Good evening and welcoming to the February 11 meeting of the City of Bellevue Planning Commission.

This evening meeting is held via hybrid format with both in-person and virtual option via Zoom.

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

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

today, Wednesday, February 11th, will be uh summarized into the record.

We have a public hearing tonight for the trash hold review of the Evans applause comprehensive plan amendment proposal.

We also have a study session with the presentation from Puget Sound Regional Council and the Regional Plan Vision 2050.

Now let's let us move forward with the roll call.

I would like to recognize the appointment of the new uh council liaison to the planning commission.

Council member Vishal Vargawa will come back.

Thank you.

So happy to be here.

Vice Chair Liu.

I'm here.

Commissioner Gopan.

Here.

Commissioner Kennedy?

Here.

Commissioner Neil Chang?

Here.

And Councilor Liazon.

Council Member Bargawa.

Here.

And I'm Chair Han Lu.

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

I would like to move that we approve tonight's agenda.

Thank you.

Any discussion?

All to approve.

Council Member Barkava, do you have any reports for us today?

Yeah.

First of all, uh really great to be here, be back working with the planning commission, uh, place where I spent five years prior to joining the council.

So really excited to be appointed the liaison and have a chance to work with this group and the team as a city staff uh as well.

Uh quickly update uh quick update on this week's council meeting I can provide.

Uh it was a really good uh uh sort of robust session with multiple topics.

One of the topics was uh of uh sort of an update, more uh uh informational on the um economic development strategy and the detailed plan the the team has developed and uh uh they went through not just the strategy strategy but the vision, but also a detailed roadmap of 60 plus economic development strategies and action items that they're gonna go through and execute over the course of the uh next year or two.

And uh they also talked about some of the successes we've had.

We've got open AI and Databricks and other companies that have come in and are gonna take over um office space the size of uh Lincoln Square South, which is significant.

Like that's the amount of office space that these new companies coming in and are going to occupy in Bellevue.

So that was a really good uh successful outcome and uh a great review.

The other thing that was really substantial was a review of the Human Services Commission proposed budget allocation to different aspects of where the funding is going to go.

Um they're doing it differently this year where they're not gonna bring to council sort of their uh most updated project split and and and then look at that.

But this was an earlier view looking at the allocations by category, um, like things like housing and then uh food security and then youth services and so on.

So there's a long list, but they had a split of all those uh uh percentages that were looking for council approval on.

So we aligned yesterday.

And we also had a robust discussion around some definitions of key terms.

One of the places where we spend a lot of time was on linguistically and culturally sensitive services for Bellevue, and they're gonna allocate about 24% of the total budget, or no, 26% of the total budget to that.

And uh really it was about whether uh it should be for and by for uh agencies within the city that actually have the same cultural and linguistic um sort of heritage.

And um uh there was a vote on that definition.

So that was a core part of yesterday.

And then um one other thing was that a uh interim official control, uh, which Matt is here, I think.

Um we talked about that for uh uh downtown um old um Main Street, old town Bellevue.

And uh we did pass a 4-3 vote on exercising and putting and adopting an IOC for that.

Essentially, that that means is for the next six months uh it could becomes mandatory for uh new development applications that come in to maintain um the character look and feel for up to two stories, and there was some updated design guidelines uh that were part of that IOC, so that has been adopted.

And the last thing which I'll talk about, which is related very much to the work happening here.

Uh Tara was amongst those who presented uh uh look forward um to our uh land use uh uh the loopy.

Um and we looked at the next 24 months of the work program, and that was a really good uh robust uh presentation as well.

Thank you, Council Member.

Um Kate, are is there any reports from board and commissions?

And commissions.

Uh will you provide uh any updates for meeting schedule?

There are so many updates for meeting schedule that I had to write some notes.

So um we're canceling the March 11th meeting because we will not have a quorum.

Um for the most part, I've been able to adjust the topics to make up for that.

One of the topics that was going to be on March 11th was um uh uh overview of the adopted economic development plan.

Um that councilmember Bargava was just speaking about.

That will probably be in the fall.

I haven't rescheduled that one, but for the most part, the other topics I um have been able to adjust.

I will note that April 8th has three topics, but I will work with Chair Conloo to ensure that we're able to cover all three items in a timely manner.

There's no action asked on any of those items.

Um I have added a presentation on the MFTE program on April 22nd.

Um that also on that date is the Bell Red Luca presentation.

The commission doesn't have a role in the MFTE program, but does impact other items that are coming before the commission, um, including the Bell Red Luca and there was interest expressed from the commissioners to hear more about the MFTE program.

So I was able to schedule that.

Um two scheduling items.

Looking ahead to the summer, it looks like there will likely be many public hearings.

Um and I wanted to float the idea of adding a meeting in July or August.

No need to make a decision right now, um, because it's possible that some uh schedules could shift a little bit.

Um, but I know that summers are very busy.

And um, so I wanted to float an idea of maybe figuring out what a reserve time could be in case it's needed.

Um and then looking even further ahead to November.

Um the first meeting in November, so it would be the second uh Wednesday of the month.

It falls on Veterans Day this year.

Um so I wonder if the ki commission would be opened a meeting on the first and third Wednesdays in November instead of second and fourth.

Um the fourth Wednesday tends to be the day before Thanksgiving.

So also not ideal.

Should we respond to your email that you will send to us with uh that that would be fine?

Yeah, and unless you want to ask the commission about the November dates now.

Do you want to make decision now?

We'd rather have the email so we can check calendars and sort things.

Okay, that's okay.

Okay.

Sounds good.

Okay.

Any question, Pam Kay?

Okay, great.

Um, let us move into the oral and written communication.

Kate, do you have any um summary of the written communication that we received?

Sure.

I forward you the communications uh that I received since uh packet was published.

Many of the people who sent in written communications um are registered to give oral comment as well.

So you probably saw their um written communications.

Um I wanted to know that there was a comment from King County.

Um Tun and I have followed up with them.

Um they um want to sort of reserve their comment for a future date when the when a building permit is filed for.

They said it doesn't apply to this stage of of the um process.

Um I've also received one uh additional comment that came in late this afternoon.

Um, and I believe that that commenter is registered to speak.

Um, so I'll let him um speak his comment.

Um, that's it.

Thank you.

Um we have totaled 30 minutes for oral communication.

Each speaker will up to three minutes to speak.

I want to emphasize that if you are here to speak on the public hearing, please wait until that portion of agenda.

Staff lines and Kate will call in the speakers in order which they have registered, either in person or online.

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

registration deadline, you may still provide public comments if there's remaining time.

Please use raise hand function in the Zoom, or if you are attending virtually or um or motion to staff if you are in person here.

The rules adopted by the city um council limiting the topics about which uh the public may speak during our meeting under ordinance 6752.

The public may only speak during public comments about subject matters that are related to City of Bellevue government and are within the power and duties of the planning commission.

Additional information about these rules can be found online.

Again, if you're addressing the Ivan's Plaza CPA, please wait until the public hearing so that uh your comments are part of the hearing record.

Kate, can you please call our first speaker?

Uh we have nobody signed up to give oral comment.

I can keep it.

I can turn to the room to see if there's anybody who wants to speak about something that is not Evans Plaza.

Not Evans Plaza.

That's something up.

Anyone online?

Uh anyone online that wishes to speak about something that's not Evans Plaza.

No.

Okay, great.

Um, tonight we have a public hearing for the threshold review of the privately initiated Yvonne's Plaza comprehensive plan amendment.

Privately initiated CPAs have two-part process in the city of Bellevue.

The threshold review is planning commission's recommendation to the council whether to include the proposal, the proposed CPA in the annual workbook.

If it's included, we will consider the metrics of the proposal at a later date.

Can I motion to open the public hearing?

So moved.

Any second?

Thanks.

Any discussion?

All in favor?

Go ahead.

Now we will start the public hearing on the Evan Plaza Threshold Review with their presentation from a staff, followed by presentation from the application applicant.

After that, everyone who wishes to speak about the proposal will have opportunity to do so.

Planning director Johnson and comprehensive planning senior planner Chiun Tuling will provide a presentation on the Avon Plaza CPA for the city of Bellevue.

Good evening, Chair Kanlu, Vice Chair Liu, Planning Commissioners.

Thank you for having us this evening.

So tonight we're here to present a brief presentation on the 2026 annual comprehensive plan amendment.

Just to start us off and to provide some context.

The comprehensive plan is, as you know, the city's guiding policy and foundational document that looks over a 20-year planning horizon.

And of course, includes our growth strategy.

As you're aware, the understate law and the growth management act, we can only amend the comprehensive plan once a year.

We've had some study sessions to talk about that previously.

We're here this evening to present some information on the privately initiated amendment that has been submitted as part of the 2026 cycle.

So tonight, uh Tune and I are going to tag team.

Um we'll start off and provide an overview of the amendment process.

We'll go over the decision criteria that you're going to be utilizing to assess uh whether it meets the threshold criteria.

Uh, we'll give you some context about the proposal, and then of course, uh present the staff recommendation.

Uh, we've had a fair amount of public comments, so we'll be summarizing that uh as well, and then um just highlight the planning commission's action if you're prepared to take action tonight and then conclude with next steps.

So um our request tonight is twofold.

First, uh that you conduct a threshold review public hearing.

Um, and after that, accept public testimony.

And then following the public hearing, if you're prepared, um, make a recommendation to city council whether to accept this application as part of the 2026 work program.

So that turn things over to 10.

Thank you, Tara, and good evening, everyone.

Um so this is just uh to level set uh something we went over at the uh January 14th meeting as well.

The annual amendment process um for privately initiated amendments consists of two steps.

And the first step, that's where we're at right now in the process, uh, is to determine whether applications uh should be included in the annual work program.

So that's not a review of the merits of the proposal.

That would be a uh potential second step, depending on planning commission recommendation and and council uh decision uh on that recommendation later on.

Um so it's important to know that we're at the first step of the process here, and then following uh the public hearing uh at the planning commission tonight, there will be a city council study session um where they will take action and review uh planning commission's recommendation.

See, next slide.

So threshold review.

And the planning commission may recommend inclusion of a proposed amendment in the annual CPA work program or comprehensive plan amendment work program if the if those criteria have been met.

So that is whether it's an item that is appropriately addressed through the plan.

Yeah, plan being the comprehensive plan.

Another criterion is a three-year limitation on making applications.

So whether there's not a similar application for this site that has been submitted in the last three years.

That's criterion D.

