All right, I think let's get started.

Good evening and welcome to the June 24th meeting of the City of Bellevue Planning Commission.

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

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

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

today, Wednesday, June 24th, will be summarized into the record.

We have two study sessions on the agenda tonight, both of which are seeking approval to set a public hearing.

First one is the parking reform Luca, and uh the second one is the Great Neighborhoods program.

Uh review of the full draft of Factoria Neighborhood Area Plan, comprehensive plan amendment.

Now let's move forward with the roll call.

I'd like to note that Commissioner Ferris is attending remotely.

Vice Chair via Basis.

President Commissioner Kanlu.

Here.

Commissioner Geppel?

Here.

Commissioner Kennedy.

Here.

And Commissioner Neil Chian?

Here.

And uh Councilmember Bardova.

Also here.

And I am Chair Liu and uh I am here.

All right.

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

So moved.

Is there a second?

Second.

All right.

All approved, say aye.

Great.

Thank you.

Uh Councilmember Bardova.

Do you have any updates from the council?

I can provide a quick update.

First of all, congratulations on being appointed chair and vice chair.

And thank you to the outgoing chair and vice chair for an incredible job last year.

Wish you the best for this year.

So we've got a lot to do.

And uh quick updates.

Uh from yesterday.

We had a um pretty extensive public hearing on the budget.

So the council is right now wrapped up in uh putting together um working with staff uh on putting together the budget for the next biennium, and the public hearing yesterday was sort of an early view of what folks have provided as input within the community of what they'd like to see uh as part of the budget.

Uh so that was uh I think it must have been 30 plus people who were testified on the budget, so it was really good input across a very broad spectrum of things.

Uh following which uh we got a really good update on where uh staff is on things like rates and forecasts.

Uh it was just an information session to get early input on what the council would like to see.

So that was a session.

And the second one was uh uh a study that was initiated out of council contingency funds uh on the request from uh council member Newenhouse uh and this was an assessment following the comprehensive plan update in 24 to see if our electrical grid is going to have enough capacity to support the growth.

Um and this was a regional study.

So uh the City of Bellevue conducted this in partnership with PSE as well as with the city of Redmond to look at substation capacity, feeder capacity, and all of those things outside of special uses like uh what could be uh data centers or very large energy uh consumption elements that are not part of the typical growth profile for the city.

And there's some good findings in there.

We got our AECOM as a consultant to come on, and they did uh extensive study in partnership with PSC in the cities, and they found then places where juristic uh specific substations that require upgrades in the next in the near term that are also uh probably a good uh reason for us to do a more comprehensive evaluation.

So they had some next steps prescribed.

And so this is the general support from the council on that, and then there will possibly be uh there is a request for uh additional budget allocations that they can be accommodated in the general fund uh for the next steps in the study to come back as we evaluate the budget.

So those were sort of a quick summary of what happened in the last week or so.

Great.

Thank you.

Uh any questions for councilmember Barduba?

All right.

If not, uh Kate, are there any reports from boards and commissions?

Nope.

Great.

All right, let's move on to oral and written communications.

Kate, could you provide a summary of the written communications we've received?

It has been a very quiet week, so I have no written communications to share.

Sounds good.

All right, for oral communications, we will have a total of 30 minutes for oral communications.

Each speaker will have up to three minutes to speak.

Steph Lee is on Kate and Essey will call on speakers in the order in which they have registered either in person or online.

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

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

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

Now there are rules adopted by the city council limiting the topics about which the public may speak during our meetings.

Under ordinance 6752, the public may only speak during public comment about subject matters that are related to the City of Bellevue government and are within the power and duties of the planning commission.

Additional information about the rules of decorum governing conduct of the public of the public during our meetings can be found at ordinance 6752.

Kate, can you call our first speaker?

Yes, we have two pre-registered speakers.

They both said that they're in person, but I see one online.

So I will start with Heidi Dean.

I see you online.

Followed by Pam Johnson.

Pam, if you're online, could you raise your hand?

Heidi, can you hear me?

I sure can.

Okay.

Let's just let me know when you're ready.

Just a moment.

Let me see.

I can't hear you, so let me see if I can change.

All right, can you hear me?

I can.

Can you hear me?

I cannot hear you.

Can you hear me now?

Yes, can you hear me?

Yes, I can hear you.

Go ahead.

Okay, thank you.

Alright.

Um, thank you.

Uh, transportation commission did its job of pointing out the issues with the mobility and access element of the factoria draft NAP.

And what's being presented to you tonight does not reflect what the TC told staff.

It actually actively ignores and dismisses it, which I will be relaying to the TC members as well as to the city council.

TCers pointed out that the mobility survey did not include an option for the number one mobility mode in and around the factoria neighborhood, which is the automobile.

Respondents were asked about bike ped transit, but not about automobiles and traffic congestion.

Respondents had to be savvy enough to check the other box and type their own response.

TCers then pointed out that this was actually not a multimodal survey when automobiles and traffic congestion were completely left off of it.

Why is this important?

It's because the staff are using this survey to boost their argument that the policies reflect the priorities of Factoria residents.

And in the memo that you're provided today, they say the reason you're not seeing congestion relief policies for factoria is because those policies are already covered in the comp plan and in the MIP.

That excuse does not make any sense given that the comp plan and MIP account for transit, bike, and ped as well.

And yet we see transit, bike, and ped policies in the factoria NAP.

So the staff are choosing to omit congestion relief policies and submit manipulated surveys that downplay how important congestion and vehicular mobility are to factoria.

This is an appropriate or honest community engagement.

And that's why the Transportation Commission called staff out on this misrepresentation of data.

The TCRs also pointed out that changing how volume over capacity for intersections and arterials are measured as proposed by the transportation staff is disingenuous.

That was the actual word used.

So changing the method of measuring level of service for intersections and arterials does not improve the level of service.

It simply masks the failure of the intersection and how bad congestion is.

So here is my request.

Please ask staff to add meaningful congestion relief policies to the plan.

Because clearly, that's not what staff wants, but it's what the Transportation Commission and Factoria residents have asked for.

Residents, not people, the activist groups that come in and take these surveys, not people living outside a factoria, the people that actually live there and come and do business there all the time.

I'm one of them.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next we have Pam Johnston that will be followed by Alex Zimmerman you're good thank you so I can talk to you guys more about Evans Plaza some people weren't here before so this will be good um one of the things that was mentioned was that there was a blanks um I think you mentioned it Andrews um that there was a blank um lot next door that's a PSE lot it's full of trees but it's basically there for when we need to have more PSE um hubs in the neighborhood um one of the things I want to make sure that everyone understands is how the comp plan works and some of that is happens in the alternatives that there are so the choices actually are alternative zero do nothing and then what will happen is the s state bills twin twenty six twenty twenty six I mean 6026 will come and it will allow housing in those areas because it will do that for the entire city because that's a state bill so we didn't get to choose whether we want housing there or not that's not a choice now it's it has housing it's just what kind of housing and what kind of housing for the whole city will be determined by when the city takes on that work.

So why would we jump ahead now?

Um another alternative is they can do housing on some parcels and not housing on other because they can be even um can't think the word but ill matched to their zone.

Their zone can be different but they can have the old stuff still there um then another alternative is to change the comp plan for all parcels and then you can change from different versions of that right on different levels.

But then the other thing is what will the owner have to be able to do well they can do nothing they can take this comp plan amendment and then do nothing they can't build all the housing they could build some of the housing they could sell it.

So you can't count on the owner when you're looking at this as like they're the ones do it forever you have to look at what's good for the city.

Was the third highest number of retail visits in all neighborhood centers in our last retail um thing so it's highly active there um I mean Harley Davidson is their their community place they have Santa Claus things like that so it's it's a highly active place it's just that some parts of it are more active than others and is it the bridal trails feel when we change it we don't know.

Thank you for your comments.

Next we have Alex Zimmerman and I want to speak today about your duty only about commission your commission how you operate and what is you doing and my expertise for many years.

Yeah.

You're only one who give me trespass for two months.

Only one.

You always interrupt me in every year meeting.

Is this don't look to me very good.

Is this absolutely absurd?

For example, you don't show people's faces.

And I talking about this for dozen years.

Why in this room you don't show people's faces?

Another commission show faces.

Only room one territory does this.

You say a criminal because he knows what is, you know, show faces crime.

Yeah.

And I'm talking about 5,000 times.

So I know what is I'm talking about.

Right now I want to explain to you something.

What is you probably don't know?

In detail.

So listen right now, me very careful.

When you give me another trespass, like you did before, you know what is I will do.

I will go in broke trespass.

Policemen will be arrest me.

It's happened times, Bell in Bellevue's happened before seven times.

I'm in jail.

Court go caring go to court.

All seven dismiss.

So I want only explain to you what this happened because you don't have experience with this.

Yeah.

And I explained to you why.

You all will be present like a witnesses in jury trial.

But before jury trial, this will be interview with all witnesses.

So I will bring you all of it.

When you don't come, policemen will be coming pick up you.

It's court order.

Judge supposed to be doing this, not me.

So I want Patres only explains this to you because situation very simple.

Why I explained to you this, because for many, you look to me like a pure debil.

You understand?

You intellectual level close to Tory.

You are real debilitated.

Don't change nothing.

You always interrupt me, and I don't understand why.

Only one man in Bellevue, who you interrupt.

One.

I never seen before.

And I go to all commission commission here.

In council too.

Council is different story.

Speak about this yesterday twice.

Guys, so I won't deliver this to you because most of you educate people.

So when educate people with college or maybe more, you know what is mean, acting like a debil is making me sick totally.

This means you are criminal.

You understand you're doing this for special reason.

What is your reason?

Personal reason.

That's not about system, what is we have?

You not represent system.

You care only for your personal us and for your career.

This it viva Trump, we have a new American revolution, stand up, slave and happy cow.

You need to understand, guys.

I bring you all in court.

Thank you.

Like jury.

Chair, we still have um that's the end of our pre-registered speakers, but we still have about 20 minutes left.

Uh I can turn to the room and uh online.

Let's do that.

Thank you.

If there's anybody in the room that would like to speak, could you raise your hand?

If there is anybody online that would like to speak, could you raise your virtual hand?

I'm not seeing any hands.

Great.

Let's move on.

All right.

Let's go to our study sessions here.

Um the first study session will be the Factoria Great Neighborhoods uh study session.

The uh the Great Neighborhoods project was designed to develop local policies to address issues and opportunities to help Factoria grow in a unique way.

Neighborhood priorities were identified through extensive community engagement.

Planning director Tara Johnson, senior planner Zachary Muckman.

Locking luck in.

We'll provide the presentation.

Good evening, Chair Lou, Vice Chair, PFSS, Commissioners.

Um staff are very happy to be here this evening.

We're advancing the factoria neighborhood area plan for more discussion with you.

Believe we were last here a few months ago.

Um, and a lot of work has been ongoing, and so of course, Factoria and um at your next meeting will be also talking about Eastgate, are both part of the 2026 comprehensive plan amendment cycle.

Um, so tonight uh we have a lot of information for you about uh progress we've made on community engagement, um, as well as our draft uh neighborhood area plan policies that are for you this evening.

