Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening, and welcome to the first City of Bellevue Planning Commission meeting of 2026 today, January 14. This evening's meeting is held via hybrid format. We are both in person and virtual option via Zoom. Tonight's meeting will provide an opportunity for public comments during the oral communication portion of agenda. All written comments that have been submitted prior to 11AM today, Wednesday, January 14, will be summarizing into the records. We have two agenda item tonight, both the study sessions. First one, the introduction to 2026 comprehensive plan amendment. And the second, a check-in on the look forward land use code amendment. Now let us forward with the roll call. Westerloo?

Present.

Commissioner Valvesas?

Present.

Commissioner Kennedy? Present. Commissioner Nilchian?

Present.

And commissioner Goppel?

Present.

Council liaison mayor Malakutian?

Here.

And I'm chair Han Liu. Can I get the motion to

approve tonight's agenda? There, I'm also I'm also hit My god.

Commissioner Ferris? Yeah. They removed your name. Just so you know, it's not my fault. And I wanted to welcome commissioner Ferris to finish her terms on the planning commission. I do apologize. Can I get the motion to approve tonight's agenda?

So moved.

Second. Any discussion? All in favor? Aye. Graduation to mayor Maracoutian on his election at the January 6 council meeting.

Oh,

And, do you have any reports for us?

Yes. Absolutely. Happy New Year to you all, the first meeting of 2026. You guys have done an amazing job in 2025, and we are looking forward to all of the reports coming from this body to council in 2026. Opposite of the chair, my first note here is welcome you back, commissioner Ferrys, and finishing your term as not pointing out.

You know? Have your notes ready for So as you had some conflict, you resigned, you went through a very extensive process, and then we realized that you can finish short term due to all of your excellent previous work and all of the topic that is coming to us and appreciating your amazing work. You are going to finish your term. We are really appreciating that you are coming back, and you are helping this body achieve more stuff that we have. We had two meetings since the beginning of the year, January 6 and January 13.

We have a we have a new leadership deputy mayor, and every two years, the mayor go through the process of assigning the new liaison for different boards and commission. This is is happening. So we will announce after we're going through the process again after the all of the appointment is done. May maybe I have the opportunity to be the liaison again, or maybe we give this opportunity to someone else to get some experience and or just know what is going on. The topics that I wanted to share with you that came to our dais is that is important for you all.

I think it's two important things. One is the parking reform land use code amendment. Not only we have some state mandate that is forcing us to remove some parking requirements in some areas, but also our code is very old, is belong to the city that we don't have that city anymore. They said there is a bowling alley and dance floor and some of those kind of requirement or land use need that we don't have that anymore. So they are going to update that.

In the dais, we ask for all of the options, not just the state mandate. So we are going to do very comprehensive about to update our parking reform land use code. The other thing that is going to be very important for this body is the multifamily tax exemption program update. We talk about it in lens. The city staff did a great job with all of our stakeholders, and the ordinance is going to be adopted.

Part of that is going to be any more land use code update that we have. MFT is going to be a component of that. So and this body is going to see that as part of that land use code update in HOMA or in any other land use code that we are going to have. These are the two related topic that we talked last night, and I just wanted to share with you. And I'm here to answer any question you have.

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

would anticipate that Matthew would address that, but I haven't spoken to him specifically about it.

Okay. Yeah. That would be helpful just given we have another session on Homecoming Hub. And given the recent updates, I feel like that's very important to know.

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

I have a follow-up question. Yeah. Do you know the timing of when council is going to consider the different options and where you might when you might make a decision?

So the so we already approved the ordinance that was a staff recommendation with all of the option as an NFTE and what they are not recommending. So that's already done. The the thing that is going to be by the land use code when the land use code come is hasn't come yet. So when HOMA comes, the portion of MFTE that is going to be additional incentive Mhmm. For if you have a mandatory affordable housing there, then it comes as a combined package to you all first and then to us.

Great. Thank you.

But the overall MFTE is done. Thank

you, Mayor. Go ahead.

Gonna ask, is it possible for us to get kind of an overview of the whole MFT e? Because I I feel like we could probably benefit from just understanding the whole thing, not just the interaction piece.

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

That would be helpful.

Okay. Thank you. Yep. Great idea. I love it.

Let's share with you. One last thing that I know it was important for some of the people here. In the first meeting of the council meeting on January 6, we received a very important update on Eastgate Campus. So I know some of you talked to me about that. The the data is there. The update was great. What is working? What is not working? And for those thing that is not working, what are we doing or what they have been start what they have started and initiated to address some of the concerns in the Eastgate Campus. So I know at least two of you you talked to me about that. The the first session, January 6, we talked about that, and it's very informative session. That's it for me. Thank you, chair.

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

No reports from boards and commissions.

Would you mind to provide us with the update of the meeting schedule of 2026?

Yes. As was noted by some of you that your next meeting, you'll be continuing your discussion on HOMA. The public hearing was in December. And in addition, I'll be presenting some of the options for responding to the process improvements that we discussed at your retreat in November. So some hopefully helpful decisions to make after discussing HOMA.

Any question from Kate? Would you provide a summary of the written communication for us?

Yeah. Since your meeting in December, we have not received very many comments. Your cap packet contained comments that were mostly sent in December around HOMA. We did receive, one comment, since the packet was published that I sent to you. I noted right before the meeting that we had received another comment, which I'll send on to you. It was related to the Bell Red Luca. So I'll make sure that you get that soon.

Thank you, Kate. We have a total of thirty minutes for oral communication. Speaker will have to up to three minutes to speak. A staff liaison at Kate Nessie will call in speakers in the order which they have registered, either online or in person. If anyone from the public has missed the 6PM registration deadline, you may still provide public comment if there is a remaining time.

Please use the raise hand function in the Zoom if you are attending virtually or motion to the staff if you are in person to indicate that you would like to speak. There are rules adopted by the city council limiting the topics about which the public may speak during our meetings under ordinance six seven five two. The public may only speak during public comment about subject matter that are related to the city of Bellevue government and are within the power and duties of the planning commission. Additional information about the rules, you can find it under ordinance six seven five two. Kate, can you call on the first speaker?

Sure. You have five preregistered speakers and then, one who signed up here. The first person, is in person, Era Pogosova, and the second person also in person is Sandy Vo. And, if you would turn on your microphone. Press the button.

Thank you very much. Good evening, planning commission. Sorry that I'm reading very short time. Couldn't memorize it all. My name is Eira Pagosa, and I'm the managing director of theater thirty three. We're a nonprofit community theater located in the heart of the Belred Arts District. I want to begin by sincerely thanking the planning commission and the city staff for the long term vision you set in motion back in 2009. That decision to designate Bill Red as an arts district was bold and forward thinking. It is incredibly meaningful to stand here sit here as part of the momentum that vision created and to witness the art district, not just existing on paper, but truly beginning to flourish. For Theater thirty three, being located in the arts intensive area was serendipitous at first, but was not incidental.

It was essential. Our mission centers on access, education, and community storytelling. Being physically rooted in a district designated to support creativity allows us to collaborate, to grow sustainably, and to serve a diverse and multilingual community that might otherwise be excluded from the arts. The zoning, the density, the emphasis on mixed use, these are not just abstract policies to us. They directly shape our ability to operate, to plan seasons, to teach our youth, and to welcome the public.

Looking forward, we're excited about what the future of BellRed can become. Theater thirty three has already, expanded its footprint within the district. We just opened up the new Studio thirty three on December 6, And there's classroom space. We see enormous potential for deeper partnerships with other arts organizations. Just today, I met with a Hindi community who's looking to use our space for their classes and workshops.

And the other creative businesses and residents who want to live, work, and make art here in the district. That potential, however, depends on the thoughtful land use decisions that recognize the realities of arts organizations, the need for affordable space, flexible use, visibility, and long term sustainability and stability. Art organizations are not temporary tenants. We invest deeply in place. We build audiences, train young people, host free community events, and contribute to the cultural and economic vitality of the city.

When the land use policy supports arts intensive development, it sends a clear message that creativity is not an afterthought but a core civic value. I want to stress on the importance of continuing to prioritize arts and culture within the Belgrade ecosystem. Your doing so ensures that the district remains distinctive, vibrant, and human centered, not just another redevelopment area, but a neighborhood with identity and with soul. Thank you again for your leadership, your vision, and your continued commitment to integrating arts and culture into the future of Bell Red. Theater thirty three is proud to be part of this district and the city, and we look forward to growing alongside for many years to come. Thank you for listening. Thanks. Turn the button off. Cool.

No. You're good. Thank you.

Next, we have Sandy Vo, followed by Cody Lodi, who is virtual. And I see your hand, Cody. Thank you.

Hello, planning commission. My name is Sandy Vo, and I am the executive director for the Bell Red Arts District Community Alliance. I'm here with Maria Lau Hui, former arts commissioner, community alliance board chair, and architect. We're here today to share the enthusiasm for the City Of Bellevue's BellRed land use code update process. We are deeply grateful and for the dedication and thoughtful work for city staff and the planning commission whose ongoing efforts have shaped the BellRed area since its designation as an Arts Village and the 2,009 Bell Red land use code updates and the Bell Red sub area plan.

While significant strides have been made, we'd to express how important it is to continue prioritizing preserving ecosystem. Arts and culture plays a significant role in enhancing quality of life, fueling local economic vitality, and benefiting the broader community. In order to achieve these outcomes, we must ensure that the Belworth Arts District remains sustainable. Together, we can do this by, one, ensuring that the proposed arts intensive area provides affordable space for creation, community collaboration, performance, arts education, creative pursuits, and more Two, attracting and supporting the growth of creative businesses, organizations, and local artists through affordable live work artist housing and retail spaces. Three, prioritizing arts and cultural amenities within future developments that are publicly accessible, such as mural, public artworks, building and wall facades, and others to highlight and distinguish the area as a creative and artistic hub.

And four, building a connective environment that makes it easier for visitors, residents, and workers to support businesses across all sectors in the district. We urge that you continue to prioritize the importance of encompassing arts, culture, and creativity into the future of the Bell Red Arts District and understand how central it is to the community, its economy, and vibrancy of its built environments. We hope you remain steadfast in the goal you set forth back in 2009 to identify and realize opportunities to integrate arts and cultural works and attractions into BowRed. Thank you so much for listening.