An important one that we'll uh spend a little bit more time on when reviewing the staff recommendation is whether the proposed amendment addresses significantly changed conditions.

That is a term defined in the land use code.

Criterion F is something that we discussed at our past meeting in January, and that's a geographic scope to include similar properties.

At the January 14th meeting, planning commission provided direction to include one immediately adjacent parcel, the corner parcel, to include that in the geographic scope of this application.

G is consistent with current general plan policies, but also state law, the Growth Management Act.

And then the last one is if the CPA is required by state law or a court or a minister of decision, which is not the case here.

So a full review is included in the staff report.

The staff report was published 14 days ago with the public hearing notice, and it was also part of the packet.

But we'll go uh over these criteria and how they sort of apply to this amendment in more detail later in the presentation.

So here's in short um summary, um, sort of the more pertinent details of the application.

Uh so this is the one privately initiated application that was submitted prior to the September 15th deadline.

Uh, it's in the bridal trails neighborhood areas, um, Cold Evans Plaza.

And the um application proposes a map amendment from general commercial to low rise to mixed use on what is approximately a 10-acre site.

The one additional property uh measures about half an acre, um, in addition to the approximately 10.

And the site is located immediately north of State Route 520 and Delrad.

So here you can see the proposed amendment site outlined in red.

Um, the one parcel that was added to the geographic scope, the applications outlined in green.

Um Evans Plaza is currently occupied by several commercial buildings, and the current uses are a range of large and small commercial services, uh retail and restaurants.

Um then here, this is sort of the key slide to go over what is the proposed change, the proposed map change.

Uh I included here uh language from the future land use map key on the bottom right to sort of outline uh what these uh the current and the proposed map designations entail.

Um general commercial is um, well, it's a descriptive term, uh, is the to provide primarily commercial uh uses, office retail service.

Uh low rise two mixed use uh also um includes residential or housing, um, as well as those other commercial um uses that I just mentioned, and that is at a higher end of a low scale and density.

Um it is important to note that the difference between the current and the proposed land use designation is both like from a density point of view, but also for um uh allowing uh housing as a as a use uh that is part of that land use designation.

Um and this specific land use designation was created with the 2024 update to the comprehensive plan, um, as well as several other land use designations.

This land use designation is currently mapped uh on the Kelsey Creek Center site and Lake Hills Village.

Um a question that came up in conversations that staff has had with the community as well, is sort of the link to uh zoning, what that means.

Of course, the application here is for a comprehensive plan map change.

And then our zoning classifications in the land use code are meant to implement uh the comprehensive plan.

The uh future land use map is policy oriented, where um the land use code really provides specifics in terms of permitted uses, building heights, and so on.

The zoning classification that uh in the land use code that implements low rise to mixed use um is currently under development as part of the HOMA LUCA or the housing opportunities and mixed use areas land use code amendment, something that the planning commission is intimately familiar with.

Um planning commission provided a recommendation to council uh at their last meeting, um, uh, including the land use designation that is meant to uh implement uh low rise to mixed use map designation.

Because the land use district does not exist in a land use code as of today, um, this um CPA is not a uh concurrent rezone application uh that would um if adopted in the end by city council um uh it will be a separate and future step.

Uh and then to go over the staff recommendation, uh sort of the other second slide I want to spend a little bit more time on.

Um this is outlined in more detail in the staff report.

Uh and staff recommend incorporating the proposed Evans Plaza comprehensive plan amendment into the 2026 annual work program, uh and also that the geographic scope is to be ext expanded per the prior planning commission direction.

Uh I want to highlight um four specific criteria, um, C, E, F, and G.

Um so for C the criterions like does not raise issues more appropriately addressed by another ongoing work program.

Uh a work program uh initiated by city council in 2018 is great neighborhoods program um that was meant to develop neighborhood area plans that reflect the community's values and vision for the future.

And the scope of that program also centers around strengthening a neighborhood area's unique identity, uh community gathering places as Bellevue prepares for its well-managed growth.

Um you, of course, familiar with the Great Neighborhoods program.

Uh council has not directed staff to include bridal trails in uh either the current or the upcoming two iterations of the Great Neighborhoods program.

And as it is currently undetermined when bridal trails would be part of the great neighborhoods program, uh, the proposed amendment cannot be addressed uh by that ongoing program in a timely manner.

Um the second criterion I want to spend a little bit more time on is uh significantly changed conditions.

Um that is a definition that I'm not gonna read out loud.

But um uh it's a definition that is provided in the land use code.

Um and in the staff report, it's concluded that the proposed amendment addresses those significantly changed conditions, um, affecting uh this specific site uh because of changes to the comprehensive plan text.

Um, maintaining the site's land use designation in the 2044 Belleview Comprehensive Plan.

Um that has created a constraint on realizing the land use vision for Bellevue's neighborhood centers.

Uh Pineview is one of them.

We went over that at the general meeting in more detail, that this specific proposed amendment site is part of that uh neighborhood center.

Um and as stated in the comprehensive plans land use element, uh Belleview supports continued engagement and investment to maintain the health of these important centers and allows neighborhood centers.

Just a second.

Do you mind to just be quiet and not disturbing?

It's it's we hear it pretty well here.

Just, you know, thank you.

Thanks.

Uh, and allows neighborhood centers to become mixed use with some higher density residential alongside the commercial uses.

And that is also captured in several comprehensive plan policies that are focused on the city's land use strategy as well as the neighborhood centers, of which Pine View is one, which is relevant here for the uh proposed amendment site.

Um the existing land use map designation does not encompass residential uses.

And um, while there are a stated need and established policy for accommodating Bellevue's housing and jobs growth within areas designated for compact mixed use development, such as neighborhood centers.

Um the application proposes a map change that would allow residential uses to be part of future development.

Um and this change would make the plan, the comprehensive plan function as an integrated whole where map designations are uh in alignment with the city's growth strategy and land use policies and uh would then allow higher density residential alongside commercial uses in the Pineview neighborhood center.

Uh the other two uh criterion F, we went over in detail at um at the last meeting to include that one adjacent uh parcel.

And then lastly, um the proposed amendment per the staff recommendation and staff report is consistent with um general comprehensive plan policies, but also implementing uh countywide planning policies, the growth management act and other irrelevant laws.

Uh in terms of public comment, um so the notice of application uh was published uh at the very end of 2025, and the notice of public hearing was um uh published um I think over 14 days ago ahead of this public hearing.

Uh in terms of engagement, um staff uh attended bridal trails community club's uh winter meeting on January 28th.

I think it was attended by uh I did a quick count, I think by about 50 people.

Um provided an overview of the comprehensive plan amendment process and uh answered questions uh um that came up after that, and um I highlighted sort of the opportunities for community engagement and and public comment as part of the CPA process.

Um I had another follow-up meeting with several members of the Bridal Trails Community Club the week after two.

Um I think we met for like an hour and a half to just uh for me to answer like additional follow-up questions uh that they had.

Uh so far, I think at the start of this meeting, we had nine written comments that were submitted.

Um the applicant provided comment.

The bridal trails community club provided comment as well as six bridal trails community members, residents.

Um then lastly, and um um planning commission liaison, uh uh Kate mentioned that as well that King County Wastewater Treatment Division provided comment, and um staff reached out to them to sort of clarify the nature of the comprehensive plan amendment application.

And um King County Wastewater Treatment Division asked um to um sort of see building permit applications later down the line.

But as we know, like this is a very first step that might potentially uh lead to a building permit in in the future.

But um so the day asked to be to be kept apprised of any future building permit applications and review those because they manage and own um wastewater treatment uh infrastructure near the site.

Um the bridal trails community club and the bridal trails residents, their comments are generally against um having this uh application move past uh threshold review to final review.

Um I'm sure that will be covered also in more detail and during oral uh comments, um, but generally about the criteria, the threshold review criteria and it not furthering sort of the goals of the comprehensive plan with sort of um key elements in the in the written comments uh in short.

Um yeah, um Tara mentioned it previously, but like after the public hearing uh uh or after the staff presentation to accept public testimony and then following the public hearing for the planning commission to to make a recommendation.

Those are sort of uh next steps and um following tonight's meeting.

Um if planning commission uh makes a recommendation, then the recommendation would be reviewed at a later meeting, a later city council meeting uh in in their study session, uh sort of tentatively scheduled for April, and then um final review if it would uh uh come to that, of course.

Like there are two steps in the process that would happen uh sort of the spring through fall uh of this year.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Um now thanks to staff.

We're gonna go have a seven minutes um presentation from applicant.

The presentation for the CPA will be made by Stephen Maltam, the applicant alongside Mike McKinsey Blackburn from the Avon's company and Jesse um Clausen representing the applicant, please.

Sorry, Red Mean Stop.

Chair Conlu and Commissioners, Councilmember Bargava, just wanted to introduce ourselves.

I'm Jesse Clausen with McCullough Hill on behalf of the applicant.

Steve, what's your name?

My name is Steve Malsum, and I'm partners with uh Len Evans and Evans Wakefield and speak on behalf of comprehensive planning amendment.

I'm McKenzie Blackburn.

I'm CFO of the Evans Company and here to support Steve in the comprehensive plan amendment.

Would you please speak louder?

I'm getting signaled that people cannot hear you.

Thank you.

Please go ahead.

Go ahead.

Okay.

Um first of all, I'd like to thank the planning commission for the opportunity to address you.

Um I think um I'm gonna just in in um respect out of your time.

I'm gonna read just so I don't get off track.

Uh so um first of all, I'm gonna talk about uh my partner Len Evans has owned this property for uh over 60 years.

Uh he brought his first tenant to the center in 1968, which was the prairie market, which is currently there.

Um it's been operated as a um retail center.

Um with the changes in the surrounding area, primary and the Bell Red Corridor, he has decided to pursue a rezone to add a residential aspect to the property zoning.

Over the last 30 years, Len and I have been partners and we've developed through Evans Wakefield a number of mid-rise mixed-use projects in the Seattle area, such as the Mill Creek Town Center, the Woods at Alderwood and the Kennedy Building.

We've also developed a 220,000 square foot commercial center, 900 units in the Smoky Point area in Marysville, where we just completed the final phase.

At this time, there are no current plans to develop the Evans Center into a mixed-use commercial multifamily project.

However, we'd like to look to the future and plan ahead for growth in the Bellevue Bell Red Corridor.

Our office, which is located on 130th, is between Bell Red and Northup.

Um, has been there for 60 years.

I've been there for 30 years and has experienced a lot of change.

Um use projects are being all around built all around us.