So tonight we were um requesting of the commission um that you review the policies, uh, provide any feedback on on the policy language, and then we're also requesting if you're ready to do so to set provide direction to set a public hearing.

So we'll start off, provide you with some background on the Great Neighborhoods program.

We'll also um briefly outline the process.

You're probably very familiar with that at this point.

We've been talking, I feel like about it at almost every meeting.

We're also going to be talking about some of the modifications with the sub-area plan boundaries.

We'll talk about our approach with community engagement and what we've heard from the community to date, as well as how they've informed our policies.

We'll touch on the way our neighborhood area plans have been organized, and then the important stuff, which is the actual policy language.

And then we'll also walk through our urban design framework, which is a very important component of the plans.

So with that, I'm going to turn things over to Zach Luckin, who's the project manager for the Factoria Neighborhood Area Plan.

Thank you.

Good evening.

It's good to see everyone this evening.

So I'm going to start by walking through again the Great Neighborhoods program, probably somewhat familiar to you all, but a quick refresher.

So the primary objective of the Great Neighborhoods program is to develop neighborhood plans that are part of the comprehensive plan that are relevant, community-driven, and reflective of citywide and local priorities.

The planning process is informed by engagement with the community members who live, work, play, and learn in these neighborhoods, and their input directly shapes the outcomes of the plan.

These plans contains goals and policies consistent with both the city's vision and values, but also reflect this more unique localized community vision for what they'd like to achieve there.

And this serves as guides for decision making and it informs how the city partners with others to realize this vision.

So in addition to the community feedback that we'll discuss in a little bit, other key inputs throughout the plan have been Bellviews Boards and Commissions, which we'll talk about, state and regional requirements such as those around countywide growth centers, which require the city to plan for affordable housing, active transportation, and transit access, and then the city's functional plans, such as the mobility implementation plan and the parks and open space plan.

And we're now here again to present the draft plan for planning commission review and feedback.

And then the adoption of the neighborhood area plan follows the annual CPA process, and these are process for actions, and accordingly, planning commission will review the updates against the land use code's final review criteria, and then make a recommendation to City Council.

So also part of the CPA, we have an amendment to the glossary volume one of the complan, where we define terms that we use frequently within the scope of neighborhood area planning.

This is in your attachment G in your materials.

While these terms are used in the comprehensive plan or other functional plans already, the proposed conformance updates define the terms in the glossary to ensure consistent definition when they're used and referenced within the neighborhood area plan policies.

The glossary amendments covered under the factoria neighborhood area plan CPA are also going to be the same and relevant for the Eastgate area CPA, which you'll hear about in a future meeting.

Our access, business district, placemaking, public space, threshold, and traffic calming.

Also, for information purposes, part of the CPA will be amending the previous factoria sub-area plan in volume two of the comp plan and the relevant policies that remain to ensure that the relevant policies remain in effect where they aren't superseded by either the new Eastgate or Factoria plan through some overlap of the boundaries, and amending these policies and figures are outlined in your attachment F in the materials.

Again, this will repeal policies in the factory sub-area plan that are specific to the portions of the sub-area that are not covered by the factory and Eastgate neighborhood area plans.

And then also we're updating the maps to show how those boundaries have been revised in the areas superseded by the new plans.

There is some remaining area and policies that won't be covered by these, and that'll be addressed in the future update to the Somerset plan whenever that occurs.

And as background, the neighborhood area plan boundaries were adopted in 2015 to better align with physical boundaries such as arterials, as well as neighborhood characteristics and school catchment areas.

Now here's a look at the current factory neighborhood area boundary.

It's bound by 405 as well as I-90.

It's predominantly commercial employment center, known for Factoria Mall and the T-Mobile headquarters, as well as the density of professional retail and restaurants, many of which are international.

The area also includes Factoria Mixed Use Center, which along with the city's other mixed-use centers are where we expect to see the largest share of housing and job growth and support transit-oriented development.

Beyond the commercial areas, there are pockets of residential neighborhoods, both to the southwest and then up the hill to the east.

Now we'll look at our engagement throughout this process.

This slide shows an overview of what we've done through each phase of the project, and it really emphasizes that we've had a variety of outreach tools at different phases of the planning process to gather input to meaningfully inform the neighborhood area plan.

Across both Eastgate and Factoria, we've reached over 1,200 people in the last 10 months, and that's included residents, businesses, students, and really anyone else who's interested in the future of these neighborhoods.

So during the discovery phase, which is our first phase, our outreach activities were focused on better understanding the values, opportunities, and challenges that shape the neighborhood identity and present-day conditions.

Then during the define phase, our outreach activities translated these findings into future thinking vision elements and policy priorities, which you may remember.

And these are the building blocks of the draft plan.

And now in the refined phase, we have shared the draft plan with community.

And since early May, we've welcomed input to refine these policies to address any gaps and achieve the desired outcomes.

And I just like to use this photo to really emphasize that the plan is shaped by community, and that we've heard from many diverse voices and perspectives at every phase of this project, from classrooms to apartment common spaces, even some busy arterial intersections.

And a note that some of the successes that we've had resulted from adapting our outreach materials so that they could better reach communities that have historically been less likely to participate, such as our affordable housing service providers and residents, students, and businesses.

So during the refine phase, the engagement team held a policy open house and had an online survey.

We had 22 attendees at the combined open house, and participants were asked to use dot stickers and sticky notes to indicate how well the policies supported community informed vision and goals, as well as identify what was missing or if anything could be improved.

We also had an online survey which very much mirrored what we had in the workshop, and we had 82 responses to that.

Again, asking people to provide feedback on the policies and how well they achieved the goals and vision.

Overall, we learned that community is largely supportive of the draft policies.

There was specifically especially strong support for policies around neighborhood beautification, providing lighting and pedestrian amenities and high capacity transit coordination.

But there was some mixed level of support from communities around policies on affordable housing, multilingual wayfinding, and expansion of EV charging infrastructure.

However, from the feedback we got, there wasn't really any clear indication of why these areas ran contrary to the vision and goals that were established and informed by community or how we could work to improve them.

And then most recently during the DeFi and phase, as mentioned, staff have coordinated and consulted with the city's boards and commissions.

A formal recommendation was neither required nor requested from these bodies, but their input was certainly incorporated.

The first was the parks and community services board.

They really appreciated the focus on walkability between parks and open spaces and encouraged stronger references to neighborhood history and public safety.

Then we spoke with Arts Commission.

They really appreciated our concept maps and how we provided clear guidance on arts opportunities, and they encouraged better articulation of space and programming priorities to support community partnerships.

And then most recently, we talked to Transportation Commission.

They wanted a better understanding of how we engage the communities throughout the process on transportation issues and encourage prioritizing congestion reduction in our draft policies.

So before we get into the contents of the plan, I'll brief go briefly go over the component and the structure.

To start off, we have our guiding light, which is the vision statement for the neighborhood, and this articulates the desired future state of the neighborhood in the next 10 to 20 years.

Then we have background narrative and imagery that describes the community context for the neighborhood area plan, including its history, demographics, existing conditions, challenges, and opportunities.

Then there's our urban design framework, and this describes the opportunities and supports policies for improving public space and is illustrated through our concept maps.

Then we have our neighborhood policy summary for each of our five planned sections, which are neighborhood identity, mixed-use centers, community gathering spaces, mobility and access and environment.

And then lastly, we have our goals and policies for each section that, when implemented, will help achieve the neighborhood area vision.

So here's a look at Factoria's vision statement.

The vision focuses on fostering a global, vibrant and walkable residential and commercial community that brings together a mix of new mix of housing, people, and retail opportunities.

And it reads as such.

Factoria is a locally rooted, globally connected neighborhood and major employment center that welcomes people from around the world to live, work, shop, and learn.

Centered around its vibrant community commercial core, Factory is anchored by a strong network of local businesses and diverse retail offerings with affordable housing and nature-oriented gathering spaces that bring people together of all backgrounds.

A walkable, pedestrian-oriented design, complemented by strong access to transit and regional transportation networks supports Factoria as a connected and thriving community.

And this vision statement is elaborated on in the narrative sections of the plan.

So now I'll look at policy.

And for this study session, we're not going to do a walkthrough of each individual policy, but I'm going to summarize them by plan section.

And again, we do want to call attention to some of the policies that community felt needed more clarification and/or did not support the goals and visions for the neighborhood area, and then we'll walk through how staff responded to those comments.

So in Factoria for Neighborhood Identity, policies seek to reinforce Factoria's identity as an accessible, convenient, and inclusive location, reflect its diverse community, strong small businesses and walkability, and support beautification and affordable housing.

So, as an example of this in practice, policy around neighborhood beautification was developed in response to community feedback on the ongoing need for participation in city programs that keep LV beautiful.

And per community feedback, we did hear some concerns around policies that related to affordable housing and public safety that warranted some further consideration.

So, to look at the feedback we received and how we addressed it, the first was the feedback we got on affordable housing.

And the comments that we got was really questioning if there is a need for more affordable housing, considering that some already exist in nearby Eastgate.

However, in relation to policy N3 on affordable housing, we did not make a change as this both affirms the direction of the King County countywide planning policies as well as citywide direction in the comp plan and the affordable housing strategy on addressing an entire spectrum of the city's housing needs.

The other comment received was on public safety and the need to more explicitly call it out in policy.

This was in relation to policy N5, which we then revised accordingly to emphasize public safety and public space design.

To Factoria's mixed-use center policies, and these seek to support the growth of Factoria's mixed use center as a vibrant, connected and walkable district, provide accessible public spaces, job opportunities, services, and affordable housing, meet countywide center designation requirements, which can provide future funding, and then support the center's integration into the community as a city plans for growth and high-capacity transit.

So in response to community business owner and subject matter expert feedback, we have policies highlighting the need to coordinate with transit providers to bring on station sighting and access to meet the needs of the growing community there.

And we didn't receive any specific feedback on these policies that warranted further refinement.

So for our community gathering space policies, these seek to support the development of Factoria and its accessible indoor and outdoor community gathering spaces and explore community partnerships and strategic property acquisition.

An example here is our policy around strategic property acquisition for parks development, as the lack of access to national areas was a particularly particular issue for community members.

And feedback received on these policies focused on the desire to re-explore the opportunity to use schools as gathering spaces.

And so here both community and the arts commission noted that the opportunity that there's an opportunity to once again use schools as gathering spaces as they had pre-COVID.

So based on this feedback and some consultations with our subject matter experts, we've revised policy N17 to add in schools as partners for providing for these community spaces.

And for Factoria's mobility and access policies, these seek to support a safe, connected and multimodal transportation network, making walking, biking, and transit access more convenient within and beyond the neighborhood, and then improve pedestrian infrastructure, wayfinding, and transit connections.

An example here is our policy calling for improved access to transportation connections through a high-capacity transit, specifically South Bellevue Station, which was developed in direct response to both community feedback and our engagement with local businesses.

As a note earlier, we did receive feedback on congestion relief, but no policy changes were made as this feed from because this feedback as the guidance on congestion is covered both in volume one of the comprehensive plan.

There are citywide policies on how to manage congestion, and then there are specific strategies and performance measures in the mobility implementation plan that already covers this area.

However, policies that we do have around improving transit access and active transportation also work to mitigate congestion issues.