Thank you.

Next, we have Cody Lodi, who is virtual. And

Alright. Thank you. My name is Cody Lodi. I'm a design professor design principal and architect at Weber Thompson and a former cochair of the AIA mass timber committee. I'm working on several projects in the Wilburton and BellRed overlay, and I applaud the planning commission for the huge changes you've made to the Bellevue land use code.

We're often one of the first test cases looking at development in these areas, and there's a lot of positive revisions that have happened in these codes. I've had a little a limited time to look at the most recent Luca draft for the BellRed overlay, and I have a few thoughts. Specifically on access and connectivity, I think there is an opportunity to provide more optionality for access corridors through the BellRed overlay to break down the blocks, especially considering that this is a transit oriented overlay and looking at ways to, really focus on providing options for pedestrian and bike, focused access corridor typologies, like the shared use path typology that's in the recent Wilburton Luca. This provides flex flexibility for creating vibrant pedestrian related connections that can support gathering and public space tied to the arts District. I also want to applaud the city for incentivizing mass timber construction as it provides a more carbon responsible way to develop.

What we are finding is that the economic sweet spot for mass timber at scale and density is at the at an a 180 foot tall, building height due to building code requirements. In order to make this pencil out from a developer's perspective, you need larger floor plates to get an efficient structural grid, especially with residential uses. While the 20,000 square foot floor plate limit for mass timber residential uses is positive, I do believe that going to a 25,000 square foot plate will provide more flexibility for residential uses to create the density needed in these overlays. Third, I also think it's worth considering striking the floor to floor height requirements and flat plate requirements for above grade parking. This unnecessarily adds cost to projects already challenged by hydrology and typology, especially in the BellRed overlay.

Thank you.

Thanks.

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

Good evening, Planning Commission. Thanks for the opportunity to speak with you. My name is Cosmos. I live downtown. And one of the things I love about living downtown is that I can walk places because we have such a robust grid of streets and sidewalks and crosswalks. If the Bell Red Corridor is gonna become a truly urban neighborhood, it also needs to be walkable. I'm here tonight because I saw the revised Bell Red street network in the agenda materials. And upon comparing the working draft map to the one that's currently in the land use code, I realized that we're considering dropping something like a third of the required streets. So I wanna share some feedback and suggestions about that. Number one, I totally get that in some instances, a required street takes up almost a whole parcel, and so it's, like, makes that parcel not developable.

I get that problem. But, like, speaking as a resident and a taxpayer and a pedestrian, honestly, I would rather see the city just finish the job in those instances and acquire the right of way, like, buy the parcel if it's so small. An example of this would be the southern end of the future Hundred And 31st Avenue. There's, like, an 80 foot wide parcel that the street goes right through. Rather than having the street grid never connect to Bell Red Road, I would rather just see the city build that out themselves.

Number two, there are a bunch of other streets that are dropped from the working draft map that don't have this problem. And so, frankly, I just don't understand why, and I'd love for someone to ask, like, why are those streets being dropped? An example would be the northern end of the future Hundred And 31st Avenue. It seems like a textbook case where it follows the park property lines really neatly. Both sides could be developed and build the street. So I'd love to understand why that's being dropped. And I guess I worry it could be sort of a slippery slope. Like, if any developer can just play the waiting game and over time we whittle away at the street grid, we're not gonna get an urban street grid in Belred. Number three, if we do end up dropping some of the streets, I would love to at least see the city assert, like, a pedestrian connection in its place. An example of this could be near the casino development.

They have built their part of Northeast 19th Street. They've also built a nice little playground. It'd be a real bummer if there was no way to reach that playground directly from 130th Avenue, but what do you know? That is one of the streets that's dropped in the working draft. So it would be great to have at least a connect a pedestrian connection in its place. Okay. All of that to say, I get that we wanna juice redevelopment in Bellred. I also wanna see more development in Bellred, but I hope that giving up on a truly walkable urban street network is gonna be kind of our last resort and that we'll try everything else first. Thanks for the opportunity to share my perspective. Thanks. Next,

we have Jesse Clausen followed by Rebecca Bloom.

Mister mayor, chair, and commissioners, hello this evening. I'm gonna talk about two things. The first thing I'm gonna talk about is the comprehensive plan amendment that is before you tonight, submitted on behalf of Steve Malsam, who's in the back with Mackenzie. This proposed plan amendment changes the comprehensive plan from general commercial to low rise to mixed use, mainly so that we can do mixed use with residential on top in that location. The city is proposing or is asking you all to potentially add a parcel to that proposed amendment, we are fine with that.

We did not submit that parcel because we don't own it, but we just wanted to let you know that we're fine with whatever you do. We think it nicely squares it off. And we're also you know, we'll be participating throughout the process, and we're here if you have any questions about what future plans, which there aren't any actual concrete plans yet. The second thing I wanted to talk about is the BellRed code amendment before you. Obviously, it's very early.

We're very excited to see the code, and we're very excited to see a code when it's done that is ready for development on day one. And to me, that means a street grid that is actually achievable. We actually applaud some of the changes that the staff made to the street grid. We think that the staff looked at some of the very difficult grade changes and connection issues in BellRed. And so we applaud some of those changes, and we think that we can go even further and make sure that there are walkable connections that go right to the late light red line.

We also wanna advocate for the most flexible uses possible. So sometimes there's a tendency to say, well, we really want residential residential in in this this area. Area. We We really really want want commercial commercial in this area. It would be great if just mostly all of the uses are allowed in most of the places similar to Wilberson. We also wanna advocate for floor sizes or floor plate sizes that make sense to those that will build them. So you heard Cody talk about mass timber. Those, mass timber floor plates really do need to be larger. And finally, an amenities incentive system that incentivizes the behaviors that you're looking for. So that includes stream daylighting, open space, affordable housing, all the good things that we're trying to incentivize developers to do.

If you give additional FAR and height in exchange for those things, you will see those things happen. You just went through this in Wilmington. We all did, and I think that code turned out fairly successfully. So we hope that, you know, you can use that as a template as we're going through for some of the decisions that you're gonna make. Thank you. Thank you.

Next, we have, Rebecca Bloom.

Good evening. I'm Rebecca Bloom. I'm the chief investment officer for real estate equity at Columbia Pacific Advisors, and my comments are on the Belred, Luca. We are working through a master development plan for a large nine acre assemblage in the heart of Bell Red, just south of Spring Boulevard directly adjacent to Light Rail. Firstly, I'd like to express our thanks to city staff and the commission for all the hard work that went into the drafting of Belred Luka, and we're really excited to be at this critical point in the process.

There are several projects already in the pipeline in Belred. We submitted our MDP last year, and similar to the recent HOMA discussions, we would urge you to ensure that submitted MDPs and ADRs are both vested against the new code, but can also opt into the new code if desired. We're very happy to see that many of the suggestions around incentivizing and daylighting of streams were incorporated into the draft Luca and the new critical areas ordinance. Daylighting is very complicated and expensive undertaking, and proper incentives are critical to delivering the outcomes. We're working through the draft language now and thinks that there are, we think that there are very big steps in the right direction here.

So thank you, and we'll be providing further comment on this topic in the future. With respect to the street grid, there's been considerable work with staff around the location of streets. We believe that streets should be more pedestrian in nature, and the commission should be asking whether many of the roads are truly necessary for auto circulation. There is necessary additional height and FAR allowed in many of the new land use zones in Bell Red. The intensity of future development may continue to be constrained due to the high water table and what that means for the cost of below grade structured parking.

So urge you to continue to consider flexibility for parking requirements, particularly adjacent to light rail. Encourage the commission to ask for additional study on floor plate sizes and tower separation. It appears that the current draft does not allow for averaging of floor plates over 55 feet in most zones, and I would encourage you to allow for larger floor plates in general. And lastly, uses need to be as flexible as possible After the last several years of turbulence in commercial real estate and the economy as a whole, I think we've all learned that flexibility is the key to success over and over again. So, thank you for all the work to date, and we are excited to continue working on this in the future.

Thank you.

Chair, we have a little bit of time left. I can open it up to the floor.

Yeah. That'd be perfect.

Is there anybody in person who would like to speak? Is there anybody online who would like to speak? If you could raise your hand. I see one person online. Just a moment. I will allow you to speak. Right. Can you hear me?

I can hear you. Can you hear me?

Yes. Go ahead. State your name, please.

Hi. My name's, Isaac Patterson. I'm a land use attorney. I work now with, Tharsis Law PS, and I just wanted to testify in my personal capacity about the BellRed Luca. And just wanted to state that we we really wanna support the maximum flexibility.

We think that the the Luca's headed in the right direction. And, just that just wanted to encourage the the commission to consider and support, developing an MFTE supercharger for BellRed along the lines with the Wilburton, supercharger program that councils indicated it supported last night. That's all I have. Thanks for all your work on this. Thank you.

Thank you.

That is all of the speakers, chair.

Thank you, everybody. Tonight, we have a study session item on 2026 comprehensive plan amendment. There has been one privately initiated CPA for 2026 for Evans Plaza. At this session, staff will give an overview for of the application, ask the planning commission to give a direction on the geographic scope of the CPA, and set the public hearing for the threshold review. Threshold review is determined whether it should be part of 2026 CPA work program. Compressive plan planner, Tune, will provide a presentation on Events Plaza. Hi, Tune.

Hi. Good evening. Yeah. Good evening, chair Han Liu, vice chair Liu, and mayor Malikudian and the commissioners. So, yeah, at tonight's let me just minimize this real quick.

So at tonight's study session, a privately initiated plan amendment, Evans Plaza, will be introduced to the planning commission, including a review of the proposal's geographic, scope. And just to go over the agenda real quick, first, we'll just sort of level set with a quick overview of the amendment process for privately initiated amendments. And secondly, we'll focus on the application itself, the one privately initiated application that was submitted ahead of the September 15 deadline. Then we'll go into a a review and sort of staff analysis and review of the geographic scope. And then lastly, sort of planning commission review and and next steps.