The Evans Plaza has all the same characteristics in our opinion of those properties currently being developed.

Uh now I'd like to just turn it over to McKenzie to discuss the changes in the area since the latest comp plan amendment.

Thank you.

Thank you guys for your time.

So we recognize that the city underwent a comprehensive plan review in 2024, but we believe that significantly changed conditions exist that warrant review and amendment to the existing comp plan.

Since the review, Len has, as the landowner has seen that there's an increased need and appetite within Bellevue for developing the property beyond its current state as an aging commercial center.

Many leases are set to expire in the future, and the changing retail climate makes it increasingly difficult for commercial only centers to compete with regional destinations, big box retailers, e-commerce, and other retail outlets.

Allowing a mixed-use designation would allow commercial to remain on site while being supported by multifamily housing operations that fill the gaps where there's less demand for traditional retail.

Where this area may have been isolated before, the recent completion of light rail stations near the Evans Plaza have created a greater accessibility to the site than ever before.

The city's need for housing combined with new accessibility to multimodal transportation, local grocery stores, and other retail make this site the perfect location for mixed use development.

So this map shows the close proximity of the site to other existing shopping centers and the newly operational light rail stations all within walking distance.

Prior to completion of the light rail, there were a few opportunities for transportation that made the site less desirable.

The shift in accessibility has significantly changed the potential for Evans Plaza.

We also want to touch upon the site's inclusion within the bridal trails neighborhood, as we recognize that many residents will be curious about the impact on this long-standing and respected neighborhood.

Well, the site is technically included in bridal trails.

It's at the south end of the hill and separated from the single family residential homes that are so prevalent in the neighborhood.

So you can see this is the Evans Plaza site.

I'm sorry, is surrounded by other similar commercial developments and is just north of the bustling Bell Red area.

Taking a further step back, it's clear the site is well outside the residential areas that would not residential areas and would not negatively impact the residential nature of the bridal trails neighborhood.

Further impacts will be reviewed and discussed at length if the plan amendment is approved for discussion and plans for mixed use development move forward in the future.

For further information, or if you'd like to speak to Steve or I directly, um, you can access information on our website, and there's our contact info.

We thank you for your time.

Okay, Jesse.

Yeah, and then just um finishing up here.

Uh I'm gonna pause your time for just a moment.

I just realized that this is not being shared with people who are attending online.

Oh, should I just pause your your time?

I'm gonna adjust the share.

Okay.

Should we do it again?

We just did a run through.

Perfect.

You know, it can be seen online.

What what do you want us to do?

Do you guys want us to do that?

I mean, I can quickly talk.

These are your decision makers.

Okay.

And they saw it, so I think that's great.

So are we good?

The the presentation will be available on Legistar for the general public.

And if somebody online would like it, I can email it to you.

And okay, we can send the presentation and you have two minutes left.

Great.

Around two minutes.

Yeah, I won't use them all.

Yes, yes, I just didn't share the presentation correctly.

Um we all ready.

Okay, we're good.

True.

Thank you.

Okay, great.

Um, so we do believe that the Evans Plaza comprehensive plan amendment meets the threshold criteria for consideration, particularly based on change conditions, as you heard McKenzie talk about.

It's important to emphasize, and you all know this, but tonight's decision is limited to that threshold question only, whether this amendment should be considered for the future.

Um, if the amendment moves forward, we'll be talking about all of the other criteria about whether it should actually become part of the comprehensive plan, including impacts, traffic, infrastructure capacity, and consistency with broader goals and land uses.

But those substantive questions are for the future and they're not for today.

Um, we also want to note that Stephen McKenzie reached out to the bridal trails community.

Obviously, Toon was there as well.

Um, we look forward to engaging directly with the community.

We're ready to come meet, talk about all the things.

Um, and we think the dialogue will continue in the next stage if you decide to move us forward.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I appreciate thank you for the presentation.

We will now turn to the public testimony as a reminder, testimony must be related to the Evans Plaza CPA.

Um, and then we have unlimited time for everybody to talk.

Um Kate, would you mind to call the first person who registered?

Yes, I am just gonna set up the timer here.

All right, our first uh speaker is Marcia McMurray, followed by uh excuse me, Ingrid and Singh.

And both of those folks are in person.

Yep, go ahead and just um press the button to turn it to green.

Thank you.

Uh yeah, my name's Marcia Murray and uh Ingrid, who's thinking next and I have been friends for many years at Cherry Crest Elementary, which we walk to from our homes and bridal trails.

Um, I first wanted to thank Tun for the presentation he did to our community meeting, which I thought was really helpful.

And actually, I really like that there is a process for landowners to come and present exceptions to the rule.

I think that that's a healthy process, and I applaud that.

And I am broadly in support of increasing density in Bellevue, and I recognize that that's just a practical need.

Um, so I'm not here to say like, no, we shouldn't develop, but I really see this as a slippery slope in terms of making exceptions to a comprehensive plan that was so well articulated.

And I remember the presentations about like different radii from a light rail station and you know, density would be related to that.

And I thought that was so thoughtfully done.

And here we have an exception being requested that I imagine would open the door for all similar property owners to then apply for the same.

And to say, you know, the Dun Lumber across the street or the whoever up the block is going to say, well, if you gave that exception to them, you should give it to me too.

And I'm just thinking of what that means in terms of deciding on this one instance, because there are so many big picture things that are in place, especially.

And I I heard mention that maybe this is for a later stage, but traffic on 24th Street is a real life day, day-to-day quality of life issue.

Um, it's a residential two-way street with just flashing red lights.

And if you add a couple hundred, couple thousand cars to that traffic pattern, it's already, I mean, if you did a study, it's already something that gets backed up for 10, 15 minutes of those flashing red lights as it is.

Um, and so I just I just want to um encourage you to look at this in terms of like the the lawsuit you'll have from the next landowner that says, Well, you gave permission to him, and now you're not gonna give it to us because um it seems to me like you're gonna all of a sudden have a really big number of applicants who are going to then force you to address some really critical infrastructure issues.

And I would encourage you to look at that big picture and make sure that those things are carefully thought out and in place beforehand, especially the traffic management.

Um, so am I against increased density and lower lower price point housing options?

Absolutely not against that.

But I do think that there's homework that needs to be done really thoughtfully for infrastructure before that's put in place.

And I really liked how the comprehensive plan was done in terms of the um concentration to um the light rails um and all of the thought that went into kind of the diminishing densities with distance.

So thank you so much.

I appreciate the time is over.

Thank you.

Next we have Ingrid Ensing, uh followed by Pamela Johnson, who is online.

Hi, thank you for having me.

My name is Ingrid Ensing, and I've lived in the Bridal Trails area for over 20 years.

And so I'm just going to speak directionally to the redevelopment, not to the specifics of the criteria, because it's not my area of expertise.

Um, so bear with me on that.

Um, so uh there's a Super Bowl ad.

Uh I said Super Bowl, so I thought maybe I'd get your attention with that one.

There is a Super Bowl ad by Redfin, and that features neighbors coming together to rescue a little girl's lost dog during a storm.

The tagline of the ad is America could use a neighbor just like you.

And that's what I'm here to talk about tonight.

Good neighbors and communities that they create.

I look at the city of Bellevue's job in two buckets, providing services for public works, safety, education, which it does a stellar job of, and overseeing development for good communities, like the one in the Redfin commercial, where they can thrive.

And you, the planning commission and the city council have established zoning plans for Bell Red, the Spring District, the surrounding areas that take into account all of these diverse um housing commercial, industrial demands.

The comprehensive plan was sold to the citizens of Bellevue, and it represents an agreement between the city and the residents about what is going to happen.

It's a trusted agreement of what development will happen and where it will happen.

So this amendment for a one-off zone rezoning of Evans Plaza raises a number of issues from my point of view.

One, rezoning of Evans Plaza is a breach of that contract between the residents and the city of Bellevue.

And our politics today, we need to work to build trust and relationships amongst each others and our actions build communities.

Secondly, to echo Marcia, this creates significant uh precedent.

There's 15 to 20 acres that are similar to Ellerin's Plaza around it, but immediately adjacent to that are homes.

So do we look to the north or do we look to the south when we say what is this area like?

There's also a mile-long stretch along the south side of 24th that could be multi-unit high rises.

Essentially, what would be happening is the Bell Red Corridor would be melding into bridal trails.

There's a question of why this property should be developed when just within the Bell Red Corridor alone, there's 6,000 units today built or going on track.

And there's the real life impact to the communities.

We have no one watching out and looking out for us.

And lastly, the property owners have the right to develop this property, but it should be consistent with what's in the area, like the Inniskan Glen condos that are just adjacent to it or Caddy Corner, or at the Bridal Trails Market at the other side of the park, which is very viable.

Um, but it should be consistent with what's in the area, like the Inascan Glen condos that are just adjacent to it or Caddy Corner, or at the Bridal Trails Market at the other side of the park, which is very viable.

In closing, I just want to say, like at the Redfin ad, uh, we all need good neighbors, and we all need to be good neighbors.

Thank you so much.

Our time is over.

Next, we have Pamela Johnston who's online, followed by Norm Hansen, who is in person.

Pam, can you hear me?

Can you hear me?

Yes, go ahead.

Okay, hold on just a second.

Um thank you.

Um I'm Pamela Johnson.

I've lived in Bridal Trails for quite a long time now, but we have many residents who live here for a long time.

Um Evans Plaza has played a role in bridal trails, it's a key commercial area, providing essential services and affordable rental retail uh options for bridal trails neighborhood and Bellevue.

Um bridal trails features low density housing, but we also have a lot of affordable housing and condos and multiple multiple multi-family housing.

Um of the things that we need to think about is that while we have all this and the things that we really care about, bridal tails and bridal centers.

Um, what are bridal trails needs?

And we don't, this is like our only grocery store inside of bridal trails.

Um should we have general commercials open to housing?

Um it's a concern because the comp plan was not deficit in planning for general commercial.

There's very few general commercial left because a lot of things that were general commercial changed into mixed use.

Um, and we basically have those those things along 520 is our only commercial housing.

Um we don't need more housing designations.

We need time for the plan to cook, and we need time for our 520 pro above 520 properties to have a real thing that matters.

We need to talk about it in a plan.

This is our neighborhood planning center, Pine View.

Um, don't like the name, but we'll work on that.

Um, but this is something really important for us to be able to plan that center.

And that was one thing we didn't do in the comprehensive plan, and we didn't do it because it's not an area that really needs to be developed yet.