Finally, factorious environmental policies seek to support a resilient and healthy neighborhood by enhancing natural systems, support expanding tree canopy and improving access to parks and trails, and promoting sustainable design and infrastructure.

An example here is our policy supporting new connections to nearby parks and trails.

As many community members highlighted the lack of access to both Coal Creek Park as well as the Sunset Ravine open space, which are currently the only natural areas in close proximity to the neighborhood.

And no additional analysis or changes were made based on the feedback we received.

So the draft plan also includes our urban design framework.

And these are maps and narrative that helps localize these policies and visualize the types and locations of improvements to factories public spaces.

The framework was informed by existing conditions, community feedback, functional plans, and technical analysis.

And rather than detail a set of actions or projects, the framework guides project identification and development opportunities when implementing plan policies.

This is also a tool to support collaboration amongst city departments and other community partners.

And these maps are intentionally broad, illustrating one potential way of achieving policy intent and distill specific improvements identified by the community during our workshops.

And the plan includes two types of concept maps.

One is neighborhood connectivity, and the other is on neighborhood gathering spaces.

And again, the first of these that we'll take a look at is enhancing neighborhood connectivity.

The concept provides guidance on opportunities to enhance walking and biking connections to neighborhood destinations, providing connections within larger blocks and development sites, improving pedestrian safety at intersections and mid-block crossings, and then arterial streetscape enhancements to make them more attractive, safe, and comfortable corridors for all modes of travel.

These improvements are referenced in a number of our neighborhood plan policies, such as N5 on enhancing factorious streetscapes to create a safer and more inviting pedestrian realm.

And then here is a look at the neighborhood connectivity concept map.

So you can see how some of these things could potentially be implemented.

The pink lines indicate our materials to prioritize for streetscape enhancements, such as landscaping, lighting, furnishings, or other pedestrian-oriented features.

Then we have the orange target symbols throughout the map, and these represent uh intersection crosswalks and mid-block crossings for pedestrians on high volume arterials and how they get to their destinations.

Then we have the light blue dashed lines, and this represents through block connections to improve pedestrian circulation by breaking down larger blocks and development sites and tying these elements together.

We have the dark blue dashed lines um throughout the neighborhood, highlighting opportunities for improved walking and biking connections.

Then our second area for urban design is the neighborhood gathering space improvements and the concepts within.

So here these seek to uh provide guidance on programming and activation of third spaces or those community spaces with community partners, potential new neighborhood parks in areas that are not well served by parks and open space today, enhancements to natural areas such as streams and wetlands, and then visual markers reflecting the unique identity of the neighborhood.

As an example here of tying policy to urban design concepts is in policy N2, where uh we call out the need for threshold enhancements at key locations to better define and strengthen the identity of Factoria.

And then here is a concept map itself for neighborhood gathering space.

So we see these green bubbles which indicate new potential park space, specifically in areas that lack walkable access to such natural areas today.

And we have the pink cogs dotted throughout the map, and these represent destinations within the community where people would like to see opportunities for both indoor and outdoor gathering spaces, such as shopping areas, community facilities, schools, and campuses.

Uh and then we have the magenta circles, which are we call those thresholds that I mentioned, and these mark entrances into the neighborhood for freeways and adjacent neighborhoods as key opportunities to highlight the neighborhood identity, whether it's through art, signage, or some other visual element.

And then we'll now open it up for discussion and review of the draft policies.

Great.

Thank you for the presentation.

I am now going to call on each commissioner sequentially and just keep in mind that we are here to provide direction.

So any comments that you give, please kind of work towards that eventual direction that we'd like to provide staff and keep in mind that we're also uh you know ideally setting up public hearing, but we can go through that discussion first.

So with that, I'll start with uh Vice Chair of Aces.

Thank you, Doug.

Uh you should turn on your mic.

Thank you.

I I don't have many comments on the policies, I just wanted to ask a couple questions.

Um I think it's uh slide 14.

Can you go to slide 14, please?

So we're talking about globally connected, and uh there's a lot of mention of connecting with high transit or creating good connections to transit.

I just want to highlight that this connection right now is not existing.

Like everything south of I-90 in Bellevue is very hard to get to South Bellevue Station.

A buzz ride, I got visitors on my house right now, and they take the bus to the station when we cannot drive them, and it takes 40 minutes, and a car drive is nine minutes, and that's just really discouraging to take public transit.

So that's just something to consider.

Uh another point here is I would like you to picture for a second uh the AV in the university district.

I don't know if you've been there, but it's this really good commercial pedestrian street that is populated mostly by University of Washington.

And this is not very different from that.

You have well, you have, of course, you have T-Mobile, you have a lot of businesses, and you have you have Newport Newport Heights, uh, Newport High School.

And uh it's not pressing, like there's no discussion of the presence of the school uh almost anywhere.

And I think there should be something really uh there should be something specific about activating this corridor with the fact that we have all this business and a huge high school uh right in the neighborhood.

And on that sense, too, if you go to your uh concept plan of uh nodes, you have to either of those.

Maybe that one, like you have that circle next to T-Boba headquarters.

Uh that I mean that location is a little bit difficult because you're right by the highway, but if you push that down to like the bottom of the T-mobile headquarters, and you create something that's important there, you start to create that tension between the high school and that.

It could be a park, it could be a space for events, uh, or something important that creates that flow between the high school and and that how are you calling this that threshold or that uh space gathering area.

Uh, it could be really helpful to activate this space.

And uh finally, there is uh no mention between the changes uh in topography.

I really appreciate the sketch of the pedestrian bridge on the on the packet.

Uh, but there's no really a mention of the changes in topography between the east and west side of Factoria Boulevard, and I think that's something that we should like acknowledge head on because it's it's gonna inform how this space gets developed.

Um I think those are my those are my comments on this so far.

Thank you, appreciate it.

Uh, just like to respond, are you good?

Um you don't have to.

Yeah, I mean I would just say that our existing conditions report does talk a lot about specifically the topography and some of those challenges in terms of but especially mobility for people with mobility challenges getting up and down the hill.

Um, you know, our options are a little limited, but it's certainly something, you know, we we walk the neighborhood and we heard from folks that you know it it's tough to get around sometimes, and so um I think one of the things that we would like to do is some of those like through block connections is creating those pathways so even if it's up and down the hill, making it more direct so people don't have to go all the way around or they're walking on roadways.

Um so I definitely appreciate the the acknowledgement of some of those natural features and how that informs policy.

Thank you so much.

Great commissioner comment.

I think I have a question, Zach and Thara, about um a public comment we had.

I got pink here and there from different um community members too.

Like, can you elaborate about I understand because we have TR20 and comprehensive plan, which we talk hours on it?

I remember doing a comprehensive- I I don't even forget TR20, I think, until end of my life.

Um, I understand we have that policy.

But um I remember when we were talking about that and comprehensive plan, we were saying about like when we are going to neighborhoods, we can have like implementation policies and stuff.

Then I don't know if it's missing here, or it'd be nice to put it here as a pla in the implementation way.

Um for example, I was just trying to write down here and there, but I do have something in my mind, like something about like reduce the congestion and improve trapper um reliability in the factoria, blah blah blah.

And but I want to hear from you um where is that missing, um, and then I can continue my question.

Um so we do have a policy around coordinating specifically with wash out on congestion, um, because we've heard a lot of those pain points are is traffic on and off of the highways.

Um so there is a policy in mobility and access around coordinating with washed out on congestion.

Um what we also heard from community members is while congestion is a a challenge, which we very much document and acknowledge within the plan, um, when we ask people what they would like to do about it, they say they want alternative modes to get around.

We acknowledge this is an auto-dominated neighborhood, but we don't want the future of that to this area to be defined by that.

That's why we want better public transportation.

We want, you know, trail access, walking and biking, enhanced streetscapes.

We don't want to just drive and be dominated by that.

Um, and as I mentioned, that's why we try to have those supporting policies to continue to help mitigate those issues.

Um, and then you know, theoretically in the future when there's mixed use development, people will be able to both live and work and shop within the same area.

Um, and you know, hopefully that could start to address those things too.

But I think really the strategies that are already in very fine-grain detail, location specific in the MIP on congestion relief, we're we're not we can't really do anything to provide more detail on that.

It's already very specific.

Um, and within the scope of what we do, mostly around active transportation and what we've heard from community, that's what's informed the policies um that again somewhat get a congestion relief.

The policy that you're referring to is N25, N24.

I believe it's N25.

Okay.

Yes, 25.

Because it's only during the time of construction, which I think that probably the feedback came up because it was a utility project happening in the last two years in factoria.

That's why people probably will be frustrated with that utility construction.

Like I don't know if that like saying only impacted during construction is just the policy and the policy level.

I'm not convinced but I can pass and hear from other people I can ask more questions that go around but thank you.

Great uh Commissioner Keeble.

Yeah I I would like to focus on that um same topic as well um because I I think overall I can say that I having lived very close to Factoria for you know more than 20 years um I think there are a lot of things that could be improved there in terms of in terms of pedestrian access you know creating more options to be able to walk safely there um and also the idea of gathering places um you know in factoria because at this point there are none really right and it's a place that you go to quickly get your stuff get out and um it's not a place that you really um want to hang out in overall so um I think that'll be helpful um but I I was a little bit surprised when I was reading through you know even the the vision statement the last the last line of it being a pedestrian oriented design complemented by strong access to transit and regional transportation networks supports Factoria as a connected and thriving community it almost seems like an overreach in my mind because I just I can't get beyond the fact that um it's really built around the automobile at this point and I don't think that's gonna go away in factoria and so I think enhancing a lot of the features that you know will make it more walkable and pedestrian is important but ignoring the fact that it's built around the um automobile seems unrealistic to me and so to the extent that you know there are um issues with congestion too in relation to the automobile I think we should be addressing that specifically for this neighborhood and um and I I guess I'd like to see kind of an all of the above um strategy when it comes to you know helping mobility and not um and and not ignoring the fact that we do have congestion issues and that's you know I've I'm in the same boat in terms of looking at that one um that one policy and wanting it actually a little bit more broader in terms of trying to address congestion.

Okay yeah no I I appreciate that and I think with the with the vision statement um it's it is aspirational so you know I think we we try to offer a blue skies approach to community and that's kind of what they had articulated um but I do appreciate a little level setting and understanding you know the existing context and and what's possible um hopefully again these are countywide centers which call for these to be served by high capacity transit they have to be um you know multimodal there's gonna be mixed use development we've already got um through HOMA and some of our other recent initiatives you know we're calling for improved streetscape design those three connections so we're already starting to see some of those improvements codified and I think as redevelopment happens in that area we'll start to realize this vision but again certainly it has a history of being auto dominated, and that's to some extent always, or at least for our foreseeable future, going to impact the the outcomes in the reality within the community.

I'd also add that um as Zach said, this is um hopefully we get approved and designated as a county wide center, but what it's sort of a chicken and the egg scenario.

So as Zach said, this our vision is very aspirational, but the intent is that we are um wanting to achieve a multimodal environment there, and that's part of the requirements under the countywide center.

Um the hope is that we'll get funding uh through that designation in the future, and so really be able to have transportation improvements that go into Factoria that help us achieve and realize that vision.