Their staff request planning commission direction on two items. So first, after review of the staff recommendation to provide direction on the geographic scope of the proposed amendment, and then secondly, to provide direction to schedule public hearing for threshold review, is which the next step in the amendment process. More on that to come for February 11. So in terms of the annual amendment process, it consists of two steps for privately initiated amendments. So for city initiated amendments, for instance, the neighborhood area plans for Eastgate and Victoria, those are sort of separate from the privately initiated amendments.

They have their own processes, two step process. And the first process step is threshold review, and that is really meant to determine whether applications should be included in the annual work program. And then the second step, final review, that is, when planning commission, as well as city council will review the actual sort of merits of a proposal. So first is more like, should it be included in the work program? And then secondly, the actual evaluation.

And the planning commission's review of the merits of the proposal will follow after city council will make the decision to include it in the annual work program after reviewing a recommendation from planning commission on that. And it's important to note, like, step one is threshold review. We're not even there there yet at this point. Tonight is really, an introduction on the geographic scope. If planning commission decides to set the date for threshold review, that will sort of be the the actual first step in the process.

It's more like a an introductory sort of precursor to the to the process. As I said, one amendment proposal was submitted ahead of the September 15 deadline, Evans Plaza, and this amendment is a proposed map amendment, and request a change in the land use designation from general commercial to low rise to mixed use on, what is, about 10 acre site in the Bridal Trails neighborhood area. It's immediately north of State Route 520, also immediately north of the Bell Red, neighborhood area. And here's a map. So, I think this came up during oral comment as well.

So the proposed amendment side covers, pretty much everything that's included, in that block bound by Hundred And 36th, Northeast 24th, Hundred And 40th, and then sort of State Route 520 to the to the south. There's also the 520 Trail that runs south of the sort of the project here outlined in red. And Evans Plaza is a commercial complex. As you can see on this aerial, it it has, like, sort of a complex of of of buildings, one story commercial buildings with a range of different uses, mostly retail services, restaurants. That's what's included in in the complex today.

And here are some, photos recently taken at this site. So here, you're looking sort of Southwest, to the west behind these buildings, the State Route 520. And here, you can see, a few of the buildings that are part of the Evans Plaza complex as you can see on on the sign there. And here's another photo, again, sort of looking this time in northwesterly direction taken from 140th Ave as well with another building with with commercial tenants there. So, again, the the the proposed amendment is a change in the future land use map as it applies to the site outlined in sort of white gray.

And it's important to sort of provide a little bit of context about what that means, sort of the the future land use map. The future land use map is policy oriented, and a future land use designation, like you can see here on the screen, the existing land use designation general commercial, that represents the community's long term vision for that area, for that specific area. And those land use designations are meant to provide a broad direction on the general uses that are permitted on that site and also, like, sort of the the the intensity scale and density of uses on that on in that area. So the future land use designation is part of the comprehensive plan. So that's the long range sort of vision policy for the city of Bellevue.

And, like, more detailed requirements is, like, how you can you, like, develop your property, like, in terms of uses and the buildings that you can build. Like, that is further defined in the land use code and and the zoning map. So that's more like implementation of that vision. And the future land use designation then links together that land use vision with specific land use districts that live in the land use code. And here, I there's a future land use map key in the land use element of the comprehensive plan, and the language taken here is is is from that same key.

And then you can see the difference between the existing land use designation, general commercial, and then the proposed designation, low rise to mixed use. General commercial, both the land use designation and the related land use district, sort of in a general sense, don't allow for residential uses. I think you can only have, like, residential uses when it's, like, sort of a an accessory or subordinate use to a commercial use, but not like standalone residential. And then low rise to mixed use is sort of a mixed use district, but then does include housing or residential uses and then at, like, the higher end of the low scale and density that you can find in the comprehensive plan. So one another element to point out here is for low rise to mixed use.

That was one of the land use designations that was created with so that the large update to the comprehensive plan and sort of the twenty twenty two, twenty twenty four time frame that most of you are very involved with. The related land use district, so that the land use district and land use code to implement the land use designation doesn't exist today, but is part of the HOMA, Luca, or housing opportunities in mixed use areas, nonuse code amendment. That is in development, I think, the at the next planning commission meeting on January 28. On January 28. That's, again, on the on the agenda for a study session item.

And so it's just important to note that we're often proposed map amendments do include sort of a concurrent rezone application. That is not the case for the specific application because you can apply for a rezone as that land use district doesn't exist today in the land use code. So that is still under development with the HOMA proposal. So that's just an important one to note. And, again, sort of the CPA process or the comprehensive plan amendment process is a separate process from rezone applications, different type of process, different goes through a hearing examiner and city council.

Planning commission is very involved with comprehensive plan amendments as we can see here tonight. So moving on to then the question of geographic scope. So before that first step, that threshold review plan and commission reviews the geographic scope of what will be discussed at the public hearing. In the geographic scope, the land use code sets a limited set of criteria of what should be considered when considering the scope of a proposed amendment, and that is property that is nearby, similarly situated, that shares characteristics of the proposed amendment sites, and then sort of a last overarching criterion is to sort of avoid being overinclusive when considering the geographic scope. And we'll just sort of peel off those different criteria step by step and sort of narrow it down to, what is in the end captured by the staff recommendation.

So the first step is to look at nearby properties. And what does that mean nearby? That means parcels that share a parcel boundary. There's one of those right there. Or that are located across from a public right of way from the proposed amendment site.

And this is then sort of the basis. The properties identified here on the screen with those access are sort of the basis for the analysis of the second and the third, criteria. And as I said, just sort of peeling it off layer after layer. So not all nearby properties are similarly situated. And, sort of two characteristics are key here is that properties are located in the Bridal Trails neighborhood area.

And then secondly, that they are in sort of part of what is identified as the Pineview Neighborhood Center in the comprehensive plan. In the land use element, several neighborhood centers are identified. Neighborhood centers are commercial mixed use areas that are meant to serve some, if not all, sort of the daily needs of the the surrounding communities, surrounding residential neighborhoods. What is different here is, like, compared to the last slide, you'll see that all the sort of properties to the south have sort of are no longer included. Those properties are in the Bell Red area, and Bell Red is a very different area than Bridal Trails in terms of sort of land use vision.

It's also a study session item later tonight. So they have their own future land use designations, sub area plan policies to guide future development there in in Belgrade. So those are not similarly situated properties to the ones that are part of the proposed amendment side. Then all the other, in other words, the the remaining properties are all in the bridal trails area, but then some are not part of the Pineview Neighborhood Center. And the Westminster Chapel, that large church property to the Northeast where it sort of says bridal trails, a large parking lot and a large building immediately to the east, that is not part of the area identified as the Pineview Neighborhood Center and is therefore not similarly situated to the proposed amendment site.

And then the third criterion is similarly situated, and some of the nearby properties don't share sort of the same key, site characteristics that the proposed amendment site has. So as I said before, the Evans Plaza, the commercial complex is, sort of single story commercial buildings with a range of, like, restaurants, retail uses, and so on. And three properties, the one at the corner sort of located on the same block and two on the opposite side of a 140 that share those same characteristics. And then other properties either have like, are different in terms of, like, development patterns, land use, or they are in an area that has a different future land use designation today, a future land use designation that already allows for mixed use, including residential, sort of different from the area here that has a general commercial designation. Maybe I'll just quickly go back to this map to highlight that.

So you can see the lane's designation to the the parcel immediately west. It was like a wooded parcel West Of Hundred And 36th. And also the area North of Northeast 24th, that's all low rise office mixed use, already allows for residential uses and therefore does not share those same characteristics as the proposed amendment size and these three remaining properties that you see highlighted on the on the screen. And then sort of the last criteria is the minimum necessary, the minimum necessary to expand the geographic scope of the proposed amendment side, if if at all. There are some there were two other properties that were sort of similar in character and shared, like, you know, same characteristics in terms of land use, development patterns, access.

But while those properties are similar, the outcome, if to decide if it would be decided to include those properties would be to include another block with a general commercial land use designation consisting of additional parcels and measuring a total area of about five acres and just a shared general commercial lane use designation would then be also insufficient for for expanding the geographic scope of the proposal. And then to conclude, the staff recommendation is to expand the geographic scope of the amendment to include that one adjacent of immediately adjacent parcel, the corner parcel that's a half acre in size. As that parcel shares key characteristics of access, land use, and development patterns, and it's also similarly situated to the proposed amendment side. So we're nearing the end of the presentation. So, like, after reviewing the staff recommendation, it is, up to the planning commission to provide direction, and there are, several options there is to, expand the geographic scope per the staff recommendation or to not expand the geographic scope.

And then the third option would be to identify additional properties to include. And before closing out, just quickly on sort of public notice and comment, this is a process for application. That means there's, like, a whole process in terms of noticing, public hearings, and so on. So notice of application was published last year. Signs went up, as you can see here on the screen.

And then throughout the process, throughout this comprehensive plan amendment process, public comments can come in. We've had some inquiries. There's some questions for clarification from community members. We haven't received, like, sort of the more formal written comments as in, like, I'm for or against what is proposed. And in terms of sort of city engagement, so the city is reviewing the application.

It's not the applicant, but staff will provide a presentation to membership of the Bridal Trails Community Club to just give an overview of what the comprehensive plan amendment process is about and to identify opportunities for the community to to engage and and weigh in on on the application also in future public hearings. And with that, sort of next steps. First thing would be in this two step process is to set the date for the public hearing, also after reviewing the geographic scope. And then lastly, which would take place later this year if this proposal were to proceed through the process as final review in the 2026. But I'll just go back to slide number three to about the two items for direction here tonight.

But that concludes the presentation.

Thanks, Tion. Is that okay if we go round of one question and then second round? Follow-up question count as a second question. What's your Lou? Oh, woah. Oh, no. No. You're good.

Thank you, Tun. I appreciate the, the presentation. I I'll I'll I'll maybe ask the basic one here. So what are the downsides for the property owner of the, the additional parcel if we choose to include them, within this? Like, they they can they opt out if they choose not to? But if you could just highlight kind of what the impact would be to the property owner, that'd be helpful.