We can get to Safeway right now, but when we get to a bigger, bigger usage in Bell Red, more properties, more traffic.

We um it'll be hard to get over there.

So, what has changed?

Um Evans Plaza opened in 1986, and it and it ended building in 1984.

Um Skate King was taken over by Harley Davidson, but that's the last thing that really changed in there.

We have a lot of things going on.

Um, and renewing leases is not a reason for a change.

We need to take it for our entire bridal trails community.

Um, and we're not served by full range of of transportation.

It's like 35, 30 minutes to walk to in transportation.

Thank you, Pam.

Your time is over.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Next, we have Norm Hansen who's in person, followed by Loretta Lopez, who's also in person.

You can't move out, I guess.

Uh my name is Norm Hanson.

I've lived in Bridal Trails for 53 years.

Can you hear me?

Okay.

Yes, please.

And uh I was on the 2009 uh community uh advisory committee for Bell Red.

And what I've noticed in the last uh 15 years that not much is developed there, you know, except on one side.

And uh immediately south of uh uh 520 on north of Northeast 20th, that's all zone general commercial for the most part.

And we wanted to have it for a two-story limit.

And uh so I want to address uh some of the two of the criterias because I think we're we're moving away from Bell Red and we're trying to go into some other areas, maybe burning off more than we can chew.

The criteria E, the proposed project does not appear to be on compliance with significantly changed conditions.

The property adjacent to the property, to the north, to the south, to the east, and to the west have not changed for many years.

To the south is Bell Red General Commercial.

All other adjacent properties are also limited to two stories.

And when we met with the community, it was going to be seven stories.

Now it's uh up to eight or nine, and it's still fluid.

So we don't know what to expect.

Um the recently approved Bellevue Comprehensive Plan did not result in a change to the plan map on Evans Plaza.

This is just a year and a half ago.

We looked at this.

And the criteria G, the project's not consistent with the neighborhood character, the Burrell Trail sub-area comprehensive plan.

Our plan, the Bridal Trail sub-area plan, has not been updated by the city since the early 90s, 30 years.

So how do you know what the residents want?

You don't.

It is planned to be updated with the city sometime in the next five years as resources permit.

Recommendation.

Because you've got limited information and limited time, I don't see how you can do justice to a recommendation.

So deny further threshold review, considering the above, and limited city resources, because they are limited to allow eight or nine stories with leapfrogged the Bell Red zoning of two stories along Northeast 20th.

There appears to be plenty of capacity for increased density of mixed use, low rise two and bell red that should be developed before you develop other areas.

Thank you so much for time.

Sorry, your time is over.

Well, that's another problem I have.

You know, the It's next we have the sub here.

I appreciate it.

Five or ten minutes.

Would you want to come to Foyota testimony?

Excuse me.

Would you want to come to have it?

Okay.

Yes.

I'm just asking him what his last sentence was.

Thank you.

My name's Loretta Lopez, and I'm a can you hear me?

My name is Loretta Lopez, and I'm a um resident of the Bretal Trails area.

Toon did do a very good job at our Bridal Trails Community Club.

Um except that he could not answer the question.

What what how tall will how tall will this development be?

And of course he couldn't answer the question because we don't know how tall it can be.

And that's my main uh point tonight.

The city has to engage with the community.

That's the point of all of this.

And yet the community doesn't know how tall the buildings can be.

And why don't we know?

Well, there are many reasons, but the neighbors don't know that.

The residents of Bradletrails don't know that.

If they knew that this could be nine stories, there probably would be more people here.

So we don't want to, how should I say?

And we encourage comment by giving proper notice.

And yes, this is a threshold.

I understand the distinction, but it's very confusing to most residents.

Most residents wouldn't know this distinction, and don't have enough information to even assess what is going to go on.

I also don't have um I I don't like the what was the the I think that the phrase was mid-level two.

Well, what does that mean?

What does what does that mean to you all sitting here?

Does it mean eight stories, nine stories, seven stories?

How do we expect residents who are not familiar with the planning process to know?

And the answer is we shouldn't expect them.

I think the city should pause and make sure there's adequate notice and explanation to the residents.

I I also agree that there hasn't been, there haven't been major changes in the area around Evans Plaza.

And I do think that the Bell Red area has not uh, there's a lot of room left to grow there.

And that plan for high rise density should stay in place for the Bell Red area.

We planned that probably 25 years ago.

I read the EIS.

Thank you.

Next, uh we have Barbara Hughes, followed by Warren Halverson, who is our last pre-registered um speaker.

Good evening.

I emailed through comments to you all last night, so I'm not going to repeat what I said in those.

I'm going to take the opportunity to say something different.

Um I'm on the bridal trails resident, Barbara Hughes.

I'm on the board of a small nonprofit, not the bridal trails community club this time, but another one in Bellevue.

And each week we put on a uh market.

I'm not speaking on behalf of them, but obviously the activity there is always at the top of my mind.

And we're a place, we're probably one of maybe two places left in Bellevue where someone wanting to start a new business or to develop their tiny business, can set up a table in a tent and start a business in Bellevue.

Um, it's really hard to source a business in Bellevue these days, and those opportunities are going away.

My concern is that a goal of many of our vendors is to get to the stage where they can move out of the market and um have a small storefront or you know, small restaurants, some of them just start a more established um location than a farmer's market and go year-round.

And it's places like Evans Plaza where they look when they want to go and um develop those businesses.

And I I've lived here 23 years, and I really see those places disappearing all around me.

And I'm the um daughter of a family that survived off a very small business far away in England.

It wasn't Evans Plaza.

And um, you know, that that's how my family survived.

That was the opportunity that my parents had, and it led to a better life for us.

And I would hate to see those opportunities go away.

And the fact that the this application has gone in indicates to me that you know, I kind of jump ahead.

Probably the end goal is a nine-story building on that site, possibly with commercial below, or maybe not, but I don't see the vendors that we have at the market when they're starting out in their businesses being able to, you know, you don't go from setting up a table in a tent to Bellevue Square or Lincoln Square the next week.

That isn't your next step.

You need to get someone that's more affordable.

And I just think is a city that's supposed to be business friendly.

Um if we eliminate these opportunities, where where are the businesses going to be in Bellevue?

That's that's my concern.

So that's kind of my my other angle to this.

Um thank you.

That was it, really.

Thank you.

Thanks, bye.

Next um next we have Warren Halverson, who's our last uh pre-registered speaker.

Good evening.

My name is Warren Halverson.

My wife and I are 50-year residents of bridal trails.

We're also proud to say that our two daughters and their families are residents of bridal trails.

Or whom is that 137, Northeast, 32nd place.

Clearly, there's a difference between residents and others who uh want to do things in bridal trails.

Picture this, though, as your neighborhood, this amendment.

We chose Belleville and specifically bridal trails because of its beauty, uniqueness, trees, and almost rural characters.

This includes a 348-acre horse park with 28 miles of trails and short loops of one to three or five miles.

Residents have also provided many pathways and trails through our community, the park.

As you may know, we also have easy access to I-90 and 405.

We border Kirkland and Redmond, Microsoft and Amazon.

And yes, our neighborhood streets are completely flooded with cars, especially streets like 24th, East and West, and North South, 140th.

Remember those streets.

That's where Evans Plaza is.

So where are we?

Today you just finished Billy's comprehensive plan, yet are now being asked to make a major precedent changing amendment for the future and ultimately land use codes, decisions for other parcels.

Make no mistake about it.

This is precedent setting.

Of course, that would require you to look at all those parcels, wouldn't it?

Just not this one.

It also is kind of concerning that low rise too mixed provides for seven stories around residential areas.

That is really significant when we see growth in the Bill View area.

I have two asks.

One that you provide to the public, to all of us, your expert testimony to the threshold review decision cent decision criteria, especially C and D and G, which speak to appropriateness of the amendment, neighborhood changes in character and resources available.

In my readings, this amendment does not pass the threshold muster.

Second, also while driving around, take a look at some of the bio trails shopping centers, like the one on 70th and 132nd.

The traffic is similarly congested, yet a new eight-story building dwarfs everything in that area.

Everything and safety issues have been uh much more significant.

Take a drive by the Lake Hills Village Shopping Center, which is similar in some respects to our neighborhood in that community, and those are two-story structures and open space even for everyone.

Think about it.

This is your neighborhood.

We really appreciate everything you do.

Appreciate consideration this and the staff's work with the bridal trails community and look forward to chatting with you more.

Thank you.

Kate, would you like to ask again if there's more people who want to talk?

Sure.

Is there anybody here in the room who would like to speak?

Go ahead.

Yes, I'm Patricia Hanson, and I've lived in uh bridal trails for quite a number of years since 61.

We've raised our family there, and uh it's been a really wonderful situation.

I want you to know that density housing as part of bridal trails is located along 148th Avenue Northeast.

So it's not like bridal trails only has half to one acre homes.

Um I think that's important for you to know.

And I'd also like to say that Evans Plaza has been a real blessing as it is.

It really um has a variety of businesses and it serves our community very well.

It seems to meet the needs of the neighborhood area as it is.

The additional traffic that a high rise would bring into that area would be uh really difficult to deal with.

And you know, there's an overpass there.

I haven't looked at it exactly, but I don't think there's room for additional traffic lanes on 140th to accommodate uh more people.

So that's something to be uh looked at.

Or uh the uh I think it would additional the additional traffic uh would overburden the traffic area.

And also, I'd like to point out that off of 140th at Northeast 20th, there's a large block of dirt.

It's all been scalped over a year, and nothing's going on there.

All for the sake of what?

I don't know.

It doesn't serve the community.

Viable restaurants and services were removed from there, and there's nothing there now, and it just sits.

It's not a beautiful site.

I call it an eye sore.

So I thank you for your time.

I think that um, you know, it's hard for all of you to actually see what it's like in a community if you don't live there, just as it would be for me to look at other communities.

So I hope that you will not be abrupt in your decision making.

And I understand if there are some additional stores or something to go in, but a high-rise residential area would not be beneficial, not a beneficial.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Anyone else online or in person?

If you want to speak online, raise your hand.

I see one person whose hand is raised.

Unmute you.

Gerald can you hear me?

Yes.

Go ahead.

Yeah, I think the big thing that I think everybody's called out is the trans.

Can you just a moment?

Can you state your name first?

Yes, sorry.

My name is Gerald McAllister.

Sorry, this is my first time.

Um so I uh my family and I moved to the bridal trails area recently.

Um so we're relatively new to the community.

But I think as everybody's called out, there are transportation issues that we've noticed here, uh, specifically around traffic congestion.