Yeah, I mean, I guess when when I was looking at the vision statement, I was thinking it would be more realistic to refer to it as something like, you know, in increasing um increasing walkability, pedestrian oriented design elements, you know, um, rather than saying that it that is the nature of the area that it's a you know walkable pedestrian oriented um design overall.

I mean, I just I feel like I I feel like we're trying to, you know, totally re um redo an area that I don't think it's realistic that it's going to be able to be done even in a 10 to 20 year period with respect to um how much it's built around an automobiles.

And that's part of the reason why when I think about congestion and the problems that people have, I don't think that I I think that should be addressed as well.

Um so um I had one other comment, um, which is just has to do with the um with the um community centers, because one of the things that has always struck me is how different like factorial mall is from crossroads mall.

And um, because it's not really a gathering place, and I don't know whether there's um a way that it could become something more like Crossroads Mall, because Crossroads Mall is great in that regard, it is a gathering place for the community, it's a focal point.

And I don't know what whether that's something the city could in some way help to make happen, you know, for factoria.

It's never had that feeling.

Yeah.

I would so it was interesting.

I think we have a couple of policies, and we've heard a lot of community feedback, and I've been to the mall many times and and have you know it's a it's very much noticeable difference.

It's not somewhere you necessarily want to go just to hang out at as you go there for a purpose and you leave, which is kind of factory as a whole.

Um, so we have one policy that's you know better leverage factoria as a gathering space.

Um, you know, we talked to they already have some events there, so it could certainly be a lot more.

Um, and when we talked to Arts Commission, they were thinking, well, maybe they could um there could be a program where the city could be almost like an intermediary between the mall and nonprofits, artists, community organizations to facilitate that being more of a gathering space and a hub for folks.

So that's kind of one option that came out of that conversation.

Um, but I think there's a role that we can play into to better supporting the vision for the mall.

Um, and we talked to the mall owners and they said, you know, we certainly would like more people at the mall.

We're open to events we have some and would like to have more.

Yeah.

Um, and then the other thing is I think the big difference is that Crossroads has a mini-city hall, um, and that brings people from all over, especially northern Bellevue, um, for services and information, and that I think brings so much more activity um to the mall that then kind of uh creates, you know, other insights, other events and other other things and the the shops thrive because there's more activity there.

Um, and so we also have a policy calling for a second mini city hall, which is uh an idea that had been explored in the past, but for funding reasons and a couple other things didn't didn't um wasn't able to move forward, but I think re-exploring that, especially when we see a lot of growth here, there is going to be a need for city services and information um in South Bellevue, and I think the mall would be a great place for it and would kind of serve dual purposes for both serving community as well as uh creating gathering spaces and making that a more vibrant hub for people.

That's great.

Great, great ideas.

Thank you, Zach.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Kennedy.

Thank you.

Um following the conversation that was just had, I also think that Crossroads Mall has a library and a giant chessboard.

So those things are really uh helpful and and very much agree with the sentiment of thinking of innovative ways to use the focal points and natural centers of the existing neighborhood to enhance those those gathering spaces.

And love those features of the crossroads mall.

So just one.

I'm curious on the conversation regarding N25 and addressing congestion.

In 21 read to me like a uh policy that's aiming at creating more connections in high capacity areas, and that to me, I was understanding it to be something that is looking at addressing congestion issues.

Am I misreading in 21?

No, I mean, so both public transit access to it and active transportation, which is walking and biking, are all things that take stress off of our roadways because they provide alternate modes.

So that's when I said, you know, our congestion, we do have policies that can work to mitigate congestion.

The scope of great neighborhoods, active transportation and like enhancing streetscapes, which is in turn it improves access to public transit.

So that does work to do that.

Um, you know, there is a planned light rail station or proposed light rail station that will serve factory at some point in the future.

So whenever that occurs, that'll certainly help that.

And we want to again create these connections to those to those stations.

So we know that we want to plan for the connections because if you just build a station there, people have to get to it.

So we have to be forward thinking about how we're creating those connections, uh, which again I think speaks to some of the issues that we've been talking about.

Okay, okay.

And and that was also helpful because I think active transportation is more limited to ped and cycle um, not car transportation, but agree that that is uh intended to reduce.

Uh I also drive through that area every day.

Um, so I do see the car congestion.

So so share um the several comments uh that have been that have been made this evening around uh desiring to address that at the same time that we're creating in 21 like policies to try to relieve it.

Um so fantastic to hear.

And thinking about that pedestrian access and um the other policies around gathering spaces and parks and environmental enhancements.

One of the things you mentioned early on in in your presentation was Cole Creek access and the number of comments that had come up from stakeholders regarding having access to that amazing and world-class trail system.

And I think that is incredibly important, and there is this lovely opportunity for uh pedestrian access along a sidewalk that connects a trail access that has been enhanced already for Cole Creek and Factoria that leads right to Newport High School.

And I was really excited at Commissioner Villaves' comments regarding creating a my words not his thoroughfare between Newport and that upper um uh I forget this is a different map, it doesn't have that magenta circle, but um, yeah, there we go.

That's the threshold at the at the top.

And I think if we could create access like you have here, um potentially sketched out where that Cole Creek Parkway is enabling pedestrian access for all of the students from Newport High, certainly if it's a new community center that they that you can go from the trails all the way up um to the threshold at the north of this map, and that would be absolutely fantastic and very very possible.

Yeah.

And right there.

Um, but that current sidewalk that enables that connection is not enjoyable.

Um, it is covered with blackberries.

I see people on it every day, and they look like they are trying to pretend they're somewhere else.

And I would too, because it has cars constantly on Cole Creek Parkway and a cement wall on the other side, and so creating some other more enjoyable pedestrian experience there would be amazing.

So just wanted to support support that as a policy.

I see that it's in 31.

Um, I think um and I I think it's really possible.

Yeah, I mean, I I really appreciate that.

We when we did our our walks with community, which included a lot of students, I was very surprised to hear that they didn't even know Col Creek Park existed.

Because I mean Oh, but it's so beautiful.

Right, but when you look at it, I mean there's there's no way to get in there, it's just kind of this vegetated wall.

You would you could think it was anything else.

Right, exactly.

So we have, you know, signage and wayfinding is a big piece of that.

The reason I was going back to this map is because uh we've got our um enhanced active transportation along Cole Creek Parkway.

So looking at okay, this is complete streets, we want better sidewalks that feel comfortable that feel safe.

Uh, and then we've got that arrow that goes goes directly into Cole Creek Park.

So this is like okay, we need to create that access point.

And the reason it's there specifically and not say um farther to the east or to the right.

Um, is because around that area there's an existing access road, like a utility road that goes in there.

Everywhere else uh to the east is a very steep slope.

So in terms of like people with mobility challenges, that wouldn't be a great access point.

We want to leverage that existing road that is built there and think about we've been talking with parks about this.

Um, but that's a fantastic amenity, and especially in more of the near term, before we can develop new parks through property acquisition or other means, um, having having better connections to the existing nearby national areas is really important.

That's fantastic.

I love I love hearing it.

So very supportive.

Great.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Ferris.

Yes, um, couple comments.

One, um, actually, just as an aside, we're talking about crossroads versus Tactorian, it would be lovely to try to get more movement in that direction.

I will say that the developer of Crossroads was very intentional about wanting it to be a third place, and you might have heard of third place books.

So it he started with the idea of what crossroads has now become.

Um, so it's again, just somebody was thinking about that a long, long time ago.

But a couple quick comments for me.

First of all, great job.

You have had to assimilate so much input, so much information.

And at least when I was reading through that document, it was really impressive.

So I just have to say, fantastic.

I do have a couple of quick comments and questions.

Um, if you could go to slide 24, are we on 24?

There we are.

So I was looking specifically at the bike trails, the yellow line, and it looks like it just stops in both places.

And here we're trying to connect to East Rail ideally, and also to Commissioner Bia Basis' point about trying to get access to the South Bellevue park and ride.

It just seems like this is a big swing in a miss.

This is how I'm reading it because it sure seems like we've got to develop much better um bicycle access to those two uh places in particular.

So that's yeah.

So the the yellow line indicates existing facilities.

Okay.

So that is true that on 124th, the bike lane goes about halfway up and then it ends.

Uh and that's why we have the dotted blue line, which is active transportation, which includes walking and biking, and we're showing that connection going all the way up to the factory trail connecting um to the Mount Sasan Greenway, and then to the south, um, having that uh connect along Col Creek Parkway to East Rail, um, because there is only an existing small section.

So we're saying we want to extend active transportation, including bicycle infrastructure all the way up to create a complete network.

Okay, okay, so you do have that in mind.

What about to the South Bellevue Park and Ride?

Uh so yeah, we do have policy on that.

It's not shown within this map because it's outside of the neighborhood area.

Um, but we do have uh at least one policy that speaks to um so we've got develop active transportation connections to high capacity transit stops.

Um, and I think there's there's one more, but specifically, you know, we had heard that from our business community, um, especially those at T-Mobile and Triple A, that there is kind of this piecemeal network of a boardwalk and a gravel and a dirt path, and there's no real way to get there, especially if you're on a bike.

I mean, if you're walking it.

Um, so I think that's where, you know, we said we need both active transportation connections to high capacity transit um as well as the wayfinding and signage, so you know, okay, it's gonna take me 30 minutes to walk to the light rail station.

That's the kind of information, even in the interim when we can't make the trail improvements, at least people know how long it's gonna take them, so they have the information for them to make an informed decision.

So I think we're we're pretty intentional about calling ball calling both of those things out, and it was uh an explicit need from the community.

So I I would just kind of do a pylon.

Um there's lots of comments about you know, trying to address the congestion of cars.

I would like to see a really specific policy around getting access to the the light rail station, because that's such a critical part of our transportation infrastructure.

So making that really explicit to me would make a lot of sense.

Um in term in terms of just calling out South Bellview Station.

Yes, yes, very specific.

Um, and then one more quick thing, uh go back to 25.

Um, so you've got lots of things listed on here, which is great.

You I also saw on the plan you showed like a what if we had a pedestrian bridge that you know you would allow people to get a refectory available.

My big question is the great idea is who pays for it.

Great crescent for our transportation department.

Um also I'd as far as I know, I don't think we're prioritizing the pedestrian bridge.

That was like an old rendering.

Um, and we're focusing more on crosswalks, um on major thoroughfares.

So as far as I know, but the pedestrian bridge is not a priority for our transportation department and probably also not very financially feasible.

Yeah.

Yeah, I'm assuming that.

I'm just wondering, is this in in many of our other um code of policies, we're kind of waiting for the landowners to redevelop and then incorporate stuff.

But it's some of these things seems like there's something that really the city's gonna have to invest in.

So I'm just and you don't have to answer the question.

I just kind of want to put it out there to say it would be really nice to figure out how in the world would we find funding for this.

Yeah, no, I appreciate it.

Okay.

Thank but again, you've done a great job.

So thank you.

That's all I have.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, uh Commissioner Nilchion.

Thank you.

Um I'm gonna rehash a lot of what you've already heard because my fellow commissioners have uh gone in the same direction that I was anticipating them going.

Um first of all, uh thank you for your work on this and for giving us presentation.