Yes. That's a good question. So it's a two step process. First, like, of course, the application for amending the comprehensive plan, which would then, you know, if approved and going through the whole process with planning commission and and city council, would still need to be followed by a rezone application. The existing use on-site is consistent with the pro is a is a commercial usage, consistent with both the current and the proposed land use designation, and it would be up to the property owner, if at all, to decide to move forward with a separate reasonable application for their for their property.

Got it. And have they given indication on where they stand? I know we heard a little bit from the other group, but I'm just curious if you heard anything from that property owner.

I have not heard directly from them. All property owners that have property within a 500 foot radius from this amendment side, so inconsiderate of any, like, expanded scope, they receive written notice of the notice of application and will also if planning commission decides to set the public hearing, we'll also receive written notice of that specifically.

Okay. But nothing yet. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that.

Commissioner Ferris. Sorry again. I forgot your name.

No problem. I certainly appreciate your presentation, and I also support the addition of that one parcel. But I wonder, could we go back? I'm gonna guess it was about slide 14 just to see some of those parcels. Let's see where yeah. That's just whichever one. Like, so the parcel that is to the North of one fortieth and I'm sorry. North Of 520 and East of one fortieth. I know you've not included that in the scope, and it was under the understanding that's more than what's minimum. I understand that.

But can we just revisit quickly what is just I I guess I'm leaning towards if the one in the Evans Plaza is changed designation. I would likely like to include that other parcel as well. So I guess I'd like to hear a little bit more from your perspective of whether that's even feasible to consider.

If that was planning commission direction to include, I think it would be feasible to consider. I think what I said during the presentation is sort of, like, the key point. It it does meet all those first three criteria. It's just more that the expanding the geographic scope of the amendment to include that would, like, sort of open up the whole block and go from, like, a 10 acre site to a five acre site where, yeah, they are similarly situated. They are nearby.

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

This is a quick comment. Obviously, my design is to be able to increase housing supply, and it seems logical to me that that might also apply. So thank you for your comment.

Thank you. Commissioner Gepeau?

Yeah. I I wanted to ask, I'm gonna ask a compound question, and it's kind of a follow-up to, commissioner Verus' question because I had the same question about that, parcel across the street. One of the things that I I would like to know, though, in trying to, figure out how to interpret a term like minimum necessary, which is not particularly clear, is I'd like to know a little bit more about how low rise to mixed use is currently defined in the draft HOMA. What does that allow in terms of the number of stories and density? And I'd also like to know the the transit connections for that for that area.

Literally, it was five questions. But

No. That's that's that's that's two quest that's a compound question. Single in a single sentence. Disease.

Yes.

Sue started off that.

Seriously. Sue start

off with transit access. And, again, like, just wanna sort of reiterate, like, the two step process about, like, first seeing whether this should be included in the in the in the work program, and then secondly, evaluating more the the the merits of the proposal. For in terms of transit access, I don't know exactly for bus access. I did go to the side by light rail, and that was a twenty minute walk from the BellRed Station. And I think it's sort of equidistant between that station and like, the site is equidistant between, like, the the Delrat Station and the Overlake Village Station further east.

So twenty minute walk to to to either of them. And then the other question about, like, how it's defined in HOMA. So just to bring it back to sort of, like, the land use designation question. So the land use designation is really, like, the the the community's long term vision, like, land use vision for for Bellevue. So what is in the future land use map key for what is is requested or or or proposed as low rise to mixed use.

So the definition there, that is sort of fixed and settled in the comprehensive plan, but then that related land use district, which is, let me grab my notes, which is part of the HOMA proposal right now is up to seven stories of mixed use development. So that is a related one, but that's under, yeah, under development and under review by the by the planning commission. So it's, yeah, seven stories of of mixed use development. Yeah.

Okay. Great. Thank you.

Commissioner Kennedy.

Thank you for the presentation. I thought this was really clear and very helpful. I very much appreciate the maps, so thank you. On this picture, where is the half acre parcel that we're bringing into it that the owner is not here and hasn't applied? What what where is it? Can you remind me?

The small square one. It's the blue X.

It's the blue X on the corner of X.

Everyone I said blue X. Everybody.

Alright.

Okay. And and just a point of clarification for what I I got a little confused in the exchange with commissioner Ferris. So the parcel that is not being considered that commissioner Ferris you were recommending be included is

To the

east. On the opposite side of one fortieth. Yeah. Got it. Okay. Okay. And that's a five acre parcel that's currently general commercial.

No. It's a it's it's a it's a block sort of bound by hundred and fortieth to the west, twenty fourth to the north, and then sort of five twenty wraps around it. It's sort of a triangular shape Okay. A block. And there are, I think, five or six different parcels in there. And then the ones on the western end, there are three no, four parcels, but they, like, they function together as one side. It's the Dunlumber warehouse and store and Okay. Parking lot.

Got it. I I I think this has been incredibly clear, particularly for the question of should this be considered as part of the work plan so that we can consider it on the the merits. It appears that there are enough questions associated with you know, that that this could be an opportunity to me. So appreciate the presentation. I'll have a lot more questions when we get to the merits, but I think that's probably more appropriate then. So thanks.

You. Commissioner.

Thank you. I have a similar comment to commissioner. So if we look at the pass parcel to the west, that's already zoned for low rise. And then if we could consider that block to the east, then you could consolidate the entire wedge, right, between 520 and North 24 and Viewpoint Park as just one area that you could unlock housing. So I would be interested to know if that could be considered. Uh-huh. Otherwise, I agree with the proposal from staff.

Yes. Again, I think that would be they share the same characteristics, sort of similar land use and development patterns within an area that has the same land use designation, general commercial. I think here, just like the staff recommendation, looking at that sort of minimum necessary is not to go too far beyond the scope of what was applied for by the applicant. So, yeah, that's really not it it does really, like, sort of hinge on the determination direction from planning commission whether that is the minimum necessary or that additional property should be considered there.

Commissioner Ningchen.

Thank you. Everyone's preempted my my questions here already. I agree with commissioner Ferris and commissioner Villa Vasis. I'd like to see staff explore, including that kind of oddly shaped triangular area there. I I get the concerns about not wanting to exceed scope, but we might end up with just that one little area that's zoned or that's that's designated a little bit differently than the others. And I'd I'd rather see it all as one kind of contiguous designation there. So I don't have any question, but I support that

look into it.

Thank you. I have a quick question. That triangle ish on the left side of the parcel, it's all trees. Is it what is what is happening there? I know you guys your Google Map was a little bit sketchy. When I was opening my Google map, it was, like, all full of trees. What is happening in that parcel? I cannot recall it.

Yes. It's wooded parcel. It is owned by Puget Sound Energy. I'm not aware of any plans for that specific site. I went out last week to the site, it yeah. It's just very wooded now. No.

And in in that Google, I think it's near slide, I don't know, 9 or whatever. I think Slide 9. Can we, like, make that Google map better? I just feel it's deceiving that it looks like a empty ugly lot, but I don't know if there was one Google map. Oh. I don't know which yeah. Here we go. This one. I feel when you open a Google Map, it doesn't look like that. I just want that area looks green because I feel it's interesting to know that just like a really green area, which is good for two floor. Yeah. Thank you. Sorry. I'm defending Google Map here for you. I think that's my that's my first question.

Should we go second round? Okay. Question, Lou?

Maybe I'm gonna get to the root here of that minimum necessary framework. I guess, is the is the intention of that framework that you put before us to reduce the overall impact to the, like, you know, the the the residents, the neighborhoods? Like, what I guess it'd be helpful for us to know why exactly where we could plot using

that framework to apply this.

Yeah. Sure. It is really when I also look back at past comprehensive plan amendments, Expanding the geographic scope of proposed amendments is not done that that often. And and when the geographic scope is is expanded, it's only with, like, minimal, properties to be added. I think it's also here is that the property owner for the complex that is outlined here in red does come forward with sort of, in the end, although from what I've heard also during oral comment, no concrete plans, but, like, there's in the end some intent to do something with that property.

That is for other properties to the further to the east, but also including that one corner property, I'm not familiar with with any sort of intent to develop or add any housing to to that area. It would just increase the scope of the of the proposal and, like, the review that is necessary for that. I think here that corner property specifically was included also to have a future land use map that sort of reads and feels as something coherent, not leaving out very small because this is then sort of the the, you know, community's long term vision for an area. So then leaving, for instance, one corner property on a much large larger block to say, like, oh, well, there, we have a different vision for what how that area should develop. It's more for consistency and for for for making it coherent.

More what I'm getting at is, like, with the the eastern property or the eastern lots there. You know, if we are applying a minimum necessary lens to this to basically prevent scope creep, I I get that also. But if there's, like, a bigger reason why we want to reduce the changes that we're applying to the comprehensive plan like that, I guess I was more getting to that. Like, are we significantly altering other parts of the content with cascading effects if we do this, or is it more just we generally don't want to expand the scope of something that we're reviewing?

I I just wanna add on a little bit about the purpose of, privately initiated comprehensive plan amendments. So council starts, sort of broader work programs, so, like, the update to the subarea plans. And in those broader work programs, we, you know, look at an entire neighborhood center and talk about the the future and how it should be arranged, that type of thing. But be between those updates, you know, we we can't do everything all at once. So between those updates, the code recognizes that there may be needs a need to tweak the map or to tweak the comprehensive plan, and so it allows for people to bring forward, proposals for amendments.

And the reason that there it's minimum necessary is so that exactly as you were saying, the scope creep, it doesn't start moving toward, well, we should just, know, consider the entire neighborhood center. It's really just this is kind of a something that we should consider, a tweak we should consider between or we could. Won't won't pass judgment. We could consider between the update to the comprehensive plan.

Okay. Thank you.

Yeah. Appreciate it.

Commissioner Ferris, thank you.

Appreciate all of the input. I'm still inclined to say I would like to have staff look at expand that scope to that those lots. It and, again, I think commissioner Nietzschean also mentioned that if we don't do it, that's gonna be that one parcel that's a one off, and doesn't that doesn't feel quite right. And and I I'm assuming that with the change in designation, nobody's mandating anything. It's allowing essentially more flexibility in what could go there in the future. So, again, from my perspective, I would like to have us increase the the scope geographic scope to include those lots.