And I think the biggest challenge I have with this is that um, and there's no real public transit options in Evans Plaza.

I've done walks to that area, but it's a pretty hefty walk for somebody like myself, even.

Um, and I think that it would be good, especially if the uh the the group or person requesting this is able to come back and request it later.

I think it would be great if it would be possible for the city to evaluate better public transit options between Evans Plaza and the light rail, rather than approving now and dealing with the traffic later.

Um that's pretty much all I had to say on that.

Um, I think just reevaluating the traffic and especially since a bus route was actually removed from that area, I believe, earlier this uh last year.

Uh maybe bringing that back would help to alleviate that as well.

So um that was all on my end.

Thank you.

Anyone in person or online sticking around?

Just kidding.

Uh I'm seeing no more hands raised online or in person.

So I think that's all of the we have come to close the public testimony.

Is there a motion to close the hearing?

I would like to move that we close the public hearing.

A second.

Second.

Any discussion?

All in favor?

Aye.

Would you want to take a break before we go to the question, or would you like to keep going?

Let's keep going.

We can't.

The momentum is good between.

Okay, let's do it.

Now I call uh for each commissioner um to start asking their questions.

Can we have the staff?

Thank you.

Um let's keep on one question just in case the next commission is asking your second question.

Then we have a fast the follow-up question means second question.

Um Commissioner Neil Challenge.

Thank you.

And thank you to everyone who came and gave your comments.

That's very helpful to us to hear what people that are living in the area actually think.

Um last time that we were considering the Evans Plaza uh change here.

We saw some diagrams of the surrounding area and um how this fits in with uh how those areas are zoned.

Can you talk a little bit about that significant uh or sorry, not the significant the um how this fits in a little bit more about one of the factors, just take a moment to talk about that.

We can bring up the map.

Yes.

Um so as we discuss uh the site itself and um we discussed that at the January meeting uh at length, um the parcels east of 140 at that whole block, um, which is sort of considered to be part of that uh Pineview Neighborhood Center as well.

Um are currently have the land use map designation, general commercial, and then um if you go further north, um there's a church and then sort of starts a residential neighborhood that has um more um lower density residential map designations, um nearer to the to the uh side, the proposed amendment side uh west and north as low rise office mixed use, land use map designation.

Um that would allow for with a focus on office would allow for a mix of uses, including housing uh as well.

Um to the immediate to the north where you see the label low rise office mixed use that is currently an office park, uh, and then to the west as a undeveloped wooded uh property that is um owned by uh Puget Sound Energy.

And then further to the northeast um sort of northeast quadrant of that intersection of 24th and 140th, um, is like lower scale commercial properties within that same designation.

Um, and then the general commercial as was mentioned during uh oral comment as well.

Uh the general commercial land use designation also sort of goes into the Bell Red uh neighborhood area south of 520, uh 520 um is the boundary between the two neighborhood areas.

I'm gonna join Gepho.

Yeah.

Um Yeah, thank you.

Um I have one question, and I'm gonna be a little bit of a textualist here.

Um maybe that's an occupational hazard for me.

Um but uh and it has to do with significantly changed conditions.

And I need your help to understand why this is a significantly changed condition.

And I I emphasize the word significantly in in the definition.

Because the definition reads demonstrating evidence of change, such as unanticipated consequences of an adopted policy or change conditions on the subject property or its surrounding area, or changes related to the pertinent plan map or text.

And then this is the important qualifying language at the end.

It says where such change has implications of a magnitude that need to be addressed for the comprehensive plan to function as an integrated whole.

And I I'm having trouble understanding how there is a significantly change condition here that warrants um, you know, uh us coming to a conclusion that that threshold criteria has been met.

Um, because we just approved the comp plan in 2024.

And I I'm I'm having trouble understanding how if we um were to say that it this parcel satisfies that criteria, why any of the others would not satisfy that criteria as well.

So can you help me understand how that's how you see that being met in this circumstance?

Sure.

Um yeah, so significantly changed conditions.

It's um uh you you read it out loud, but it's not uh an easy uh definition.

It is sort of a three-parter and um per to staff report.

Um, it focuses on um because of changes to the pertinent plan text.

Um, I think there it's important that um in the land use strategy or in the growth strategy for Bellevue and that is laid out in a comprehensive plan, it targets growth, uh residential growth in different areas of the city, uh the mixed-use centers like downtown, Bell Red, uh crossroads, but then also um looking at these neighborhood centers like throughout the um that are spread out throughout the different neighborhoods in in Bellevue, and um a residential growth component or like a mixed use residential uh uh you land use is like an important part of that land use growth strategy and the policies around neighborhood centers.

Um what you see here and for a lot of the the other neighborhood centers, um sort of land use changes were discussed as part of the broader HOMA discussion where they have um mixed use residential land use designations, um, where you're now working through a land use code amendment, sort of to implement that and allow for residential uses there through the code.

I think here you sort of see an exception to that by having large um portions of the this specific neighborhood center, Pineview, having a land use map designation that does not allow I think only as a sort of an accessory use to a business that allows residential use, like a single family residential, but it doesn't in a broader mixed use sense allow uh for a residential use um to take place there.

Um so I think that is sort of the where there is an inconsistency sort of created between the future land use map and the um sort of the broader policy changes that were made uh per the periodic update in 2024 uh to sort of target mixed use residential growth in all these neighborhood centers.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Ferris.

Only have one question, but I do have a follow-up after this.

Um pretty straightforward question.

So we've talked a lot about the different designations when we have mixed use.

So simple question is if something is redeveloped on that particular site, are they gonna be required to have retail slash commercial slash office, perhaps on the first floor?

What are there going to be requirements about including such uses?

So that ties in with the discussion that you were having at your last meeting relating to HOMO.

And so ultimately um your recommendation is being forwarded to city council in a couple weeks, actually.

And um, so it resides with them, but there are requirements for ground floor retail.

Thank you.

Yeah.

No follow up.

Um Commissioner Kennedy.

Um great.

Thank you so much for the presentation and for all of the comments with Lucy Denite.

I also found them incredibly helpful.

I had a uh uh follow-up question in relation to uh Commissioner Geppel's kind of general theme and train of thought.

So as we think about the criteria that we're considering tonight for threshold review, that significant change in circumstances language that Commissioner Geppel read.

Um when we're making this threshold review, are we making the decision associated with this map that it would change from general commercial to low rise to mixed use?

Or are we just making a decision that it can change to uh a general designation allowing for residential mixed use, for instance low rise one mixed use, or uh mid-rise mixed use, which is adjacent to it.

And and if we're making the decision on the specific change.

What are the consequences of the number of stories and how is that distinct from those those kind of surrounding areas?

Because one of the other criteria is consistency surrounding areas.

So at this juncture, you're not making a recommendation on the change from general commercial to low rise mixed use.

You're evaluating whether this should be considered and discussed as part of a 2026 work program.

Um, so should the commission determine that you want this to move forward as part of the 2026 work program and city council agrees and takes action on that.

Uh, we'll come back through the final review process and we'll be evaluating what the change goes to.

So the significant change in circumstances isn't how many floors are appropriate.

The significant change in circumstances is uh that there are unanticipated consequences of adopting the CPA as drafted currently that are the next two that require a revision to the CPA to allow for additional flexibility in that zone.

But we wouldn't be determining if it's eight stories, nine stories, five stories, three stories.

I think the significant, I'll start off and then 10 has the specific language in front of him, which I don't.

Uh the significantly changed conditions are uh the crux of the matter is that when we updated the comprehensive plan, um, as 10 um mentioned, we looked at a number of neighborhood centers, and then city council also provided direction to change the designation on certain neighborhood centers.

This was not one of them.

So ultimately uh I think you've heard that through public comment to bridal trails neighborhood uh plan has not been updated since the 90s.

So and you'd imagine that there have been a number of changes over since the 90s in this area.

Got it.

Yes, that's very different than what I was saying.

Thank you.

That's helpful to what you're yeah, just like one quick condition is the the question here is whether the proposed amendment addresses significantly changed condition, not whether it's sort of the the vehicle uh uh of like changing the conditions.

That is like the that is more what Tara said.

Um sort of the land use policy question remains, and that is something to consider uh if this were to move forward per uh council action to final review.

Yep, thank you.

Thanks.

Why chair wise chair Liu?

Thank you.

Um appreciate the presentation uh and all the public comments.

And I I'm gonna echo the same sentiment as uh as Commissioner Kennedy and Commissioner Gepple.

I feel like uh I'm still a little bit uncertain about the um about the significantly changed conditions being uh I guess like a sufficient threshold for us to consider, but I I'll ask my question uh on criteria F, which is the uh, no, we are considering a geographic scope um expansion here as a part of this, and it does kind of designate similarly situated properties of similar height.

I guess um are we are we evaluating that next to the future land use map, or are you evaluating that against the current land use map?

And I guess, you know, because you know the the proposal here does seem you know like much larger than uh the ex then the existing uh properties that are around there, but I I'm kind of curious what you what you guys are considering as the baseline here.

If I can rephrase my question if it's yeah, I'm not 100% sure if I follow the question.

You know, we're we're talking about uh considering what this would look like uh against the um similarly situated properties and I think what was the whole thing?

Uh it was like geographic scope to include similar properties.

Yeah, situated properties that have been identifying the expansion as a minimum necessary for to include those properties uh with shared characteristics.

I guess like this along with the significantly change conditions criteria.

I like I just want to know are we are we looking at this the future land use map as like what our baseline should look like, or are we looking at the like pre-comp plan uh land use map as like what our general baseline is?

We'd be looking at the future land use map because that the future land use map is what governs what we have within the city.

Yeah.

So the pre the prior land use map doesn't apply anymore.

Okay.

And but the current designation of general commercial is on the future land use map.

So um if this were to move forward and through both threshold review and final review, and their final action was to change the designation to lower rise mixed use too, then the then it would no longer be general commercial.

But our we're not rec necessarily recommending low rise mixed use too as a part of our recommendation.

Not tonight.

All right, uh, that's it.

Thank you.

Um thank you.

I think from my question as um I'm asking a public question that they ask us, what if the other uh general commercial um owners come and they'll want to have a change?

Should they go to the same process?

Because I remember when we were talking about these during the comprehensive plan, couple of us was here.

Um we talk about let's let's keep the general um uh parcels general with an upsell or anything intentionally because we said it's next to the highway, the traffic, the air condition, uh and all of those.

We had our own reasoning.

Um what's happened if um someone who is a landlord and like that South area comes.