I thought it was very, very helpful, and I really appreciate the uh the concept maps that you showed.

I thought those were great.

Um first I'd like to uh applaud that change that you made regarding collaborations with schools.

I think that was a very helpful piece of community feedback, and I'd you know, I'm I'm glad that that is making it into the draft.

Um, but then I'd also like to uh kind of build off of the comments made by Vice Chair Villabasis and Commissioner Kennedy on trying to find some kind of additional um gathering place, maybe a park, something in that northern half of the Factoria neighborhood to try to pull people from give give people a reason to go from the high school over to that area and and engage increase engagement throughout uh the whole of the Factorian neighborhood.

I, you know, I was happy to see N15 about acquiring suitable property for neighborhood parks.

Um I'd be interested in exploring maybe applying property for for some other kinds of uh maybe services, I know libraries were mentioned, some some other um public gathering space, uh if that's feasible for us to do in this project.

Um I also my other comment is regarding this change to the um to the streets infrastructure that that um we're working on here.

I appreciate the um emphasis on pedestrian and biking.

I I also feel like I go to Factoria a good amount.

I feel like that area kind of lacks in greenery and trees.

And I I think you know, if you're going to someplace like U Village, you're seeing a lot of um trees on the sidewalks and you know, nice green spaces that you can you can walk through and around.

I that that would be something I would like to see emphasize as well in this, if possible.

Um, you know, like Commissioner Ferris uh mentioned that the question then becomes who's who's gonna implement it and who's gonna pay for it.

But if we can find a way to emphasize um increasing greenery and trees in that area, I think that would be that would go a long way for making people want to stay in that area, not just go there and leave.

Uh yeah, so I do we do have policy in the environmental section that specifically gets at that because we've heard um or we've heard that from a lot of folks.

So um we've got both increased tree canopy focusing on streetscapes, public property, environmental-sensitive areas.

I mean, that's that's huge.

This is one of our lowest street canopy neighborhoods uh in the city, definitely a big priority.

We have that policy and then 35, which specifically looking at we have these vast, you know, oceans of paved areas and to be able to incorporate landscaping, uh, our low impact developments to like some of that stormwater management, green infrastructure.

So that's definitely something we've heard, and we're prioritizing through this.

So it might it doesn't like come through in the concept plan, um, but it's definitely through policy.

That's that's a focus for this neighborhood especially.

And there's a lot of equity issues, climate issues tied to that.

So I do appreciate that.

Um, and then in terms of gathering spaces, um, I certainly think in in the northern part of Factoria, it could benefit from that.

Um, you know, we've got the this green dot, which is potential park space, um, but also gathering spaces, um, both in the near term and then as redevelopment occurs.

Um, and then we've got similarly uh the one on the former Puesta del Sol school site.

So we want to think how can we, you know, partner with the school if there's a future for redevelopment or if they're using the school and get some dual use of that site.

We've had some conversations with them about that.

So that's another kind of natural place where we could have some of those gathering spaces.

I think the rest of it uh as outline of policies, we're really relying on community partners, private property owners to collaborate with us to provide those community spaces because this is private property.

I know the strategic property acquisition is specifically something that parks does, and so I think their scope is a little narrower in terms of like it would be for park space and not a library.

But I mean, I think anywhere in the neighborhood area we could benefit from gathering spaces, but we do again try to show a little bit of an equitable distribution about both sides of Factory Boulevard and then both to the north and to the south.

Great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Great, thank you all.

Um so the commissioners have made great points already, and thank you so much for the presentation and all the the community engagement.

I know there's a lot of events around.

I attended a couple of them and they were really well done.

Um I'm gonna just emphasize, I guess, two different points that some of the commissioners have talked about already.

The uh the first one is the trail access and parks.

I think um there's N15 and N31 that both kind of emphasize uh acquisition and then connection.

I do think both of them could probably be strengthened.

I think the uh the first N15 one is more about uh connection points to existing parks.

I think N30 and 15 is acquisition of parks that are uh near transit.

I think it's this area just needs more parks.

I don't think it needs to be qualified by access to transit.

I think like you can see on that map how lacking uh it is in terms of overall greenery space.

So you know, I'll leave let staff kind of go about how to go about that, but I do think it's worth emphasizing those points of park acquisition, uh building community gathering spaces, greenery.

I think all combines into that one.

Uh the second thing I want to just uh plus one to what uh commissioner Ferris said about the access to South Belly Station.

A couple of people have mentioned this as well.

Um I think that we could strengthen the policy uh around the connection to high high use transit.

Maybe it is uh calling out specifically South B station.

But one of the one of the problems with the connection to South B station from Factoria is specifically uh you go from the mountains to Greenway Sound Trail.

I always get the name wrong, but yeah, that one, the I-90 trail, and then you get to uh the area just south of South Bove U Station, and then it becomes this really rickety, like partly paved but very broken path.

And so I think emphasizing a uh you know the policy to say maybe like a fully connected uh uh pathway or access point, some things that kind of add a little responsibility for us to build not just the factoria piece of that access to the South Bovey but also kind of extended out to beyond just Factoria would be good for us to see that all the way through uh those are my two points appreciate it uh I'll do another round uh I think we're we've generally given good direction let's kind of keep this one quick and then uh we can kind of go on to see if we want to make a motion to uh to set a public hearing so um we'll do a second round here so by sure via basis.

Thank you.

I plus one the the comments about mentioning South Bellevue station.

I think uh if we could I think the the priority right now all around the city is to connect to the train once you get to the train station you're you can go anywhere and Factoria is kind of this watershed like it's just grabbing everything from South Bellevue.

So as long as you can get to Factoria should be able to get to the train and that that gap is missing.

So I I appreciate that um I also would like to include alternative modes of transportation I know we're talking about um micro mobility and bicycles and buses and train and all this stuff uh I think there's a mode that is very well suited for difficult topography and that's something that could potentially bridge Newport Hills or Cole Creek to Factoria and then over to South Bellevue station.

This is there's a real example in my hometown.

And this is that it it works really well.

I mean we we've we've heard something similar from a couple community members and and it can you describe the picture commissioner it's uh like a skiing gondola yeah I think it's the longest one in award right I forgot how many miles it is it's so long but uh this is um an option to connect all these places that have like they're choked by topography right and axis and you could connect from Bellevue uh from from uh Newport Hill Center to Factoria or something like that or to Newport High School and then you could connect from Factoria to uh South Bellevue station and so on and so forth uh another one is we probably should be intentional I don't know how this translates into policy about which mode is appropriate to which location and I would like to uh follow up on Commissioner Lu's going about expanding the the reach talking about factoria but understanding that this is going to affect what's around it uh not only South Bellevue station but also Newcastle and Renton I think it would be great to collaborate I think it's policy 25 collaborate with uh a nearby jurisdictions I guess because uh Cole Creek is a natural quarter but it's so dangerous like I don't know if anybody has ridden a bike over there but it's like pretty scary and is really hilly but it's a natural quarter for e-bikes like that's resolves the topography and all you need to do is have a segregated safe lane and then all of a sudden you're moving a lot of people from almost Renton from Lake Boring all the way through factoria and then Cole Creek almost to South Bellview station you just have that little gap that you can bridge by kayak across the slope.

So that those are my comments that's it commissioner conduct I think I was going through the neighborhood scan um and then some of the comments in the questionnaire on page 44 we have like 15 responds and all the 15 said one of the um way that they are community as a car.

And it's from 15 from the 50 and respondents.

They have some of them has a walk or like a um buster but like the car is the only thing that is repeating there.

And then on page 66 I see so many people talk about being congested.

And I think it'd be nice if you if you show the frequency of the response of the um questionnaires it'd be nice to have the clear picture of what people respond.

Because I understand the explanatory of that one, but I feel there's so many things is missing uh from all the things.

I was like literally reading stuff.

There's so many things, like for example, the congest that it's like on page 66 has been repeated like so many times.

People compla like complain about that a lot.

But a question was the way that that question was not there, but when we have an open uh question that people can talk about, how do you describe your neighborhood?

The first word was I order second one with congested.

I was complaining.

Like I hate walking in the congested area.

Like if if it make a beautiful place, but it's all the cars congested, I think it's not gonna go be a desirable walkable area.

Um I want to we figure out if the commission agrees to figure out to correct N25, maybe removing the impact during construction to make it more high level, or I was writing something.

I thought Commissioner Geppol is writing something too.

I was writing something here.

Um I want to say like something about like design and develop the arterials and intersection, including weakel capacity to reduce congestion uh for existing and future traffic and demand or something like that, like something along the side to to be um comprehensive with the comprehensive plan to just like back up what we have in comprehensive plan because we have like two bike policy, which I appreciate it.

We need it, but I feel it sounds like based on the comment that I'm hearing from community to we're just giving up on the car traffic and congestion.

I don't want they feel that.

And I understand about I want to hear from Transportation Commission too.

I didn't have a chance to reach out to them, but I think we need to fix N25 somehow to be able to be more um better.

Um staff would be open amenable to making that change if there's direction from the commission.

Yeah, I think we can we can add that as direction and like we don't need to modify the recommendation at this point since it's still.

Yeah, there's still opportunity for us to come back with revised language, and that's the whole point of tonight's study session.

Thank you.

Commissioner Keppel.

Yeah, I was just gonna plus one uh Commissioner Kamlo's comment as well that I I'd like to see a broader um, you know, congestion mitigation um goal um or policy and um SFN 25.

And um, I was also gonna just plus one the um the idea of um of calling out you know South B station and a fully connected um, you know, um uh you know path to that.

Um, you know, maybe as part of um SFN 21.

Um, because I I think that would be a huge benefit, um, you know, to uh to just trying to um create uh um means for people to be able to use transit and active transportation, so yeah, those are the two things that um are important for me.

Thank you.

Thanks, Commissioner Kennedy.

Um I don't have any additional comments.

Um I I I did have a question on the schools being able to use schools as gathering places on this N17.

Is this a policy that Bellevue has in every neighborhood?

Um, that we're supporting those schools being part of community gathering spaces, or is this going to only be specific to Victoria?

It seems like it would be a great idea anywhere.

So it's just important.

I would say, and Zach, you can you can probably um add on as well.

We have um we have been quite lately we have started coordinating very closely with the Bellevue school district, so really talking through are there opportunities as we go through these neighborhood plan updates.

Are there opportunities to really uh form stronger partnerships?

Um and so I think the the this will be an ongoing conversation.

So it won't just be um just factorious factors that we can incorporate more broadly in other zones and neighborhoods.

That's fantastic.

I think we had a similar policy that came up during the crossroads viewport neighborhood to area plan.

Okay, uh I and I also like the two proposals for revisions to uh in 21 and and in 25 to remove the dream construction on N25 and add including South Bellevue station on N21.

So plus one that.

Thank you.

Minister Ferris.

I actually don't have anything else to add.

Uh thank you, Commissioner Neil Chum.

I have no additional comments except to say that I agree with both of the proposed changes in South LV park and ride and the getting rid of the during construction portion.

Thank you, thanks.

Great.

Uh I don't I don't have any more as uh either.

So I think just going through some of what we talked about.

So first one was uh I think mention of more of the uh the school both as a node but also uh connections to different areas within Newport or within a factoria and then um and also as community gathering places.