Sorry. Just to, make sure I understand, to include those lots East Of Hundred And 40th or just a corner parcel?

Correct.

Correct.

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

Thank you. Commissioner Geppel?

Yeah. Can you, can you pull up the, the map with the x's on it that shows the parcels East of, 1 40th? Yeah. And then you had some ones that with progressively less access. Yeah. There's one. Yeah. I'd I'd like to just pass one, commissioner Ferris' comments as well. This is what I would, suggest in terms of additions, as well. That's it. Yeah.

I can't believe it. Just kidding. Can we shake Kennedy? Okay.

Yeah. So so just a two part quest one question. So one was I just wanted to clarify the intent that we are considering today. What what I understood was we're considering whether or not the proposed amendment is sufficiently nearby similarly situated, shares characteristics, and avoids being overly comprehensive enough for us to say, yes, we should move to step one in the CPA privately initiated amendment process. Is that correct on what we're we're considering?

Believe so. Like Mod summarize the point. In my own words, it's like the next step would be to have threshold review public hearing. One of the things was to set the date, and then it is the other questions here, what should be the geographic scope of the proposed amendment? Should that for instance, as staff recommended, be that one corner parcel added to K. What is outlined in red on the screen.

Okay. Okay. Super helpful. I didn't realize we were also giving guidance today on the geographic scope. Is that something that we can also modify in the future when we consider the merits, or is this the decision? This is the decisional.

I believe today is the decision.

Got it. Okay. Very helpful. Thank you. So then I have a couple additional questions to this one question, which is when we think about general commercial, I thought it was really helpful to see the key on your prior slide from the comp plan amendment.

What is hard to tell from that language is what is not allowed in a low rise to mixed use that is allowed in general commercial. What are we preventing these landowners from doing by moving to it? One of them wants this. What can't be done in the future if we change this?

Yeah. That's a good question. So, yeah, the future land use designation is sort of at the at the vision level sort of that is described or these descriptions on the screen speak to that. I think then in here for it's the HOMA proposal that would implement that future land use vision in, like, code and and, you know, what can you build and how can you use property under that code. That would be, like, a further analysis for all the properties further east to see how they would fare under what is like right now in the strike to raft of Homa.

I don't I don't have, like, an immediate answer for all those properties about if they would be consistent later on. I think so with, you know, the sole commercial uses, so they would be aligned with what is, listed for the future land use designation. If they were to go forward with a rezone application in the future, those potentially added properties, I would have to check what that would mean for their existing uses. But that's sort of a more of a implementation question than than sort of a a future land use question.

Kind of. I think for me, it really significantly relates to the decision on the geographic scope. If if this this lens isn't comprehensive, but if if we were to rezone that entire section of parcels, is there any general commercial left in the Bridal Trails area? If someone had a use that we're preventing from this change, could they still do it in Bridal Trails?

So two things there. I believe there's more land within the general commercial designation for the West on, like, Northup Way

That that needed as general commercial, that wouldn't be impacted?

No. That would be beyond the the the scope of the proposal. And then secondly, I think what is important to note here that, like, unless a property owner moves forward with a rezone application

They can continue their current use.

Yes. And even so, even after rezoning is adopted, like, usually, like, in the code, like, nonconforming uses, you know, there are provisions for those uses to and buildings to continue. But here right now, I think it's important to consider it's like versus the future land use designation question, like a rezone application. Like, you do not you're not, as a property owner, forced or required to move forward with the rezone application after that. So yep.

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

Thanks. Commissioner Villavesses?

Yeah. One question. Does expanding the geographic scope pose any risk to the owner that is submitting the applications, Like, in terms of less likely to be approved or more time for approval? I mean, this is almost a year long process. So

Yeah. So a proposal would need to be reviewed and also for, like, environmental impacts or SIPA review. So increasing the size of the proposed site would also result in, from a theoretical point of view and from an analysis point of view, in potentially more development. So if you increase the this like, this is like a sort of a 10 acre site. Staff recommendations to add a half acre site, that wouldn't mean so much for the scope of what you need to analyze under SIPA.

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

So is it possible that there's an expansion and then the application moves forward and then it gets rejected because of c parts, something else. And then the order needs to start again without like, it just gets rejected outright or or maybe gets just approved for his own partial. Does that make sense? I don't wanna be in a position where we encourage an expansion, and then this expansion creates some constraints that result in the rejection for his application at not no fault of his own.

That's a that's a good question. Like, yeah, as I said, it would increase the scope of the sort of the the the amendment, and therefore, it could have implications. I I don't know, like, of if later on at some point, it would then result in, like, the proposed amendment side being scaled back. If that's an option at all, I'm not aware of that. I do think what is important to note that if an application, does not get approved, that then there's a three year limitation on sort of that same side being proposed again for a comprehensive plan amendment.

That's it. Thank you. Commissioner Nietzsche?

Yeah. I I guess I just have a follow-up on that then. Kate, this might be a question for you. Do you know if later on if we expand the scope on this and we go through SIPA and there's some issue with the additional bits that we wanna end add here, can we amend it to just have the original? Or

Matt, can I ask you to weigh in on this?

Hello, Matt. Happy 2026 to you.

I have never seen that happen before. Typically, the planning commission would use a very, very light touch because this is a privately initiated comp plan amendment, and you have a property owner that's asking the city to consider it. I do think that everything Tun said is is a factor. I think if the planning commission were to unilaterally decide to expand the scope, that also could affect some of the neighbors and potential opposition to it, which also could end up being a situation where if it's very narrow and just the application, you may not have as much opposition to it. But if you expand the scope, it might be more than surrounding properties are comfortable with.

I don't know off the top of my head, though, whether you could then retract the scope after you expanded it, but I can go and look at that and try probably figure it out while you're having the discussion too. But in general, I would caution on overreaching for a privately initiated comp plan amendment. It's an application from a private property owner.

Thank you, Matt. I think for me personally, that was my actually next question about what are the risks we are taking by adding more parcels. And maybe that church on the North Side wants to come and they want to say, we wanna upsell and this gets expanded and expanded. And then I personally don't wanna take a risk. I'm even not happy about adding that to small one.

I understand they said they're fine with it if necessary. I felt whatever is caused to be a fast process for them to we see more housing, that's my that's my goal personally. And it's like literally twenty one minutes walk to Barret, twenty seven minutes walk to Village Station, which is, like, good. It's, like, good walkable. It's a good location to have the low rise. Can you guys nod about if you want to add those east side parcels or no? Because I want to see how where you are standing. This is no. No. Okay.

Alright. You are just backing up. Okay. Good. Should we go another round, or you're feeling comfortable about taking motion? Commissioner Farris Ninchant, do you have a question? You're good? You're good? I was like I'd like to make a

motion that we direct staff to have a public hearing on February 11 on land use code amendment.

You Can I do first the geography if we're gonna add that to small parcel first or not? Yeah. I was

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

Any discussion all in favor?

Aye. Aye.

And then now the second motion for the public. I mean, the first one. The other another round of motion. Jeez.

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

Second? Second. Second. In discussion, all in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Thank you so much. Thanks. Thanks. Great discussion. Thanks for keeping one. Okay. Sorry. Let me go to my paperworks. Do we need to take a break or we go to power to run? Power to run?

Through it.

Bray?

Power to run.

Okay. Oh my gosh. We we need a we need, like, a small break. Let's have a five minutes break and come back. Thank you.

Sorry. Okay. We are back. Our second station item tonight is a check-in on the Byrard Road forward Luka. The planning commissioner reviewed the proposal of Luka scoping May.

The first phase of engagement has come to the close, and a draft of the code has been released to the public. This is the session. We'll provide a briefing on the scope and approach for the look forward Luca, as well as progress updates on the outreach analysis completed so far. Thank you so much for code and policy assistant director, Nick, and planning manager, Christina. They will present us the BellRed. Thank you.

Great. Thank you, and good evening, chair Conlu, vice chair Lou, mayor Malikutian, and members of the commission. I'm excited to be here tonight with an update on the BellRed look forward Luca or land use code amendment. As noted, it's been a bit since we've been in front of you on this topic. Last study session was back in May.

That was when we were about to embark on our outreach. And so we're excited to report some of the findings from our phase one outreach approach. I think what you're going to hear is a challenge in balancing the long term vision for BellRed with the various stakeholder perspectives that we've been hearing. So we do expect that's gonna continue to be a challenge as we move into our phase two engagement. But the way we've set this up is phase one is resulting in a draft code.

It is a working draft, so we've got some incomplete sections. We've got just some general policy concepts, but we really wanted to be transparent in our work, get that out there for some feedback and reaction, then dive deep with some of our stakeholders as we embark on phase two. And then we'll come back to you with a revised draft and start working through it back in March. So give us a little time to work through the draft, but we do wanna orient you to kind of the changes so you have a clear understanding of just what's being addressed in the the Bell Red look forward, Luca. So with that, I'll pass over to Christina.

Thank you. You're always so fast with that. Thank you. So, again, this evening, we are information only, as Nick noted. So the components we're gonna be covering tonight, again, a recap of the vision and policy framework that we've been working within.

We will do a a little bit of a summary on our phase one engagement process. And then the bulk of the content, because we do have that working draft out, will give a bit of an orientation towards how to navigate that draft, some of the key concepts that are structuring it, and then wrap it up with our next steps. So first, really, high level context with BellRed. It's really interesting to see it in geographic context with some of our other growth centers. So we do have this kind of contiguous growth corridor, but Bell Red really takes up quite a bit of that land area even, you know, compared to Wilburton in downtown.

So we're working with quite a bit of variation and diversity within the district as well as a lot of potential with our two light rail stations. And also worth noting, while it's not on the map, the city of Redmond also has quite a bit of development planned around that Overlake Station in the Northeast. So, again, looking back to the 2,009 sub area plan, which we are now working on that look forward look back to look forward, now to look forward, that an original vision was set in the, at that time, far distant future, looking forward to light rail, ultimately with the vision of transforming this light industrial area into a transit oriented development and green space district. And a lot has happened since then, since that updated code came in. We've had more than a million square feet of office in the Spring District.

