Kirkland Planning Commission Study Session on Bridle Trails Neighborhood Center CAR – October 28, 2021

The Kirkland Planning Commission held a study session on October 28, 2021 to continue discussion on the Bridle Trails Neighborhood Center Community-Initiated Amendment Request (CAM20-00674). The session focused on refining development standards for uses, massing, step-backs, parking, transportation, and public benefits based on previous commission guidance. The applicant, represented by Amanda Keating (Weber Thompson), presented updated proposals incorporating feedback from the October 14 meeting. Commissioners provided direction on key issues and requested further details for the next meeting.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Jeremy Eckert (ROIC) stated he was available to answer questions but had no prepared comments.
• Chris Kagan, a Bridle Trails resident, expressed appreciation for actions that support the Bridle Trails Neighborhood Plan.

Discussion Items

Uses and Active Frontage

• Senior Planner Scott Guter reviewed the applicant's proposed list of active uses (retail, restaurant, entertainment, community facilities, etc.) and asked whether the commission wanted to expand the list to include other neighborhood-serving uses such as small medical clinics.
• Commissioners expressed support for a broader range of commercial uses but cautioned against over-prescription. Commissioner Bagg suggested adding uses like dental offices and insurance offices. Commissioner Rutherford emphasized focusing on the qualities of active frontage (e.g., maximum length of a single use) rather than a rigid list. Commissioner Allen noted the importance of distinguishing between public-facing retail and residential amenities.
• A key issue was whether residential amenities (e.g., fitness rooms, leasing offices) should count as active uses on minor arterials. Commissioners generally agreed that such uses should be limited on the ground floor along arterials but could be acceptable on upper floors or along internal circulation routes.
• The applicant proposed 80% active frontage on minor arterials and 50% on internal streets. Commissioners discussed whether 50% was feasible without including residential amenities. Staff and applicant will explore alternative percentages and definitions.

Grocery Store Commitment

• The assumption that a grocery store would be provided on the larger ROIC parcel was questioned. Commissioner Reusser and others emphasized the need for a grocery store somewhere in the neighborhood center, but noted that the Totem Bowl site (the applicant's parcel) may not accommodate it. Commissioner Tymczyszyn pointed out that the Totem Bowl site is losing a bowling alley/restaurant/bar, so it should provide some community amenity.
• Staff will research definitions and parameters for a grocery store (square footage, ceiling height) and bring options to the next meeting. The commission expects the property owners to collaborate on equitable distribution of amenities.

Massing, Step-backs, and Setbacks

• A significant portion of the discussion centered on distinguishing between "step-backs" (upper floor recesses from the lower facade) and "setbacks" (distance from property line). Commissioner Reusser advocated for a clear requirement for upper story step-backs to avoid monolithic buildings. Other commissioners supported the concept but wanted flexibility for design review.
• For minor arterials (132nd and 70th), the applicant proposed a 15-foot average upper-level setback from the property line. Commissioners expressed concern that this could result in a straight-up building if no step-back is required. Commissioner Reusser preferred a 20-foot average setback based on downtown examples. Commissioner Rutherford suggested step-backs should be tied to the height allowed on the opposite side of the street.
• Staff clarified that the city's code has evolved toward requiring step-backs for predictability. Commissioners asked staff to bring back specific options for step-back requirements for the next meeting, considering the different street typologies (minor arterials, residential streets, internal circulation).

Parking and Transportation

• Commissioners requested more data on parking minimums/maximums, on-street parking for retail, bike parking, and traffic impacts. Commissioner Allen was interested in parking maximums and where parking would be located. Commissioner Bagg asked for analysis of traffic loads and site access points, given grade changes.
• Staff and applicant are in ongoing discussions with public works and will present more information at a future meeting.

Public Benefits

• Commissioners emphasized green building standards and affordable housing as key public benefits. Chair Rozmyn stressed the climate emergency and housing crisis. Commissioner Rutherford wanted the walking experience through the site to be considered, including possible through-block connections. Commissioner Reusser advocated for a centralized public gathering space (not just widened sidewalks) to serve the community.
• The applicant proposed open space requirements (e.g., 8 sq ft per residential unit) and discussed public spaces adjacent to active uses. Commissioners asked for more concrete options on green building incentives and open space design at the next meeting.

Key Outcomes

• No formal votes were taken. The commission provided direction for staff and the applicant to refine the proposal.
• Staff will work with the applicant to develop: (1) a definition and parameters for a grocery store; (2) options for step-back and setback standards tailored to each street type; (3) clarification on acceptable active uses and percentages, including whether residential amenities count; (4) detailed proposals on parking, transportation, and public benefits.
• A next meeting date will be determined, likely in November 2021, subject to scheduling around the Station Area Plan joint meeting with City Council on November 16.