I think N17 was mentioned there.

Uh there were a couple comments around support for uh a congestion-related policy.

Uh I think N25 was proposed as a potential alteration or just a net new one, and specifically focusing that around automobile access.

Uh, couple points on emphasizing community gathering places.

I don't think any specific policies were mentioned there, but I think uh maybe some proposals around strengthening that um the policy language that we have right now around some of those gathering spaces and connections there.

Uh trails and parks access, I think N15 and N31 were uh mentioned as areas for improvement.

Uh South Bellview station access, calling that specifically, and then uh potentially modifying N21 uh for that uh as a kind of fully connected lane or fully connected uh uh connection.

Um and then uh the last one was I think more emphasis on green spaces with N30 and N35 being potentials for um moderation.

Yeah.

Um I have another question.

I I read in the comments that um it was someone asking about N24 that we were saying about coordinate the high trip generating location to improve safety and access to driveways at the peak hours.

What does that mean?

Access to driveways.

Uh so this was uh a result of our engagement with the T-Mobile and triple A folks.

Um and there's on Southeast 36, which parallels 90, um, they have their two main egresses from their head headquarters there, and at rush hour, pretty much you can't get out of that driveway.

You have people driving using the turn lane as a second lane.

Um, so more traffic demand management in those areas for safety purposes, but just also to um help people get in and out of those areas.

Um, so that's that's what that's designed to.

This is so narrow to being the policy level.

It's just when I'm reading it, if I have a residential home there, I feel it's about my driveway.

Like when I'm reading it out of the concept.

I think it's also bit not clear for me personally.

I don't know how the commission think about it.

And the other thing was like in comprehensive plan when we were doing it, we were using um the verb bridge more powerful, like not encouraging, facilitating.

Can you just use the where bridge that we were using?

It was more like uh in a harder spot of the where uh if we can make a little bit better, like implementing like um something like I'll top it to be implementational.

Sorry, I just it just came to my mind these two.

Sounds good.

Um sorry, I I guess I'm gonna clarify that.

Are you just saying overall the policies need more enhancement?

I think something if there was it's my personal opinion.

I you can just I just I I forgot to share that one, but again, and then the other one is on in 20 um SFN24.

I think the driveways is pretty vague.

Okay, yeah.

We can maybe consider alternatives on N24.

I think uh at least for the policies that we've highlighted here, I think those are the areas where we want emphasis on stronger language on can I can I get a little clarification on N24?

Just so I understand what you mean.

Yeah, I guess like I I'll Yeah, okay when I'm reading it, I I I saw in the public comments.

I don't know if you respond to the public comments.

So many people like added the questionnaire in some of the questioning people was asking specifically what does a driveway mean on N24.

I don't know what you respond to those people, but I'm assuming those people are like me and they're thinking we are talking about their driveways as the residential single family home instead of T-mobile specific road specific section.

I don't think that policy is telling us we're talking about that's a specific section of the factoria.

So you would like to see that more specific as because like high trip generating locations is just like too too generic.

If it's valid to use it in the policy level for the neighborhood talking about one section, unless it's the impact is so high.

I don't know.

I'm just I mean, yeah, I would just say we'd heard this not only from the people who work there, but from surrounding residents, because that impacts how they access their neighborhood.

So I mean maybe more specific.

I don't know how commission feels about it.

Uh let's okay.

Uh I think we can just we can maybe explore that one a little bit later at the public hearing.

Um I think that one, and I'll just say my personal opinion on that is that there are a number of single family homes there that do also face congestion during uh high traffic hours like that area right before you get to like St.

Margaret's is like a prime example of that.

So I think that's what we're we need to specific the area that we are talking in, my opinion.

Like I feel like maybe if I'm on like one of the random streets, I feel it's about my driveway too.

But again, that's my understanding.

I think that might be the point of it, but we can also just like save that for the public hearing and then uh get people's comments about uh if they want to see that more specific.

We had a public comment just now.

Yeah, yeah.

Um okay.

Other uh, I think otherwise uh this direction clear from commission on the uh the policies.

Great.

Um, then could I get a motion if people are comfortable with to set a public hearing?

I'd like to motion that we um direct staff to hold a public hearing to review this.

Second, great.

Any uh all in favor say aye.

Aye, aye.

None.

Great.

Thank you, staff.

Appreciate it very much.

Appreciate it.

Good work.

We good is everybody open to a quick five-minute bathroom break and then back.

Okay, sounds good.

Let's meet back here at 8.05.

Thank you.

I think actually I'll also sell that.

Study, it's like we want to stop.

I want to get back to the other thing, these things.

Yeah, that's yeah, I don't know if you know what you can say.

Um, we don't have to be yeah, thanks.

I don't know.

I think it's a lot of people.

I think it's just like the internet, it's sort of a personal purpose.

Yeah, that's it.

We've got a call, specifically, so it's just a speeches.

Yeah.

But we like, I can't actually say both.

That's what's right.

Like, you know, they do that.

Oh, it's true.

So, you know, yeah.

I was just like, how do you take?

I couldn't think of that.

I'm just like, oh, it's how you don't know.

Actually, we use the starting space.

I think that's a much other one.

Yeah.

Well, it's also more reporting.

All right, we're back in session uh for our next topic.

Uh the city of Bellevue is updating its land use code to comply with new state laws that change how cities regulate parking for new development, as well as updates to the city's comprehensive plan policies.

The project will also explore opportunities to simplify and consolidate parking regulations state or citywide.

Planning uh manager Christina Galant and senior planner Sean Edgel will provide the presentation.

Thank you both.

Thank you.

Uh good evening, Chair Lou, Vice Chair Via Vasis, uh, Councilmember Barga, and commissioners.

Uh, this evening we are here with our first study session on the full proposed LUCA for the parking reform land use code amendment.

This LUCA is necessary for the city to achieve compliance with Senate Bills 5184 and 606015, as well as specific parking related provisions of HB 1491, also known as the TOD Bill.

Side note is that 1491 is a much more substantial piece of legislation, and the bulk of that legislation will be implemented through a separate future project.

So, with regard to the LUCA here, parking can be a really significant cost driver for new development, particularly when the required parking exceeds actual demand.

When requirements are too high, there's a risk of properties underbuilding to design a project to the amount of parking we can justify rather than leading with the best use of the land.

This magnifies when underground parking is required, along with other factors common in Bellevue like high high water table.

So to that end, legislation has introduced limits on how much parking can be required for residential and commercial uses, and also creates new exemptions for transit-rich locations and for specific land uses.

It also introduced some limits in how the city can regulate the physical characteristics of parking spaces and lots.

At this stage, the proposal includes updates necessary for compliance without going further.

There's two major reasons for our approach here.

First, the uh updates that are coming with the state law are focused on the areas where we would first look to implementing parking reforms, and those areas that there's the most potential for losses due to unbalanced parking requirements, including our light rail and BRT station areas.

These changes are also consistent with our affordable housing strategy goals around reducing parking requirements near transit, as well as several housing element goals regarding promoting housing density choice and affordability near transit, as well as evaluating the housing cost and supply implications of regulations.

On the other hand, the second rationale is that we have heard many in the community are apprehensive about these changes.

And while there's a lot we can draw from other communities, we acknowledge we can't fully predict the impact of some of these changes.

In addition, if we were going to go further, we would recommend more substantial outreach and analysis beyond what's practical to do with the 2027 deadline.

We'll get into this a bit further, but we really, despite a heavy push and some really solid engagement plans, struggled to get more substantial engagement on this process, despite the fact that we know this is an issue of high concern to a lot of people.

So, with that in mind, uh, while we're not going further, it's a good opportunity to set us up for future analysis and monitoring.

And to just to wrap up, so while it's not required, we did also take the opportunity to clean up and consolidate our parking-related provisions throughout the code to really substantially improve ease of use and clarity.

So this evening, the direction that we are going to be seeking, we're going to be presenting the LUCA in its entirety, and we will be seeking feedback on the key components of the LUCA and requesting the commission to provide direction to schedule a public hearing at a future meeting.

That I will pass to Sean.

Thank you, Christina.

Good evening, Commissioners.

To guide our discussion, we're going to begin with the core objectives of the amendment, followed by legislative background driving these updates.

We will then dive into the specific components of the proposed code, touch on topics that city council directed us to evaluate, recap our public engagement efforts, and wrap up with the project schedule and next steps.

Let's start by looking at the core objectives driving this amendment forward.

This LUCA has three primary objectives.

First and foremost, we must fulfill state mandated statutory requirements under set bills 5184 and 6015, alongside parking provisions within House Bill 1491.

Beyond strict compliance, this project presents an excellent opportunity for code optimization.

We are working to consolidate disparate parking requirements currently scattered throughout various chapters of the land use code into a single unified section.

In doing so, we aim to standardize our parking ratios, replacing outdated or overly complex rules with clear, objective, and predictable metrics that ease the review process for both staff and applicants.

Next, we'll dive deeper into what each state bill requires.

Collectively, Senate Bill 6015, House Bill 1491 and Senate Bill 5184 introduce exemptions to local parking mandates based on land use in proximity to transit.

They establish reduced minimum off-street parking requirements and place strict caps on municipal parking regulations.

It is important to emphasize right at the outset here while the city can no longer mandate these higher parking levels, developers still retain full flexibility to build more parking if their specific project or market demand warrants it.

Now let's go ahead and look at exactly where these state mandates apply within Bellevue.

Under the parking section of House Bill 1491, municipalities are strictly prohibited from requiring off-street parking for residential or mixed use developments within specific walking distances of frequent transit.

The proposed LUCA draft implements necessary updates for minimum compliance with the state law.

Specifically, this applies to any development located within a half mile walking distance of a light rail station or within a quarter mile walking distance of a rapid ride station or bus rapid transit.

The walkshed shown on the map here is an estimation measured along streets.

Projects are going to be required to demonstrate that their site is within the walking distance when they apply for permits.

It is notable here to again reiterate what Christina mentioned.

The remainder of House Bill 1451, the TOD bill will be coming forward between now and the end of the decade.

I believe 2029 is the deadline that we have set for us as part of a future transit-oriented development LUCA that will be coming in the near future.

But beyond specific transit locations, the state has also exempted specific several specific land use categories entirely, which are shown on this next slide here.

So no minimum parking can be required for any small residential units under 1,200 square feet, or for small commercial spaces under 3,000.

Additionally, exemptions apply to affordable housing, senior housing, child care centers, ground floor commercial spaces and mixed-use buildings, and commercial to residential adaptive reuse conversions.

It also covers simple changes of use between different commercial activities by removing minimum parking barriers during the change of tenant incoming small businesses can now occupy existing commercial spaces without being penalized by legacy parking shortages.

For the areas and uses where the state does still allow us to require parking, they have instituted strict caps to minimum requirements.

For residential uses, multifamily parking mandates cannot exceed half a space per unit.

A shift from our historical range of up to one space for single family uses the mandate is capped at one space per unit, down from our current requirement of two.

For commercial uses, the requirement cannot exceed two spaces per thousand square feet, which generalizes and lowers a standard that previously scaled up to 16 spaces per thousand square feet depending on the specific use.

And in addition to capping the ratios, the state has now also updated on how we regulate physical development standards.