The city's invested more than 300,000,000 in improvements towards public transportation in those that arterial system. I've had around 3,000 new housing units constructed, and I did a little back of the math looking at Sound Transit's data dashboard. The two lines exceeding expectations even without the 90 connection, averaging roughly almost 9,000 daily boardings since the Redmond extension happened last year. So very, very exciting to see. But now on to the BellRed look forward, I offer all of that up to say this isn't a situation where we're we're throwing a whole lot out and starting fresh.

We have an affirmed vision. We have new opportunities. We also have some clear areas for improvement, but it's a it's a refinement and a look forward. We do have an updated that came that updated affirm vision came in through our updated sub area policies and map adopted October 2024. We're also working with some fresh increased housing and jobs targets.

So again, more on that vision. The BellRed, it's a compact, walkable mixed use corridor, a community sort supported by light rail, and a robust multimodal transportation network that supports sustainability, placemaking, and the arts, a broad range of housing at various levels of affordability, comprehensive connected parks and open space system, and an area emphasizing environmental and stream corridor restoration. So a big area, but also a lot to accomplish within that area. So core topic areas that were advanced through the updated policy and will be trickling through into the code. Not everything is going to be reflected in the land use code.

We also have functional plans, kind of programmatic work addressing some of these pieces, but number of changes to land use, housing, and urban design, cultural and community connections, transportation and utilities, and streams. Some significant improvements across all of those areas. The Luka was launched by council last year, back in February 2025. And at the initiation, the priorities the council shared were calling for stronger incentives for stream daylighting, directing us to explore incentives for affordable commercial space and performance venues to support arts, culture, and small businesses. They request a review of affordable housing requirements to balance feasibility and equity, and finally, emphasize the need to strengthen the multimodal transportation network to improve walking, biking, transit, and connectivity.

So now on to the phase one of outreach that happened roughly over last fall and winter. As Nick noted, the general goal was to build this shared understanding, gather some early feedback from the community and stakeholders, build relationships. We held internally a number of listening sessions with key staff implementing portions of the code. We engaged with the Bellevue Development Committee over multiple meetings last year. That group includes a lot of developers and property owners in the area, among others.

The staff participated number of tabling at certain in person events, tabling at meta, other kind of community events in the area. We did an online questionnaire that went out to all addresses in BellRed. And we, as as is always the case, a lot of direct outreach with interested parties, kind of one off meetings, conversations, that kind of thing. The online questionnaire, we did have that mailer. We got a 161 responses.

You know, could could be more, but we think it was actually a pretty pretty solid response there. We respondents were asked to select from a list of their pick their top three priorities for BellRed, and we see the the four that really stood out. The pedestrian and bicycle mobility, really loud and strong, parks and open space, affordable housing, and arts and cultural spaces. Across all of our engagement, a number of really common themes and insights that we've been hearing, a lot of comments on safety and mobility concerns for people walking and biking through the district, and associated as well, really wanting to see that desire for more human scale design and walkability, comfort in the pedestrian environment, a strong desire for arts and a vibrant, vibrant, connected public spaces, reinforcing the importance of preserving local identity in small businesses. We also heard a lot of support for the local streets concept, seeing that that walking permeability is essential for safety, walkability, economic vitality, and equitable access, but that this is a really complicated topic.

So in the initial rollout of local streets with the very rigid grid system that was originally set, acknowledging we also heard a lot of practical concerns on how that layout should really reflect and respond to parcel boundaries, site constraints, but also noting the importance of addressing a lot of those connectivity gaps within the district. So wanting to find a way to strike a balance between those strict requirements and also ensuring that we get those vital connections. So now on to the components of the working draft. So this draft was released December 31. It's exciting to see people engaging with it.

We're really going to be using this as a as a tool for engagement over the next couple months here. And now structurally, there's a there's something important to note. So with the introduction of Wilburton, the way that we approached that was to set up what we call call generally mixed use land use districts. And the vision is that while they were initially rolled out in Wilburton, that those could be applied more broadly in places where we have the higher intensity kind of uses. And as a related note in general, we are, as a team, looking for more opportunities to consolidate and make things more consistent across.

So this is an effort along that way. So as it stands now, BellRed is as an overlay section, it is quite isolated. There's a lot of that code that's written very differently than other parts of our code, a lot of approaches that are different, and not necessarily in a way that's really beneficial. So structurally, what we've done is we have pulled the components of that mixed use land use district section introduced with Wilburton that we see as common across mixed use land use districts into their own section. And we've brought in some additional new mixed use land use districts there as well.

And now components that are truly distinct to either BellRed or Wilburton are in respective overlays that apply. So there's kind of this base mixed use districts. And then if you're in Wilburton, there's some specifics there. And if you're in Bellred, there's some specifics there. So think things like the amenity incentive systems.

That's where you really get at a lot of that district specific detail, but getting a lot more consistency by kind of drawing from the mixed use districts here. Okay. Also, with this draft, we are proposing updating our zoning to track one to one with the future land use map, which you can see here for BellRed. So today, we have the the BellRed land use districts are are kind of hyperspecific, so everything is BR. We have retained a few districts that are do remain more specific, looking at some of the the medical districts and the the Bell Red general commercial.

The BellRed general commercial used to extend much further across the district to the South. Now it's more limited to North Of Northup, kind of serving as a buffer to 520 up there. But otherwise, across the district, the sub area plan updated comprehensive plan has expanded significantly with the areas where we have high rise and mid rise development, really capitalizing on the opportunity in our station areas. So when you look at the draft, you will see these updated updated names for land use districts to align. All right.

And another big concept introduced with the sub area plan are both the arts district intensive area, which you heard about in Comet, as well as neighborhood districts. So the sub area plan introduced seven separate neighborhood districts with slightly different policy approaches and visions for each. The way that right now in the draft you see that come through is that we are proposing setting up the amenity incentive system such that scoring for amenities can be adjusted to be slightly different in those different neighborhood districts to kind of reflect the priorities there. So an amenity that we might think is a higher priority in one district compared to another will earn you more FAR in that district where it's identified as a priority. And there's a similar approach to that downtown currently.

We're using a similar structure there. The arts district intensive area, we are also we'll get to the amenity incentive system in a bit. That is one area where we see that coming in the land use code is we've selected a set of amenities that are prioritized within that district for development. On land use flexibility, we are recommending shifting towards an approach where all uses are permitted unless they are specifically prohibited or subject to conditions, same as Wilburton. We are also going to be implementing the citywide approach to nonconforming uses structures and sites that's moving forward with HOMA.

So onto local streets. Again, this is a big topic, so we're saying this is driven in policy. It's been refined, still evolving. So we see this. This has been a really important policy we're continuing to bring forward, not a new concept geared around supporting walkability, connectivity, multimodal access.

The revised map we're about to show is the result of a lot of internal review. Our goal with these revisions was to think about what are those connections that are most critical to be provided as public street segments, and where are the areas where we can be more flexible on how connections happen. So under the current system, it's a grid that is exclusively public streets and more limited typologies. And under the updated system, we are proposing limiting the number of specifically designated public streets. And for areas outside of that, we have clarified that there is an area where block size limits apply.

So if you have a larger site, a site larger than 105,000 square feet, you can you will be needing to break down that site into blocks. But if you're in developing a large site that is not otherwise having to require public streets that are very specific, you have some more flexibility to define those blocks using private street typologies. So it's adding really considerable flexibility there and still getting some connections. We just only wanted to show those segments on the map that are more specifically defined would need to be publicly dedicated and meet standards for publicly dedicated streets. So ultimately, our goal here is to be focused more on outcomes rather than rigid grids, really prioritizing connectivity, smaller blocks, and access where it's most important.

So this is the current map just to get us thinking. So as you look at this, you might think those are very even. They are. And when you look at parcels, when you look at the topography, it a lot of these are quite challenging, do run through the middle of sites. So now moving on to the revised map.

I didn't get them at the similar scale, so I can't flip quite back and forth. But our our major priorities were, you know, really maintaining those those Green Street, East West connections, and then also maintaining selected other connections selected to the north and south. But we will see, looking at those property boundaries, a number of those larger sites we do know are going to be broken up further through the block requirements. Through the legend. Oh, yes.

Yes. Yeah. Because it's quite there. So the dark pink, those are our local streets. So that is a publicly dedicated street typology, more of a traditional two lane street with sidewalks.

And then the dashed pink, those are local streets that are in the permitting process that are going to be built out. The black dash are cases where we have interim streets that have been built. This has been one of the really complicated parts of implementing BellRed, because with these street requirements, we have cases where the first project to move forward won't be building out the full street. We had previously called these half streets. In reality, when you're going in first, that first person has to provide quite a bit more in terms of the infrastructure and the area.

They also get to kind of set the alignment and the elevation, so there's a trade off. But we are updating our language to call those interim streets instead because the reality is they're more than half streets. But we've got those connections. So those dashed areas are either half built out or going to be building out soon. And then the peach kind of brown, that is the area where those block size limits would apply.

So that's tracking with roughly the area where previously we'd had that full grid extended. You can also see there are some areas where the grid's been fully built out. So the the Spring District lower left there, that's that's reflecting more of the updated street grid. So it's a working draft in progress, but reflecting quite a bit of analysis on the city end. So now on to building design and affordable housing.

We are aligning with Wilburton design standards for height, floor plates, flexibility for mass timber, and life science. We have increased this will be increasing FAR and heights in the TOD overlay. We are recommending well, previously, the plan had been to move forward with both mandatory and voluntary options for affordable housing. We are recommending moving forward with one mandatory affordable housing concept. It would be moving forward the same approach that was brought forward with Wilburton.

So that's for rental, 10% at 80%. And then you can drop your percentage of units when going deeper on affordability. Similar approach for sale units. And there will be options for on-site, off-site, land transfer, or fee in lieu. We do anticipate the MFT up MFTE updates underway will support feasibility, that we are coordinating closely with the Office of Housing team working on that, though acknowledging that those changes are outside the Planning Commission review.