Are we gonna go keep changing all the general commercials too?

Yeah, I can um answer that question.

So I think um it really comes down to sort of what is the central question uh for the potential final review process, um, where planning commission reviews sort of the information that is there and like staff review and recommendation to see like what is from like a policy point of view the right land use designation for this area, considering also you know, taking into account considerations that you mentioned yourself, like what is the role and function of land designated as general commercial and um, you know, but also accommodating housing, like that is in the end very much like a policy question central to to to the final review uh uh uh process step.

Um also in like the threshold review criteria, but also the staff report.

Like that is not the questions that you asked now, is like not like um sort of answered and addressed in at this stage.

Okay, thank you.

Should we go the second round?

Commissioner Ninja.

Yeah, I have a follow-up on follow-up question on what um we were just talking about there with regarding other potential parcel owners wanting changes to their parcels.

I just want to make sure I'm understanding it correctly.

So they could only do if they wanted to rezone their property, then they would have to show a separate significant change in condition for their property.

So they can't just say because that property was that parcel was rezoned, then I should also get a rezoned.

Is that is that correct?

That's accurate.

Okay.

Thank you.

Commissioner Geppel.

Yeah, I'm still stuck on this threshold criteria.

And I'll be honest with you.

I mean, from a policy standpoint, I would love to support more housing.

I would love to support more density, but I'm I'm stuck on whether this is a significantly changed condition.

Um my concern is that you know we are using um you know policy um a policy rationale that's in the comprehensive plan that could be applied to any parcel within the city for purposes of a change.

And so I feel like in some ways, if we were to say that it meets the threshold criteria um in this circumstance, it almost reads out that significantly change condition threshold.

Um, because I I'm still struggling to see that it has implications of a magnitude for this one particular parcel that need to be addressed to have the comp plan work as a whole.

And I I just I'd love to be wrong on this.

And I'd I'd love you to help persuade me otherwise because from a policy standpoint, I'm totally in on the idea of trying to create more housing opportunities in the city, but I'm I'm concerned about the precedent that we're setting.

Can you help me on this?

I'm gonna ask Matt McFarland to come up and provide some context too.

We need a chair back right.

I I think that's the right question.

I mean, we have a privately initiated comp plan amendment that's looking at the parcel and the one parcel that it expanded to.

I I think you've hit the nail on the head is is the broad city policy that we're all familiar with to encourage housing and and encourage housing, particularly in neighborhood centers.

Is that sufficient as a factual matter and as a policy basis to satisfy that decision criteria?

And I I don't have an answer to that.

I think Dune laid out in the staff report and in his explanation what um what is certainly the analysis to consider.

It's a question for the planning commission.

I do want to emphasize too that this is a threshold review question, right?

It's not the the planning commission would have another touch on considering this proposal that final review as well.

But uh that I I really think that you're asking the right question, but then I don't I don't have an answer to that question.

I will say this from a legal perspective, just to ground everyone, uh it's really important to remember that the comp plan future land use map, which which we updated significantly with the periodic update, that is a legal requirement that whatever the future zoning is has to be consistent with that future land use map.

So you can have you those of you who participated in the future land use map update may remember part of what Kate presented was having different zones that could fall under one future land use map designation, right?

One thing that's kind of tough here is that we do not know the zones that could apply under this future land use map designation because that could be affected by HOMA, right?

I mean, that's one thing that they pointed out.

That I you know, we don't know what council will do.

We don't know what's gonna happen in the future, but there's certainly a possibility that by the time uh if they if this went past threshold review as part of the annual comp plan amendment, that those zones would in fact be something that we knew then.

Um and and that uncertainty is certainly something to to consider.

But um it, you know, the question here is exactly what you're asking.

Does the explanation that staff's given, which focuses on the housing production and neighborhood centers, does that rise to the level of significantly changed conditions for the purpose of this specific really um kind of parcel specific uh application?

Thank you.

Yeah, and I'm sorry I don't have an answer, but that's not my role.

Yeah, the answers.

Yeah, just kidding.

Commissioner Ferris, do you have any second question?

Second question was already answered.

So no, great.

And commission Kennedy.

Um, I had a second question.

Um I have a I have a different question to give from what was just presented.

So um I guess just following on uh Matt, what what you just presented around what are what are we considering with this threshold review around a significant change in circumstances?

Um I think Commissioner Goebel really summarized well in his lead up to that question, what what is uh still unclear to me in that determination, which is if we apply to that question a logic that says a significant change in circumstances, warranting uh rising to the level of the magnitude needed that the CPA can't work as in a graded whole can equal we haven't updated your your land use map since the 90s.

Um, and therefore there's a ch there's a change in condition, it does really open that up to uh a potentially a lot more than just this parcel.

If we're talking about a change in circumstances for this parcel, which seems to be the intent of the regulation, it would be helpful to have an understanding of the justification for the change in this this particular parcel that wouldn't apply to potentially not only all of the general commercial but all different types of uh designations under the future land use map.

Um, and and that seems like a question that's answerable, and we and we don't seem to have the answer tonight.

So, what I wanted to understand in sorry for the big lead up to my question is two things.

If we don't make this decision tonight, because we need clarity on that point, what happens to our schedule?

What happens to making the decision on this threshold question?

What's the process and timing of that?

Um, and two, there were several comments tonight about sufficient time to review for the community and not feeling like there has been sufficient time.

So when we think about it could had this been done during the CPA review, how many opportunities for public comment and listening sessions would we have had?

Is there a distinction to what we've accomplished before tonight?

Is there a possibility that with this additional time to make this decision, we could have those additional listening sessions to make sure it's comparable?

So process-wise, um could we pause on this, answer that question, provide an additional opportunity for review that would give some comparability to what would have been provided under the CPA amendment that just occurred?

Um well, we are on a timeline to take this forward to city council uh for inclusion in the 2026 work plan.

Okay.

Um I believe we're scheduled for some time in April, but given that you I think you canceled, we have the March 9th meeting canceled.

Um, so we'd have to do some I guess creative work with bringing this, bringing this back to you one additional time before before before we advance this to city council.

Um, we also are gonna have a city initiated comp plan amendment that we're taking that we're gonna ask for council direction to initiate in April.

So we want to make sure that we're meeting those timelines because as I said, we can are right at the outset, we can only amend the comprehensive plan once a year.

And so that work has to be completed before the end of the year.

And we need to hold a public hearing on both uh the threshold review, which you've done tonight, as well as make adequate time for evaluation and analysis for the final review process.

But Tara, I think Kate, maybe you said but the HOMA if the HOMA goes in two weeks, that might impact this one too, right?

When the HOMA goes to the council in two weeks.

Well, it's gonna go for study session in two weeks.

Council isn't gonna make a decision on that night.

And okay, they'll they may ask to come uh staff to come back for additional study session, or they may come back asked to come back under what would it be other ordinances and resolution.

Got it.

Yeah.

Yeah, the a couple of things.

Um Homo will not get adopted at the first study session.

Um this may be helpful to some.

I Torah can speak much better on the schedule, uh, the kind of the mechanics of the schedule.

But if it's helpful for the planning commission, this is kind of bad news and good news.

Significantly change conditions is also criteria in the final decision criteria, too.

So to the extent that that's an open question as we sit here tonight and and needs you know further discussion, it doesn't go away after threshold review.

It's also criteria that that the planning commission and council would consider with the final decision criteria on whether it's appropriate to adopt the comprehensive plan or not, too.

Um I think that probably uh you had one more question that I thought I had some guidance on, but it just I just point on it too.

Oh, that um it was it was something else that uh Commissioner Kennedy had raised, but if I think of it out, Kate, do you want to add something?

Yeah, I just wanted to speak to the planning commission schedule.

Um you could add another study session.

Um staff wouldn't come back with different information at that study session for threshold review.

We've done the analysis for threshold review.

Um, but it would delay the analysis for the final review if if you end up moving it forward, so there would be less time for the community to engage in the final review because all comprehensive plan amendments are time bound by the year.

So the more time we spend in threshold review, if it does then advance, the less time we have for the final review, you know, analysis of the merits.

So um, you know, just sort of thinking about this the schedule.

We whatever you decide to do, we can adjust the schedule, drop things that aren't essential.

Um, we can make it work.

Um, but just consider you know the the time that you have this year.

Are you we haven't finished the second round for everybody?

Just give are you doing good with your question?

Is that good?

Let me finish with two more people and then we can talk about the process again.

Uh Vice Chair.

Well, following the attorneys because it's always so comprehensive.

Uh I'm just gonna ask a basic question.

Uh when you guys go in if if say this passes threshold uh our threshold decision and it goes to staff to kind of analyze.

Could you give us a general outline or scaffolding of what exactly would go into staff's review of the different options?

Traffic was mentioned a lot.

I'm sure that's gonna be gonna be included as a part of the review, but just what exactly is staff's portion of this if we uh pass the threshold.

We'll have to do uh some pretty detailed environmental analysis, so assess what the environmental impacts are, including traffic, and then there'll be the final review decision criteria, so similar to the threshold review, one of which is a significantly change conditions, alignment with other comprehensive plan policies, the growth management act.

Um it also include kind of like the different options of uh Lady Sexions that could be used there rather than just a single one.

Yes, that could be an alternate recommendation on on the land you stuff.

That would be included as a part of the staff's overall analysis of the uh of the review.

Okay, thank you.

And then I tackle long with chair question, and if we don't pass what will happen, don't pass threshold review.

Um, then that recommendation will get forwarded on to city council, and then they'll take they'll take action and then um keep remind remind me if I'm wrong, but I believe there's a three-year time limit.

Um, and they're not gonna be able to resubmit for another complan amendment for a three-year time period.

Are we good with the process?

Commissioner Ferris.

Actually, that was what I was going to bring up.

Is if we do say no to this threshold review, that means that they cannot do anything for another three years after that.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um I need a break.

I don't know about you guys.

Um, would you one to make a decision now about if we are passing or not passing?

Anyone wants to take a motion?

It's open, or do you want to take a break for five minutes and come back?

Five minutes break.

Let's see.

Right.

8 15.

Five minutes break.

We come back again.

Is it it's not enough?

I don't know.

It's not enough.

Okay.

We will come back at 8.50.

Thank you, everybody.

Um I just want to get a nodding vote, how you guys feel about we can take a motion and sit on the ground, but I just want to feel you felt it's gonna go pass or not pass.

Commissioner Ferris, how do you feel?

I support the passing through the threat.

Okay, and Commissioner Ninja support.