Under the new rules, cities must allow both enclosed and unenclosed parking spaces to count equally towards any remaining minimum requirements.

We also must permit tandem parking configurations to satisfy these minimums.

Additionally, the state establishes a standard maximum required stall dimension of 8 by 20 feet for typical spaces, with exceptions to ADA accessible spaces and places minor limitations on how strictly we can regulate parking surface materials.

Now that we've covered the state mandates, we can delve further into the code consolidation portion.

Historically, parking regulations in Bellevue have been spread out with separate neighborhood-specific rules scattered across various special districts and chapters.

We evaluate these disparate regulations to establish a consistent baseline citywide standard.

By bringing these pieces together into a single unified parking chapter, we ensure compliance with state law while making the entire land use code vastly more user-friendly.

The first major section of this new chapter deals specifically with consolidated off-street parking.

Recent state mandates have significantly changed how Bellevue regulates off-street parking.

This consolidated code section establishes simpler, lower baseline for new development and tenant transitions.

Here we eliminate complex and overly specific parking ratios in favor of a broader commercial category to comply with state law and streamline with the permitting process.

Where older rules required four to five spaces per thousand square feet for office or retail and between 14 to 16 spaces for restaurants, the new standard establishes a flat cap of no more than two spaces per thousand square feet across all commercial uses citywide.

Again, as we stated earlier, developers will retain the flexibility to build more parking if the project requires it.

This is simply a regulatory cap that is placed.

While commercial and standard residential maximums are capped by the state, our second component here focuses on unified visitor parking rules.

We have centralized and unified our visitor parking language, maintaining the framework established under the downtown and east main overlays, and including multifamily developments citywide that exceed middle housing thresholds at seven dwelling units or greater.

This can help to tackle resident concern surrounding spillover parking impacting on street neighborhood parking.

An item of note here, we did recognize an error within our draft language that is going to be updated while exemptions apply across the subsection detailing what minimum parking regulations we are implementing.

State law actually has given us the leeway to make the distinction that visitor parking requirements can still be applied.

So we will be making an amendment to that language.

Moving from parking numbers to physical spaces, our third component updates our design standards.

This LUCA standardizes minimum parking space dimensions citywide to align with the state's 8 by 20 foot benchmark.

Importantly, it introduces modern flexibility for environmental sustainability by permitting alternative surfacing materials such as grass block pavers.

It also addresses local legal nonconformities by establishing clear, reasonable pathways to allow for certain existing gravel spaces to remain without triggering punitive upgrade requirements.

We identified several parking-related sections that, while not strictly required to be changed by state law, made practical sense to clean up as part of this consolidation.

We have unified and simplified the minimum dimensional standards for loading spaces and streamlined standing standard parking lot drive aisle widths to reflect modern design practices.

While staff focused on compliance and consolidation, the city council also asked us to evaluate a few expanded policy options, which I will share next.

During initial briefing, City Council directed staff to evaluate two expanded policy options, eliminating parking minimum citywide and expanding parking reform near transit.

Following this our evaluation, staff recommends implementing baseline state compliance at this time for the following reasons.

The state mandates under this LUCA already target the areas where parking reform will be most impactful.

Additionally, a conservative approach allows us to monitor track and evaluate real world development impacts of these new regulations before considering broader local expansions.

And finally, adhering to the state baseline provides a stable, predictable path forward for Bellevue today while preserving the opportunity to make calibration adjustments in future code amendments.

Um to manage on-street parking congestions in high growth areas, transportation department is transitioning from free car curbside parking uh to a paid parking model within downtown Wilberton, Bellred and the Spring District.

Uh so coordinating our off-street regulations with this active on-street management also ensures a balanced comprehensive approach to uh citywide parking demand.

I apologize.

Uh on our public engagement, community voices have been central to this process.

Uh we did con we did conduct a public outreach campaign throughout the spring uh to ensure that residents and stakeholders understood these changes and could voice concerns.

Uh, this did include a virtual information session in February, followed by series of an interactive in-person data walks um in April and May at City Hall and the Crossroads Community Center respectively.

Uh we concluded our active outreach with a virtual lunch and learn session on May 8th.

Based on our review of the feedback review received, the public's input generally fell within three main areas.

Uh support for reduced mandates was uh was seen as several commenters did express strong support for reducing car dependence, citing environmental benefits, support for transit-oriented lifestyles, and opportunities to convert underutilized parking lots into productive commercial or residential space.

Uh, however, conversely, we also saw concerns over uh neighborhood spillover.

Many residents did share significant anxieties uh regarding potential street congestion.

They raised concerns about parking spilling over into surrounding residential neighborhoods, guest parking shortages, and potential access issues for first responders and waste management services.

Uh finally, we did receive a variety of targeted questions looking at broader system impacts, including EV charging readiness, standardizing compact stall dimensions, curb pricing or neighborhood parking permits, and maintaining adequate parking access for individuals with disabilities.

Many of these comments helped staff to format our draft code proposal before you tonight.

Looking at our timeline, the statutory state deadline for full compliance is January of 2027.

We are on track to meet this goal following tonight's session.

The next major milestone will be to bring the refined code language back to you at a formal public hearing next month, setting us up for final council action ahead of the state's deadline.

With that timeline in mind, I'll conclude by bringing us back to the specific direction we are seeking from you tonight.

Uh staff is looking to you for your feedback on the consolidated code components that we've discussed, and ultimately direction to schedule this item for a public hearing.

Christina and I are happy to answer any questions you may have or dive deeper into specific sections of the proposed text.

Thank you.

Thank you both.

That was that was great.

Alright, I'll go around and get uh every commissioner's opinion again.

I'll go in reverse reverse order of last time.

I will say I'm not going to discourage everybody from speaking their minds, but also I see this as a very compliance oriented exercise.

So let's try and consolidate our points and I'll still do the two rounds.

And with that, I'll start with you, Commissioner Neil Challenge.

I am the wrong person to start with this because I given that this is very compliance oriented.

I don't have any questions for you.

Just do what you have to do to follow state law.

All right, Commissioner Ferris.

Oh, yes, one quick question and then a comment.

So could you go back to slide nine?

And I think I'm gonna ask what this means.

I think I know, but I just want to.

So when you talk about tandem parking, I think that was on slide nine.

Yes.

Uh, I sat where like two people can use the space at different times.

Tell me what's the what's the definition of tandem parking?

Yeah, so the 10 the definition of tandem parking is where you have two parking spaces, one in front of the other, and the front parking space has more access in and out than the one behind.

Okay.

Um this is a parking space uh requirement that came out of uh 6015, I believe.

Um, and the allowance for this is one that we tried to make sure that we facilitate.

Okay, and specifically that those tandem spaces are required to count um towards um the uh the minimum requirements.

Um yeah, okay.

That's very helpful, thank you.

Uh, just one really quick comment.

Uh obviously there's some push to be able to essentially eliminate parking requirements, which I'm I think I would love to see, but I also really respect your decision to say let's keep it to the state mandated minimums and then let's track it.

My only comment back is I would like to see a very specific timeline on when we're going to reevaluate whether or not the stent parking standards are working and whether we can potentially you know push it farther.

And I don't know whether that's three years or it's five years, but I would like to see not just some time in the future, but a specific timeline on when we're gonna reevaluate.

Absolutely, thank you.

Uh Commissioner Kennedy.

I I would plus one on the timeline.

I was also curious when we would be reevaluating, and I think you presented some interesting options to consider.

So what is the criteria for revisiting those options and considerations?

You also mentioned uh TOD Luca that's coming our way soon.

Can you expand a bit on the impact uh that that may have on parking?

Um just was interested to hear a little bit more about your reference to it.

So I can go ahead and start with this.

The in regards to the parking impact, the largest portion of the TOD bill uh in regards to this is the uh station area development here.

Um so with regards to light rail stations or bus stations, there's actually walking distances where parking minimum parking isn't actually permitted to be required by municipalities for residential or multi um or mixed use uh developments.

And that's the largest implementation that we have currently.

There's gonna be more uh to take into consideration with those station areas when we actually approach the uh TOD LUGA itself.

Yeah, so we're we're in the process of scoping that one out internally.

Um the bulk of the bill has an end of 2029 um compliance deadline, and it's going to involve um some uh updates to minimum FARs, pretty significant updates to minimum FARs in all of those station areas.

But we do have a quite quite a bit of latitude in how we do that.

So, you know, the process now on our end is building out what that scope and engagement process looks like to um set that up for a really solid approach and checking in on parking again, that could be a great opportunity to do that because um that'll be a few few years out.

Um, and we'll have the opportunity to kind of see how things are going.

Um, but weirdly, with this legislation, the the parking components were separated as needing to be implemented first.

Unusual, but that's why we're kind of uh include addressing that here.

Got it.

I yeah, it does seem like a natural opportunity to do that and um it will be very interesting to see what you proposed, just pairing that with our prior conversation and thinking about the implications of limiting parking, thinking about how to do a more comprehensive approach that considers how do we get access points to the light rail stations to ensure that when we don't have parking, we have those active transport corridors fully mapped across the city.

Um I think that was highlighted in the conversation we were having around the factoria neighborhood plan, and it would be really helpful that when we're thinking about well, we don't need parking and we're going to have these transit-oriented um districts seeing a map where we can say here is how we are going to get to those light rail stations and why we don't need parking.

So when we revisit, um, we can can really have um both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis of how is this working and and here's here's potentially opportunities to make it work.

If not, so thanks.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Goebel.

Yeah, I was just gonna voice some support for um staff's recommendation.

Thank you, um uh Sean and Christina for a good presentation.

I I um I I think that the the change that um you know the state is requesting here is gonna be a big you know big shift for us and I I think that's um it's it's a good approach to um to implement that and then you know figure out what further we want to do um going forward after that um I had two questions um on it though one is when we talk about um uh walking distances how is that gonna be measured I know we've we've talked about that in the past um so that's one question.

Yeah so with the walking distance um that is mainly going it is provided through um currently maps that we have uh that do provide uh through um I'll I'll I can jump in this thing.

So right now we're defining the walkshed just based on um uh distance along streets so instead of as the crowflies um that's kind of one natural point however a a lot of jurisdictions have brought up this topic as one that's somewhat ambiguous in the legislation for further definition um because it speaks to that whole transit shed that will define some planning implications for the broader TOD bill implications.

So we are expecting there's gonna be some more clarification because we've had questions about can we limit it to say places that have sidewalks um can we you know think about the relative comfort you know when it comes to grade and such and right now those kind of openings are unclear um so it's possible we might be able to refine it further right now we're just taking the approach of distance along streets as the safest bet.

Okay that makes sense um the other question I had was when we met and talked about this topic back in February there was um I think some enthusiasm you know among the planning commission about um looking at opportunities for centralized um parking shared parking between you know potentially commercial uses and residential uses and having the ability for you know um residents to be able to use um you know parking um during um you know off peak times for um you know commercial um for commercial development and there are some examples of like in the Netherlands of people doing that kind of thing and I'm just wondering if that's something that you've thought about is that something that there's any way to help encourage at at the city level um just wondering your thoughts on that.