So onto the amenity incentive system. So both today and in the future, participation is required in order to exceed the base FAR for a project. Currently, in BellRed, we have a tiered system where projects have to first go through providing a certain amount of affordable housing, a certain amount of parks improvements. It's quite complex, and what we've been seeing is that the way that it's structured often rarely results in projects going forward with other amenities beyond affordable housing and parks, which, in some cases, can come at the expense of things like stream daylighting. So we have restructured the amenity system to be set up more similar to downtown.

So the tiered system would go away, though there is the mandatory housing component, which is always going to be required. And then again, we'll have adjusted scoring reflecting different priorities in different neighborhood districts. We have also narrowed the list to set certain amenities which must be prioritized within the arts district intensive area with the caveat that even in that area, for projects that are daylighting streams or providing a designated planned park or trail amenity in the sub area plan, that those can take precedence. So the flexibility there, knowing that those stream daylighting improvements will be really, really costly for projects to provide. So this is the list of amenity options.

Substantially, a lot of these are the same as today, but we're going to be updating the scoring. A few of these that I will note so in orange, these are basically fully new options. So the affordable commercial space, this was introduced with Wilburton. Same concept here that will now be an option in BellRed as well. With green building today, the incentive system just gives credit for either lead lead green lead gold or platinum.

So this would instead be updating to give our more comprehensive green building rule. And a few options which we're doing substantial updates for as well. We're working with King County on updating our provisions for regional TDR. We're also updating the design the requirements for public art to align using the standards from downtown instead that we were recommended as being better, and we've updated the provisions for outdoor plazas as well. There will be ongoing supporting analysis to inform the next draft, so continued economic and development feasibility analysis, looking at cost drivers and financial import performance, also informed by others in development services, the office of housing, and developer input.

We do have an updated affordable housing nexus study, which is going to be setting that legal basis for inclusionary zoning, calculating our maximum supportable fee in lieu. And then ongoing implementation review, we'll be continuing to identify technical issues and opportunities to improve clarity, working across departments, potentially adding or refining building and site standards. So starting to wrap it up now. As noted, we are fully underway in phase two of our work, refining the draft. So this earlier this morning, we had a a quick presentation with the BDC.

We're gonna be doing a deep dive with the BDC next month. We're also gearing up for an in person open house towards the February. Details to come for those in the audience. Coordinating a number of other meetings, continue direct outreach. We're also doing a series of internal deep dives, paging through the draft with internal staff to work through the code, and then gearing up for a full review on that revised draft, hopefully launching March, which then would carry us through our council action. And with that, I'm always thrown when it's an information only presentation. I was going to say that. Yeah. The informational.

Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. Is it okay if we go, like, one round and okay. Great. Western Lu, your name is at the first this time.

Are we doing one question, or are we just doing one round? I have few questions. But

One question. Because maybe the next person asks you a second question, and then we can save some time.

So I I wanna explore a little bit of this commercial affordable commercial space. It's a you know, it makes sense to me when we talk about affordable housing because there's a mechanism to actually enforce that, but I feel like we're still lacking that both on a city and a county level for affordable commercial. So could you define what you exactly you're talking about when you're meeting?

Yes. Yeah. And thanks for pointing that out, because this is something that gets brought up all the time, and it's very difficult. But fortunately, our economic development team has come up with a concept that we're pretty excited about, and there is a rule getting finalized with the details. But essentially and please correct me if I'm omitting something.

It defines standards for an eligible business, and so this would be vetted by the economic development team. So it's geared at small businesses, and I think that's defined by both employees and revenue. Don't recall exactly. But for driving the rent, the affordable rent would be determined by it sets a cap based on a ratio of operating expenses. So I think the rent can't exceed double the operating expenses for that space. So the economic development staff would help with the vetting for eligible tenants and also confirming that rent cap.

Maybe just a comment on that. If you're gonna separate affordable commercial or or actually, if you're if you're gonna do that and go through a vetting process for affordable commercial, you could consider combining your metrics or your criteria for childcare, I think it was in nonprofits, into that criteria and just putting it together. Because otherwise, you're separating two specific businesses away from other that are others that are also probably subject to the same, you know, operating expense ratios. You may as well just put that as one word for you.

Yeah. That's a good point. That had been, I think that the childcare and nonprofit space had been a legacy one in BellRed, and I agree it makes sense to to consolidate there.

Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Farris?

Similarly, I also have a couple things, but I'll try to limit it this time around. So one question, kind of two sections. One, of course, housing and specifically. You talked about there's 3,000 housing units that were developed. What was the goal back then?

That's a great question.

We don't know. Okay.

Let get back to you. Long time.

We know for sure that it was very likely underdeveloped, and we know for sure that the buildings were not maximizing the height that was allowed by code. So I'm assuming that you all are looking at, you know, what's happened there. Are there things that we can tweak to make sure that we can maximize development potential? So, again, you maybe can get back to me on what that looks like.

Yeah. We are definitely looking at that. And some of the heights, you know, they were they were awkward. I think, you know, commissioner Villavazas can probably attest to this, where the the heights were, you know, maybe a 110, a 120 feet. And people were wanting to stay in that wood frame category versus capture that additional floor and then switch construction type and incur a bunch of extra costs.

So we've tried to align as much as possible with the standards that were pretty well vetted with the development community, with you all as we worked on Wilburton, and so hoping that that addresses some of those concerns. Also, the heights were quite low in in Bell Red. It was a pretty bold kind of change in 2009, but looking at it compared to what we've done in other areas of our transit corridor, they're pretty modest. We have we have 40 foot building height limits in our TOD areas. That's changing with this code. So I'm hoping that those standards are really going to unlock some of that housing as well.

Great. Thank you.

Yeah. Commissioner Geppel?

I have one question. It's not a compound question. It's, and, and I wanna say too, that I really appreciate, some of the work that you're doing to try and bring consistency between the different sections. I know that's a challenging thing, but I think it'll pay dividends in the long term. So kudos to you for doing that. My question has to do with on the affordability requirements. Are we thinking about anything similar to the pioneer program that we did for Wilburton for BellRed? And if so, why? If not, why not?

Not at this time. I think the thinking we've seen I will say the reaction to the pioneer program, we did exhaust that program quite quickly. So we haven't really seen the need at this point. Don't Don't know if you'd share more on

the Well, and just so we're the terms are accurate here, the pioneer provision is a separate in the amenity incentive program, it allows kind of extra FAR to be earned for a certain amount of units. And then the catalyst provision Yep. Which was the temporary one that Christina was noting that was exhausted pretty quickly in Wilburton. And so that's something we are not proposing at this time. But what we did note and what we included in the memo as well is we are very closely coordinating with our office of housing group, and we're also relying on some of their inputs as it relates to economic analysis and some of the feasibility to support the mandatory approach with all of the other kind of expectations of development to determine for you all if we think that it's warranted.

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

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

Yeah. And thanks for correcting my wording. I I was referring to the to the to the Catalyst program. Yeah. I mean, the only only follow-up I'd say is you might wanna consider, I'd say, sort of catalyst light. You know, if if the Wilburton experience, you know, created a a gold rush mentality, maybe we need to just, you know, dial it back some. But I I I like the idea of people going out there and getting started. So I I like, in general, the catalyst the catalyst idea, but maybe it was too generous as originally proposed. Thank you.

Commissioner Kennedy?

Yeah. Thank you. Just one question. I wanted to better understand the private roads that are going to fall within the grid. I thought the map that you showed earlier was really helpful. We received a few comments already around grid planning and the need to ensure pedestrian access came out loud and clear in your outreach to the community. So I wanted to understand how the plan is supporting pedestrian access with the different tiers of roads that

you had on the on the screen. Yeah. So the the the the starting with the public roads. So we have local streets, which provide for kind of to full city standard sidewalks to travel lanes, and then green streets are also, again, providing for a high quality pedestrian environment. The the key challenge we run into with those public road kind of public roads built to public standards is that there isn't as much flexibility for the widths in the travel lanes.

So one option that is available on the private side would be to have for almost something like an alley typology. So one of the private typologies is called it's called an access corridor, and it basically just provides for a two lane road that can be used for private access to a site. In in the draft, we have also have noted that the that that that is only acceptable for bordering one side of a block. So that's an an acknowledgment that there are sites where it can be really challenging to get that full width. Could be helpful to just have that kind of an alley access, but that we don't want to see that becoming the norm to fully bound blocks because that specific typology is not really providing for that quality of pedestrian environment.

The other private option is an active transportation typology that still provides for pedestrian access but gives a little bit more flexibility. Ultimately, there's trade offs. There are requirements for the hours that that private street has to be open, But, you know, it it kind of it goes out of the city's hands, so kind of some trade offs there.

Don't know if you have anything else to add on the

Just that we're gonna do a deep dive on this specific topic. So appreciate you surfacing maybe some of the questions that you're you're having now so that we can be really well positioned to kind of dive into that discussion.

That would be welcomed. I think just graphical, you know, or visual representation that would be really helpful of the differentiation between the widths and axe and access for vehicles and pedestrians and bikes would be super helpful for me so I can picture what is an alley versus a well, you called it something else, but alley stuck in my head. Yeah. Surface. Surface. Yeah. So that that has such a great ring to it. So, yeah, I I think it'd just be really helpful to understand, you know, is it gonna be something like when I tried to go for a run around the casinos in Las Vegas and you can't connect anywhere?

Trying to avoid. You know?

Yeah. Like like, who does that? But, like, I think we in Bellevue, you would. So how how how do you how do you get through, and how are we ensuring access? Yeah.

Yeah.

That would be a really helpful description. Like, how will those connect? Even if they're not as wide as a public access street, Can I go for a run through that development and get to the other side? And I think that may be helpful to other commenters that we're looking for that pedestrian access too. So thank you.

For sure.

And with the map segments, we certainly have more confidence that they will connect. And to reinforce kind of the slide that Christina was sharing around the $300,000,000 of of city funded investments in our our arterial system, the local streets are really intended to complement that taxpayer investment that's been provided and to help support kind of the denser development that's being provided within the same areas that we're expecting these local streets to also be provided. And not only do they serve that circulation purpose and then the certainty around reliable maintenance and upkeep of it, but it's also opportunities for arts to be able to use that space. And we have just better control. It's our streets.

It's public streets for the community, for the public. So we view it as really integral to the vision, but we'll be sure to also kinda get into some of the details around the cross sections and what it means for the experience as well.