This is not official.

Well, it's just nodding.

Sorry, I know Matthew don't like that.

Um I saw his face, like literally I saw why it's chair.

Okay, and then GIFA.

Passing, yeah, if passing or not passing.

Are you in the non-pass?

Okay, and Commission Kennedy.

I am I am feel like I need clarity on the how we're how we're passing significantly changed circumstances.

So okay.

Does that mean you need more questions, or you feel you are in the non-pass at this moment?

I feel like it's something that can be answered.

So I'm reluctant to say not pass when it has three-year consequences.

Do you want to bring up a question?

Do I want to we want to ask a question again?

Or I mean, I don't think we have the information.

I think we asked all the questions and that they're basing the current decision um a justification that I just unclear on.

So NA1A, one not pass, three paths.

I am none not decided either.

Sorry to make this, but Commissioner Ferris, do you want to say something?

Uh, but I can get pursued and change my mind.

Um Chair Conlu, could I could I ask an additional question just to see us to it?

Yeah.

Okay.

Um I know the applicant is submitted comments as have several residents.

Um could could you could you just run us through um or Tara or that all of you if you want to just run through uh the justifications around the significantly changed circumstances uh from the applicant's point of view as well as from the city's one more time.

Sure.

Um and I think that's a good um sort of distinction you make in your question.

Uh what does the applicant say in their application?

And what does the staff report say?

Um I think there it is important to note that there um is a different analysis or justification as to why the staff report concludes that um there, you know, there are significantly changed conditions compared to what the applicant put forward in their application.

I would say that the latter focuses a little bit more on like on-the-ground conditions that have changed.

I think it was mentioned too about um the changing retail uh environment, um, leases ending.

The staff report focuses on um sort of the overall growth strategy that is laid out in the comprehensive plan in the land use element as was adopted in 2024.

And I think there, um, sort of to go back to significantly changed conditions.

I think it's important to note there too.

And and I heard like concern about is this like an across the board um um sort of change condition that you might see.

I think it's important to note there that for the 10 plus neighborhood centers that are identified in um Bellevue, is that um they generally have land use designations in the future land use map that allow for mixed-use residential development?

That is something that you saw and reviewed as part of sort of the geographic scope of like the HOMA land use code amendment, uh that land use code amendment.

Um sort of encompasses land use districts that are mapped or could be mapped in what are now neighborhood centers identified in the Bellevue comprehensive plan.

So I think uh as as Tara um said in response to an earlier question, this is um sort of more like an exception where the future land use map designation um um did not change as part of the comprehensive plan update, while our land use strategy or growth strategy did change, uh like sort of in policy form in text form um in the comprehensive plan.

Um so that is sort of in in short, uh, what in the staff report is outlined as the um yeah, the analysis as to why this criterion that is spelled out in a land use code uh uh is not part of staff recommendation.

Thank you.

That's so helpful.

And could you explain to me just one more time?

I know this was also asked, but how with that justification for significant change, this would not apply to all of the all of the areas that are designated something other than residential mixed use in that uh zone.

No, so like this would just be limited to the geographic scope of the application and any additional separate future changes would have to go through their own uh comprehensive plan amendment process where they would have to meet the criteria spelled out in the land use code.

Same, we would have the same discussion as we would be having we are having here tonight.

It means if we have like 20 more parcels that they have general commercial, they need to go to the self same process, initiate the privately initiative, and then all of them probably will not apply at the same time.

Um does that make sense?

Yeah, plus like the addition that the land use policy question remains, which is the central question um and final review if it moves to that is like is what the applicant applied for here according to planning commission and city council the appropriate land use designation for this part of the city.

So that would still like remain.

Commissioner Kennedy, this this is what I meant.

I forgot that that I was going to respond to your question, but I think it's a valid question from a if we were having a broader policy discussion, like for example, the city initiated uh comp plan amendment that's going to cover a much bigger part of the city.

The question that you're asking about how how or why would that not apply to those other properties?

But it it's important to also remember that for for this type of privately initiated comp plan amendment, that's not really the issue that's before the planning commission, even though it may be a valid issue question in another context.

The question before the planning commission is just the geographic area that isn't is part of the application.

So I know that's kind of tricky because uh and also a lot of times the planning commission considers those broader comp plan amendments that cover a much bigger swath of land than just uh two parcels, but that that's the focus of a of a privately initiated comp plan amendment is to look at it for those parcels, kind of to tune to point, which I think you made very well.

We can't know through this application what the answer to that question would be because we haven't looked at it.

And another, you know, this came up with the geographic scope question too.

The the surrounding property owners, the neighbors, they haven't even been provided notice as would have been required if it were a bigger piece of land that was being um, you know, the public hearing notice, the code requirements for who gets notice.

There could be completely different public comment from other people if it were a larger geographic scope or a city initiated cop plan amendment too.

So it's it's hard to to answer that question when it's not what the actual application is asking for or what the planning commissioner should be looking at too.

Does anyone want to take a motion pass or not pass unless vote for it?

Chair, I would like to uh make a motion that we um recommend to the city council the proposed Evans Plaza Comprehensive Plan Amendment, pass threshold review because proposed comprehensive plan amendment is consistent with all the threshold review decision criteria in uh LUC 20.301.140.

I'd like to second that motion.

Um any discussion.

Can we vote one by one?

Commissioner Kennedy.

This is how it works.

Sorry.

Um yes or no?

Sorry.

Yes.

Okay.

Commissioner Gopel.

No.

Okay.

Vice Chair?

Yes.

Um, Commissioner Nietzsche?

Yes.

Um, and Commissioner Ferris?

Yes.

And I'm no.

And we have four yes and no two no's.

And it's gonna go um get passed.

Thank you so much.

Okay, preempt.

I wonder if we could motion make a motion to stand our meeting until 9:30.

Just so go for any discussion?

All in favor?

Tonight we have an informational study session item about the regional plan, vision 2050 and the regional center framework.

Puget Sound Regional Council is made up.

I'm just gonna go let people.

I'm just gonna let people um Puget Sound Regional Council is made up of the local cities, towns, ports, and tribal governments.

Would you please just if you're leaving, just thank you.

Um tribal governments in the four um county region of King Um Kit Sap Priers.

Sorry, I know I should know how to pronounce our counties, uh Pierce and the Snohomish counties.

Vision 2050 was adopted in 2020, creating the overall strategy of growth in our region and guiding our own City of Bellevue comprehensive plan.

Principal Plan and Puja Sound Regional Council, Liz Underwood, and would provide a presentation on the role of Vision 2025 and mixed use centers.

Sorry, thank you.

Great.

Um, thank you so much for having me.

So my name is Liz Underwood Boltman.

I'm a planner at the Puget Sound Regional Council.

So I think this is really just a briefing to kind of give uh the planning commission sort of some shared knowledge about uh the role of regional planning and the role of um our our regional plan vision 2050 in shaping some of the local planning work that uh the city's uh city does.

Um so I'm gonna talk a bit about um vision 2050 and our regional growth strategy um and uh also talk a little bit about our regional centers framework and how those uh those uh documents inform um local planning that's done at the at city level and also across the region.

Um so um as the intro uh indicated, uh, the Puget Sound Regional Council is the region's metropolitan planning organization.

Um so the region uh includes King, Kittsap, Pierce and St.

Homage County, uh 82 cities and towns, um, as well as transit agencies, uh ports, um, uh a whole variety of stakeholders.

Um, state the the state works with uh we work with the state as well, um, and a variety of urban and rural areas um across the region.

Uh so we have 4.5 million people and about 2.2 million jobs.

Um so it's a big interconnected region.

And so our role is really to work with all the cities and jurisdictions in the region to have uh cohesive coordinated planning across the region.

Um so I'm gonna just give a little overview of the planning framework just to kind of walk us through, make sure we um kind of uh have a shared understanding of um of the role of the regional council under the Growth Management Act.

Um so Puget Sound Regional Council is our regional planning organization.

Uh we adopt uh Vision 2050 and our multi-county planning policies.

Um and cities and counties then work together to set population and employment growth targets and also to adopt additional policies to guide growth.

Those are the countywide planning policies.

So local comprehensive plans like the city of Bellevue is adopted.

Um, need to prepare plans that are consistent with both um multi-county policies as well as those countywide policies.

So it's a kind of nested framework of kind of consistent policies.

Um and our role too is to certify uh those comprehensive plans as well as countywide policies for consistency with our regional plan.

So um certification of our local plan allows plans to be eligible or allow cities to be eligible for our regional transportation funds.

So there's a good incentive for uh consistent and coordinated planning across the entire region.

Um so some of the main themes from Vision 2050 are gonna probably look very familiar.

There are themes that are um that are woven into uh comprehensive plans throughout the region around um addressing our regional housing crisis and increasing housing choices and affordability across the region, um, providing opportunities for all in a strong economy, um, a really strong focus of Vision 2050 was addressing um emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, and climate change, um, while also keeping the region moving.

Um, and also this really strong focus on um our the environment of the region in terms of uh the health of Puget Sound and um our open space uh uh initiatives.

Um I'm gonna talk a bit more about growth in centers in near transit, but that's a really key part of how we think about growth uh planning across the region.

Um so the central uh goal of vision 2050 is really to plan around this forecasted growth.

Um so we're expecting another uh to reach 4.8 million people by 2050 and 3.4 million jobs.

So we start by looking at this overall regional forecast and working with um our member governments to uh uh understand what some of the priorities are and sort of divvying up this overall number to uh between the counties and between uh different groups of cities to understand kind of their role and who should be planning for more growth to help support our overall um objectives for um planning.

So once we take that overall growth number, we have a this regional growth strategy, which has different shares jurisdictions, but it's different characteristics.

So metropolitan cities, the kind of major cities in each of our counties.

So in King County, it's Bellevue and Seattle, and in Stomach County, it's Everett, Tacoma and in Pierce County.

So those major cities are really allocated a significant share of growth because we want to be encouraged with our places that are well positioned to plan for growth into the future.

We also look at major transit investments that are happening across the region.

A big emphasis when we updated Vision 2050 was looking at Sound Transit, the role of Sound Transit investments, and really wanting to leverage and maximize kind of growth near transit in those major big investments.

And so through the local planning process, the city's comprehensive plan includes growth targets that are consistent with this overall framework to really help support growth where we want it to happen and lower less growth in the rural areas, for example, and sort of more of our outlying cities.

So that's one of the really key cornerstones of Vision 2050.

So we have a couple other plans that help support the Vision 2050.