Yeah so um in regards to the the kind of shared use off site alternative parking um configurations uh currently the draft itself has created more of a combined uh section that details with both of these um but at this time does not incorporate the addition of allowing for uh commercial spaces to allow for uh residential use um it is something that does provide for shared use of parking between uses.

Sorry it does yes okay maybe maybe if you can just point me to this section absolutely yes um that would be helpful is is there a particular section that I should be focused on for that yes it is 2025 90f2 yes what was that 20 2025 90 f2 20 okay sorry I read by line by line okay we're gonna have the draft open here.

Great okay no that's it right Commissioner Cullman.

I think I wanted to um double tap on what uh Commissioner Gephole mentioned.

I think it's nice to just be sure in that 2025 90 um F2 we have a flexibility to let the commercial lots be used by the residential off the pick or even the visitors.

I think it'd be nice to make that one.

The other one that I wanted, I don't know.

I was going with 12 to 18 months, um, um basically monitoring impact of this policy, but I don't know, Commissioner Farris.

You might know more.

I don't think anything gonna get built that's gonna go be compliance with this uh bill in eighteen months, maybe 36 months.

Uh I I sincerely wants to know if that's gonna go impact the slip over uh the um over park to the neighborhood if we receive any complaint or anything.

I think it'd be nice to monitor that, like if it's 18 months or 36 months or something like that.

I will refer you to you all to know how that's gonna go be a good time.

And the other one was is um for 2025 G.

I wanted to be sure that we can um make it in a way that the required bicycle parking ratio be in the way that's encouraged their resident to get the bicycle.

Like having a having a bike rack and bar by bicycle parking, it's really impactful.

Um I think that'd be nice if in Dah one we can be sure that uh we can elaborate a little bit more there to be sure, um, encourage people to have a bicycle.

Um that's a great suggestion.

To be honest, I'm not sure how that would come through in the land use code.

I I do know we probably have other city initiatives to help.

Yeah, maybe somewhere you guys figure out.

But yeah, yeah.

Land use code.

You know, our main focus is on making sure there's good high-quality um opportunities to keep your bike safe.

So, but thank you.

I think that one is talking about a bicycle requirement specifically on bike parking requirement.

Yeah, that's a specific thing is talking about that.

Yeah, yeah.

Great, thank you.

Uh by sure via basis.

Just turn on your mic.

So uh Tesla model S is seven foot two in wide in width, and your parking dimension is eight feet wide, which means that you have five inches on either side, and you have the width of the door, which is gonna leave like three inches, so you cannot get out of the car if you have columns in between the parking.

The compact parking spot is seven foot wise, which means that you cannot fit the car.

And a narrow park like that works in parallel parking, but for a narrow parking spot parking spot like that, you have to kind of aim from from far away, kind of when you're gonna change your oil, like you have to so it requires a lot wider driveway.

So I would I know the 20 feet is a state mandate, and that I guess that's very generous, but the eight foot is you're gonna have a lot of angry people.

Yeah, I would increase that to nine.

Parallel parking is fine, but I think for 90 degree parking, eight foot is just not I don't think it's conducive to the parking.

We hear you.

Unfortunately, this was also the state mandate that we absolutely can't um impose a um uh a minimum size larger than that.

However, projects can still choose to build larger.

I I think you know, for our implementation purposes, perhaps thinking about some um materials to help say, hey, by comparison.

Like you said, I thought that was a good one to say a Tesla is this width.

You know that a significant portion of your residents are going to be driving cars like this.

So our hands are tied there, except to um, on the other hand, knowing that uh hopefully developers are gonna be thinking about who's living in their buildings and who's gonna be, you know, paying to rent out spaces.

Um but yeah, we're we hear ya.

Okay, so um height, you have uh page six item two B, structured parking clearance, minimum high cleaners of eight foot six, including uh mechanical equipment, pipes, etc.

That's usually it's like seven foot four, seven foot six.

That's pretty standard to see.

Uh one extra foot of clearance where you were in a basement that has like big pipes, that means that your parking ceiling is gonna be much higher.

I would uh suggest that you leave seven foot six including pipes, um, or have a reasonable dimension excluding pipes and leave that to the engineers.

Uh but that would include increase like excavation costs and it wouldn't impact your building height.

Like I think that that's that extra foot is gonna have an impact.

Um you also have we have eight eight foot uh parking spots, uh, parking stalls, but we have 20 feet driveway for two-way traffic.

I think that's fine in a multifamily, but if you have like uh medium density residential, even middle housing with like eight project eight eight homes or something.

A 10-foot driveway should be fine for double like two-way.

So you I mean if there's two people, one arriving and one leaving at the same time, one will like kind of back up and let the neighbor go by.

Uh I would encourage to keep uh 10 foot driver or even 12 foot driveway for two-way circulation on products up to a certain size, and then have a minimum provision for backing up like a parking pad, backing up and maneuvering, could be like 20 by 20 or 22 by 22.

That allows you to do that, but but you don't need the entire path to be that width.

You can have uh 10 foot driveway where you get to the parking spot and that becomes wider.

That gives you a little bit more flexibility.

Uh and I guess the last question is uh about parking surfaces.

Uh I know you're talking about uh grass and gravel.

Uh is there a way to get wonderful included in here?

I mean, because it's a parking surface, right?

And it's uh the the difference is like the pedestrian use can apply as uh amenity area or public space uh regulation.

Uh it's uh it's come up more and more in this discussions and it's it's a successful yeah uh type of uh it's a success successful typology.

So I don't know if that there's any room in here to include that.

Uh I do love the enthusiasm for wounders.

Um kind of specific to the scope of this project, um, this this code section is concerned with um off-street parking, loading spaces, um, and drive lanes kind of internal to projects, so not it's not getting at provisions related to that external circulation, like in in a s in a street that you'd have in a winner if that makes sense.

Um we'll we'll share your comments as well with transportation on the other provisions just for context there.

You know, our scope was focused on um changes to the uh specific kind of parking requirements in terms of quantity and size.

Um a lot of those other dimensions are ones where we're maintaining current transportation practices and kind of just updating the language, but yeah, your comments are well received.

The reason I ask is because we have driveway standards.

Yeah, driveway materials that are allowed, and I assume this does not only apply to inside covered parking, it applies to cottages, for example.

We have a driveway, that's that's the regulation that we're gonna look at.

So that that's where this would come in helpful.

So driveways and wounders.

And then this is this is how it works, and then that would that could translate or extrapolate with the land use code saying if you're using a winner's according to that standard that's outlined here, then you get this bonus or this extra amenity space and and whatnot.

So I would appreciate you can float the the idea or or raise the issue and see if there's a possibility to to look at this.

Yeah, we can bring some people.

That's it.

That's all that's all I'm thinking.

All right, um, again, thank you for the presentation.

I've got to love compliance always.

Uh I I think you guys taking the minimal approach to see, you know, impact of what happens when we implement this and then taking a future stance on it.

I would love to see, you know, more eventually, but I I do think it's the right thing to do to kind of approach it with the minimal impact in mind and then um and then moving on from there.

So uh I'm gonna circulate this for another round of discussion.

I again, um, you know, I appreciate all the comments around.

I think we want, you know, more uh maybe more information on the broader TOD bill.

Uh there's a couple opportunities here for you know timeline on what uh future uh uh expansion of this could be, but again, I'll uh circulate the conversation.

Let's keep it on the you know uh do we want to keep this uh strategy and approach of using the bare minimum to start and then uh directing staff towards a public hearing if applicable.

So I'll kick this off again with uh Commissioner Neilchon.

Uh yeah, I agree with that approach.

Uh I also just looked up what a wooter fizz.

So would also like to hear uh any comments for regarding that.

Uh but yeah, I agree with that approach.

All right.

Uh Commissioner Ferris.

No further comments.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Kennedy.

No further comments.

Commissioner Keppel.

Yeah, I'm I'm ready to move forward with the uh the public hearing.

Um, you know, I one thing that I I just looked at the um shared parking um provisions um in the draft code, and I think it's a great start.

The one thing that I don't think it does enough of though is figure out ways to incentivize um those kinds of developments because all it does is really address how those shared um those shared spaces can be counted for purposes of meeting the minimum requirements, and so it's it's a step in the right direction, but I don't think it's adequate to um really incentivize that kind of um shared usage sufficiently.

So if there are other mechanisms and other opportunities, I'd love to see those occur as well.

And maybe that's a different Luca.

Yeah, we can we can um check back on if that incentive can be boosted up a bit here too.

Yeah, that's it.

Thank you.

Commissioner Kalmu.

I think I'm good too.

And then for the bicycle part, um it is on page 1617 is repeating on that um 2020 um 590 um G, if you just look at that and just make it again in a way that's it's like encouraging the bicycle.

So it's like really it's like persuaded the bicycle parking.

It's not like anyways, thank you.

Yeah, this might be a stretch, but what I think what's gonna happen is if you're gonna have uh developer build like what, five parking spots, like eight feet wide, they might get the permitted give the certificate of the C then they're gonna repay the lines and they're gonna do uh four that are ten foot wide instead of five that are eight in widening.

And and I don't know if there's a way to kind of make this as uh an option.

So you could meet the requirements with the parking count, those dimensions, but you have the ability to repaint uh.

Um I again very creative.

I technically that would be repainting in a way that is no longer compliant with the the parking requirement.

So that would that would be a kind of an internal conflict in the code.

So that's an an area we wouldn't be able to kind of but uh you could I don't want to dwell on this, but just kind of to change the idea real quick.

You could uh measure the parking requirement based on linear width, right?

And you meet that linear width, and then you're free to paint however you want as long as you meet the minimum requirement, which means that you could meet the linear width of five parking stalls at eight foot wide.

You meet it, you get approval, and then you can paint four.

Yeah.

So the the painting requirements, I know also we can give some more information on how that process.

But um, I I feel like uh yeah, we'll we'll try to think too about if there's any kind of incentive ideas to try to encourage people to to build larger spaces.

Um, you know, so we can give that some thought.

I mean the the i know you're bound by state band, yeah.

These are the type of things that people get sued for.

You buy a condo, you're paying, I don't know how many millions, and then you go away are you part of your car, the car doesn't fit.

It's like we'll get sued, right?

And and so, or at least you need to kind of be upfront with it needs to be set somewhere that this is for a very small car.

Yeah well and part of the and and I think that's that's also part of the thinking and the rationale for the the parking reform bill in general is that this really is kind of with the mind of this is kind of letting the market decide both what the need is for parking and what those spaces can look like and there's good and bad with that I you're noting and so you know maybe it it could be something to say perhaps you get a further reduction if you're doing larger spaces something along those lines um but yeah we can give it some thought okay thank you that's it for me.

Great um yeah no further comments I think we need to comply with state law uh so I think we're ready to move forward uh could I get a motion to uh set a public hearing for this?

I would like to make a motion that we direct staff to set up a public hearing to review the parking regulations.

Can I get a second thank you all in favor say aye aye and no opposed I think we're good.

Thank you both.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right next on the agenda is the approval of minutes do we have a motion to approve the minutes from the May 27th meeting so moved.

Is there a second?

Second any discussion all approved say aye aye aye.

Is there a motion to join the meeting?

I'd like to make a motion that we adjourn our meeting is there a second second.

Alright all in favor say aye aye thanks Al thanks thank you