, uh, all of those.

It's just so important for me to have a walkable accessible uh area for the art.

And again, the openness space.

I think I know uh developer community are pushing back on the openness space, but I think this is what we were envisioning for.

Like we wanted to see the concert, we want to see uh gathering and all of those.

Like, for example, in the spring district, that day is a really nice plaza in the middle that is a lot happening there, right?

They even rent that a space for the private events is uh creates a lot of um uh growth for that uh area.

I think I want we have the incentive um program focus on that, be beneficial for the art district um if this is what we wanted to do.

And I think it's a vision of council members.

Any other rounds?

Should we finish before nine?

Okay.

Is there any motion to approve the minutes from the December 10th?

And thank you so much.

Any discussion?

All in favor?

I motion to I know during the meeting.

I'm giving it to her.

Okay.

During our meeting.

Any discussion?

All in favor?

Thank you, everybody.

Thanks.

Thanks.

859.

59, like literally.

Like literally a minute.

We could not extend it.

I was panicking.

It was like number of questions was getting like higher and higher.