So we have our regional transportation plan, which we're actually updating right now.

And that includes kind of the major transportation investments that are expected through 2050, as well as the financial strategy to help pay for those investments.

And we also have an up a regional economic strategy, which we're also updating in 2026.

So a lot of work happening on our implementation plans.

So all of these, these particular plans, the regional transportation plan, the economic strategy are federal requirements as part of our metropolitan planning functions.

So I'm going to talk a little bit about our centers framework.

And so our centers framework really kind of underpins the overall plan for the region.

So this is really once we kind of designate centers that helps to identify kind of where we plan for growth into the future.

So we have 30 regional growth centers as well as 10 manufacturing industrial centers.

And manufacturing industrial centers really intended to preserve industrial land into the future.

It includes the ports, includes Paint Fields, includes a number of other industrial areas and regional growth centers, which are major downtowns and other mixed-use areas across the region.

So the intent of this strategy is really to help guide our regional growth allocations.

These are places that local governments are really planning for and wanting to support growth anyway.

So we're really trying to help support the planning that's already happening at the local level.

Sound transit and other transit agencies use this framework to identify kind of where transit investments happened.

And so Sound Transit has a statutory responsibility to look at our regional centers framework in terms of allocating transit investments.

And there are also priority areas for PSRC's federal transportation funds.

So we have funds from the federal government that we allocate to kind of regionally important projects.

And so our centers are really important places in terms of priority areas for those funds.

So a little bit of the backstory is that many of our regional centers were designated in the mid-90s before there was kind of an official process.

So we're going through a process right now to re-review all of our regional centers to make sure that they all meet kind of our adopted criteria.

But it's really important to it's an important framework to help encourage the local planning to for those places across the region.

The center's framework also establishes criteria for countywide centers, which is kind of the next level down of kind of centers across the region.

So I think Bellevue's Bellevue has a few countywide centers, including Factoria, Crossroads.

So those are some other examples beyond downtown Bellevue, which is a regional growth center.

So we periodically look at our centers to make sure that this is a system that's working well and that the places are kind of growing and planning for growth.

So while they're really small areas across the region representing about 8% of the region's urban area, our regional growth centers include about 30,000, 300,000 residents.

And since 2010, about 25% of the region's housing growth has happened in those centers.

So we're seeing a lot of development in terms of mixed use development in centers.

So that's really good to see as part of the kind of fruition of a lot of years of planning.

And especially because many of our centers are major employment centers.

They've really, for a long time, have been major centers for jobs.

And so we really want to make sure we're encouraging housing growth in those places as well.

And if you want to learn more, we have a whole whole series of reports and dashboards, all kinds of data about centers if you're gets really interested.

And so I mentioned we have different types of centers.

So we have two different types of regional centers.

So we have our metro centers, which are like downtown Bellevue is a good example, downtown Seattle, as well as another category of regional centers, our urban growth centers.

So Totem Lake, downtown, downtown Kirkland, downtown Redmond, a few other examples of some of the urban, the urban centers.

We have about a large number of countywide centers, but 79 centers across the region.

So it's in Pierce County, but downtown Sumner is a good example of a countywide center, as well as the centers that I mentioned in Bellevue.

There are also a lot of other neighborhood and local centers that are in local plans across the region are also really important places, but don't necessarily have an official status on the regional map, but are also really important places when we come to think about how we plan for growth and how we support growth across the region.

And I think we're we're almost there.

Okay, we've got a couple more slides.

So in terms of what we look at when it comes to designating regional centers, which I know there's been some discussion about the role of Bell Red and potentially another regional center coming through.

So we look for places that have existing jobs and housing so that there's an existing market to develop housing, but are also planning for significant growth into the future and our mixed-use areas.

We look for quality transit service.

So we uh we've got a number of centers that have um new light rail connections, which is really exciting, as well as other forms of high capacity transit, um, but are also walkable areas because those are really important uh to help sort of spur market demand and kind of nice walkable areas that people want to be in.

Uh we also look for um centers to do local planning to for jurisdictions to be doing local planning around their centers.

So that's really important to kind of engage the local community and understand um what some of the opportunities are and where they're how to make uh livable places for that people want to want to be in.

So that's why we really focus and require local planning to help support those areas overall.

And that's really what I came to talk about today.

Just wanted to give you kind of an overview of our regional plan, uh, the way we think about centers, um, and uh would be happy to take any questions you might have.

How much Lisa?

We always talk about the regional centers and regional growth centers, and we always ask questions.

This is really helpful.

I think I can go for a round if anyone has a question.

Uh Commissioner Nilchian.

Yeah, and sorry, I think you did address this, but can you just give me a general overview of the timeline?

Yes, the timeline for for vision or for vision.

Okay.

Yes.

So we um we adopted vision in 2020.

Um, we anticipate uh adopting a new vision in about 2030.

So we will start um kind of launching the update probably next year.

Um it's really in the planning cycle is really built around the local comprehensive planning cycle.

So we kind of need to adopt it by a certain date in order to get everything into place for to help inform your 2034 um comprehensive plan update, in case anyone's getting really excited about the 2034 updates.

I'm not here.

I think my round is over time.

Can we say get though?

Yeah, thank you for um thank you for this.

I was gonna ask, I mean, both at the Puget Sound Regional Council level and at the City of Bellevue.

Um, what efforts are we making to leverage, you know, um potential federal programs in order to help um with housing development.

I know I know right now there's a there's a pending piece of a bipartisan uh piece of you know federal legislation that's called the Road to Housing Act that's betting in the Senate.

There's also some companion bills in the House.

And I'm just wondering, you know, this is beyond just a regional issue, it's really a national issue.

What are we doing to make sure that we're leveraging sort of all levels of government in order to help our region with more housing and housing production?

That's a great question.

I will attempt to answer it.

Um, so we have uh so we have government relations staff, and so we're definitely tracking federal and state legislation around housing as well as around transportation.

And so that was an effort after vision was adopted to um take a look at all of the opportunities around um, you know, what are the opportunities at this at the state, at the federal, at the local level to help support and advance housing.

So I mean, we have a fairly specific role in terms of you know, kind of bringing people together.

There's a lot of other kind of opportunities at the local level or through the house through housing authorities or through other groups like art, like a regional coalition for housing.

So I think it's about kind of trying to find like the right role for the regional council.

But I see Tara is here.

Maybe Tara's gonna uh some more I'm just gonna talk about city of uh what what we're doing from um from the city's perspective.

Um so of course we have a state lobbyist.

We also have a federal lobbyist, and uh council plays a very big role with that process.

So council establishes our state legislative priorities, which I believe have already happened, they usually occur in October uh in advance of the state legislative session.

And then we have uh intergovernmental team and several staff, including myself that uh are monitoring all the legislation that's moving forward, primarily on a state level, but um we also have staff that are uh monitoring things uh on a federal level.

Great.

So we're all hoping that we'll we'll be successful in getting some funding, but we know um we know that's complex now.

Great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Ferris.

Uh two relatively quick questions.

Um great question, because that was one of mine.

So check that one off.

Um so you talked about funding and from different sources.

And does the PSI Regional Council have um responsibility to allocate funds, or are you just providing plans and the state and the counties, cities essentially adopt, you know, where they send their money?

That's a great question.

So we are a metropolitan planning organization uh designated under the under federal law, which is really focused on transportation investments.

So uh we uh that that is really the the source of funding that we have to allocate is federal transportation funds.

So we have funding through the federal highway administration, a federal transit administration, and we every uh we have different funding cycles for different types of projects.

And so um uh right now we have uh we have a rural town centers and corridors funding process going of kind of trying to support uh some of our smaller jurisdictions um that uh have other types of projects.

Um, there are a couple other types of of grant funds that we look at, but it's really around transportation funding for our particular uh lane of work.

Great, that's helpful.

Um, okay, quick and easy question.

Um, we've got the metro centers and then the urban growth centers.

What's the difference?

Yeah, this is a great question.

So when we adopted the center's framework a few years ago, uh I think one of the questions people were asking is like, wow, downtown Seattle seems really different than downtown Pewallop.

So, like really different in scale for the types of places that we had.

So it was really an effort to kind of differentiate and have slightly have different planning goals for bigger places that already have significant density uh compared to some of our smaller downtowns or smaller regional centers.

So it's really kind of a size and scale difference.

Um there are a few sort of nuances in terms of some of the criteria, but um, I mean, they're fun, they functionally sort of have the same purpose when it comes to our allocation of transportation funds, but um have slightly different planning goals to based on scale.

Okay, and there are criteria for how they're right now just um Seattle and Bail U that are the Metro centers.

We have there are more.

Those those are more exam, those are examples of we have, I think we have nine in total.

Um so uh the the major cities in each of the counties, so downtown Bremerton, downtown Everett, downtown Tacoma, um, I think, and a few others that um great.

Yeah, thank you very much.

Yeah.

Commissioner Kennedy.

My questions have been asked.

Thanks.

Well I'm presentation.

Thank you.

Super cool presentation.

Thank you.

Uh I just had one question on the uh the you you show the numbers of uh, I think it was 4.4 million to 5.8 on uh uh what was it, people growth and then 2.3 to 3.4.

Could you just take me through kind of the framework of how you determine those uh kind of assumptions of growth?

And yeah.

Yeah, yeah, that's a great question.

So um every few, so before we will, before we launch the update to the plan, we do an a regional macroeconomic forecast.

So it's looking region wide at the amount of growth that we would expect based on um things like the attractiveness of the region compared to the national economy, um, a whole bunch of other factors that in our that's sort of built into a model.

So we have uh it's basically a model that produces a kind of an overall forecast.

Um we do also do kind of a cross-check with the state office of financial management.

They also do population projections that are used for um in growth management planning.

So um that's another way to kind of cross check on the pop our population projections to make sure that we're not producing something that's really significantly different um for the region.

Does that get updated like annually in terms of uh like the assumptions that are in there, or is that a kind of set and then we move on with the strategy?

And then we kind of revisited every it's it's about usually about every five years to kind of revisit our um overall forecast.

Thank you.

Yeah.

And I don't have any question.

Thank you so much.

This was perfect, and I'm I really enjoy it.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

And sorry to keep you until this time here.

No problem.

And if anyone has any more questions, always feel free to send me an email.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Um is there any motion to approve the minutes um from January 14th?

I would like to make the motion that we approve January 14th meeting minutes.

Uh any discussion?

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Oh, I would like to make a motion that we adjourn.

Second.

Any discussion?

All in favor.

Aye.

Wait a minute.