Thanks. Commissioner Nilsia?

Thank you. I can I ask two really quick ones? The first is just a clarifying question because I I I might have just missed this in the presentation. Can you explain what a green street actually is, like, compared to another street?

Yes. And I will say I I do better when I'm I'm working off of our working off of our streetscape plan. But a green street is one that has kind of enhanced facilities for pedestrians and bikes, so wider widths there, and it also builds in more of that natural drainage system. Stormwater is a big you know, natural stormwater management is a big component of green streets as well. So we see these as being really important, both they're both kind of environmental and utilities assets, and they're helping with that place making and definition for the district.

Great. Thank you. And then just one more really quick one. You mentioned the affordability the affordable housing nexus study and how that's gonna impact this. Can you just give me a rundown of the timeline of when we're expecting that to come out and how it kinda relates to the timeline for

I think it's just about done.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We'll be able to share that. We'll post it to the web page like, at the end of this month. Do you wanna talk about the how it impacts or influences?

Sure. Yeah. So the the NEXUS study is a legal requirement. So basically, it's saying calculating what is the maximum that we can justify asking for in exchange for providing a certain public benefit. So in this case, the approach that was used for our affordable housing nexus study was to look at, you know, what is the demand for lower wage jobs that's driven by these additions in commercial space and what is driven by adding these higher priced units where you have new residents driving demand for those lower wage jobs, what housing would be required to offset that impact roughly.

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

Thank you.

I'm really sharp today. Thank you. Commissioner.

Thank you. There's a lot of detail in here, and, it looks like it's really off to a great start. We have a lot of work already done. So this is exciting. See, I'd like to zoom out a little bit. Could you go to the street, grid?

Yeah.

So I've been seeing this local street map for a while, and I hear about it. And I'm just always surprised that we're not putting the streams in as part of this network of public space. The comp plan, when when we talked about it couple years ago, indicated that we wanted to, use the streams as the near parks that would serve as the organizing main public space in Belgrade. So I think this is something that we shouldn't set aside. We I think it needs to be incorporated here.

These local streets, it would be great to have perhaps a little bit more detail on these maps, really to understand what the, I guess, the urban fabric is gonna be here and how we're gonna be able to move, within the district without the use of a car. Right? Now on that sense, there's a huge opportunity here because the the district is bound by 05:20, by Belgrade Road, by one sixteenth, and one by 148. Like, there's it's small enough to be quickly accessed anywhere by car, but it's big enough that you can really move a lot of people within the district without a car. You have the train stations.

You have the streams that are gonna be probably and hopefully linear parts. And there's I mean, if there's an art district, you wanna, avoid a situation when people only drive there because that's it's not gonna be fun. Right? So I would, would love to see an overlay of pedestrian and bike network and hopefully segregated back bike network, which has not been possible in the city of Bellevue. But maybe this is where we can do it, and people can take the train here or take, Eastrail and get to Belgrade, and then they can walk or bike or go on a scooter anywhere within the district, go to the galleries, go to the shows, and go to all these things, then go back home.

And it looks like that's all gonna be done at this scale and at this level, and it's gonna take a little bit more detail. Everything else, like, are we gonna put the code, the amenities, separating the overlays, and having kind of a blanket, rule for Wilburton? Like, all that sounds great, but I this is the one area that I think is really gonna need some, insight. So I would love to see some some progress on that. I plus won the Catalyst program. I mean, if it was exhausted very quickly, I guess it was a success. Right? So we shouldn't shy away from it. I would love to see if that can be done. And, yeah, that's that's it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

It's good to go last. Everybody cover everything. Great. I think one of the question that I have or the comment, I know we promised the art district team who are sitting there that we're gonna go have some type of housing that is like a studio house for artists. I think we covered in comprehensive plan too in some lines about our policies.

Are we going to go have something in incentive program, maybe specifically for that art district in that area to just motivate. I mean, I just want all the developer pick that. I literally want the artists have that ability to live in that area, like a Paris that they have a art, you know, district that everybody walks there up the hill, pretty not accessible. But something like that I want our artists be able to live and have a studio, or we can have that, like, really as a art district. Like, if we can have that incentive program super motivated, that's for that art district area, that'd be enforced with more incentive program.

Should we go second round? Do you want to add anything, or are you good here? Nick or Christina, are we good? Do we have anything in your mind at this point? Okay. Should we go second round? Okay, Jai Lu.

I I have one one re I guess, like, two requests more than anything. The next time we we check, can we are you able to pull data from Sound Transit on what the behavior of the 8,800 daily boardings is? Because I'd be really curious how much of that is for working, like, commuting versus, like, just kind of recreational. And I think that would help us as we're, you know, approaching both, like, you know, street grid and each of those regions near the the the light rail stations of what the best use case would be for those. So if you're able to find anything from Sound Transit, that'd

be really helpful for us to kind

of see what the commuter or what the light rail use behavior has been so far. Sure. The second thing is, I think for the last NEXUS study, there was a financial model that came out. I'm assuming this will get updated with the newest one. Would you be able to provide that to us for us to play around with? I think the last one focused on the impact of affordability requirements on the overall price of housing or per unit built and the residual land use. But if you could

find that, that'd be really helpful to have. Thanks. Kosha Farris?

I have one question and

a couple

comments. Just the hopefully, easy question. You I totally support you talking about different incentives and how you weight them differently depending on where it is, etcetera. And if I'm not mistaken, that arts area district, I'm sure you're gonna have incentives for, like, the loft space or affordable spaces. But if I'm not mistaken, that's also where a lot of our streams need to be daylighted. Mhmm. So and maybe you can get back to me on this, but how are you balancing that? Those are both really difficult to achieve. And Yeah. How are you balancing that? So that's

one

of

my questions. So the initial take in the draft, the way it's set up let me go back to the list here so I won't forget one. The way that it's set up currently is that you have this list to choose from. However, within the arts district intensive area, we've established that 75% of your amenity FAR has to include at least two items on a narrowed list. So for that narrowed list right now, we've included affordable housing, affordable commercial, nonprofit space, public art, outdoor plazas.

So that's one path. However, we've included a caveat that even if you're in the arts district intensive area, if you're proposing to daylight a stream, because there are a couple streams that go through that area, or you're providing a parks dedication or a trail dedication that's been identified on our sub area plan because we also have those. Those can take precedence. So, hopefully, we'd still see you know, if they've got additional amenities, they might look towards this list, but but it's just kinda giving that flexibility. So wanting to say, you know, if you don't have that kind of stream opportunity, we've narrowed the focus for the arts because it is a large area.

We will have a lot of sites moving forward that don't have those considerations, but we do have to acknowledge that that stream daylighting is is really impactful, and we wanna free up capacity to to make that happen.

For sure.

Yeah.

So one quick comment. We heard comments from public testimony earlier tonight about the floor plate size, and I would love to hear from your perspective whether that has merit to increase that. Obviously, we talk a lot about pedestrian connections. And then lastly, I would like to know when you can come back. You don't need to tell me right now, but, obviously, council is looking at this whole parking requirement update, and I'd like to better understand how does that impact BellRed specifically.

Oh,

five question. But can we extend the meeting if we are going? Everybody add, like, question. Like, let's look at ten for fifteen minutes, it's okay.

That we extend our meeting till 09:15 or, yeah, 09:15.

Second.

Any discussion? All in favor? Aye. Thanks. Okay. So let me make sure

I I captured it. We had a question on floor plates, also the parking. Was what what else am I missing? Yep. Yep. Okay. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yeah.

Okay. Commissioner?

Yeah. Can we go back

to the slide that, commissioner asked about just on streams? I think the comment about trying to use streams is ways that, you know, long streams, you know, as as ways for people to, you know, walk through and get connections, I think is a great idea, actually. And I'm I'm wondering if I'm wondering if there's some way as part of the stream daylighting initiative that we can incorporate, you know, paths along streams, you know, pedestrian paths where people can go. Because with resources like this, if people see them, if they have access to them, they will value them. And if if, if we daylight those streams, that's a good thing in and of itself.

But if we also help to create a constituency that actually values them and benefits from them, that will continue to pay benefits in terms of a recognition of the importance of these resources. So I'm I'm wondering if as part of our daylighting effort, can we give any kind of extra incentives for people who not only create, you know, create those situations of daylighting, but also help to, you know, produce that access or corridors where people could travel along streams. That's it for me.

Thank you. Commissioner Kennedy?

Thank you. I actually did wanna know the answers to commissioner's questions if it's not a lengthy Yeah.

Yeah. We can we can they'll they'll be the answer now and then the follow-up. So on floor plates, so we are and I I know a lot of the comments were specific to mass timber. We have provided quite a bit more flexibility on floor plates with Wilburton and now propose for BellRed than we have in other areas. I think when we come back, we can give a bit of a comparison there.

We also have some really substantial flexibility, specifically for buildings under 100 feet in height, hearing that that mid rise typology is really the most feasible, where the most affordable housing happens. So we've really done away with a lot of barriers for mid rise. It's really when you get into tower construction that we do start to introduce some more limits. We feel that the way that they're structured now, that was the result of a lot of feedback and back and forth with the development community through Wilburton. I think we can give more concept more context, but, you know, I I I don't really think this is really going to be the make or break to extend it just a little bit further.

But we can give more context on how they compare to other areas. I think that would help. With parking, so parking Luca was actually just initiated by council last night. So the council has set staff with a direction to not just start with that state minimum, but look at expanding our parking reductions further into other kind of transit rich areas, other places where the pedestrian environment really supports it. So there's going to be, I think, some exciting work there that will definitely flow into BellRed.

So for now, we've brought forward the Wilburton approach of just pointing to the citywide standards and then applying a flat 75% reduction, which brings down parking quite considerably in Bell Red. And I anticipate with that, the parking reform, Luca, coming through, that'll reduce things further. But we're just kinda keeping all parking topics to the parking project.

Yeah, more to add there.

Just to add, because the direction was to, you know, comply with state law and then look at opportunities to go beyond. And so we're clear on state law. The parking requirement is zero if you're within a half mile walking distance of a light rail station. And then the outside of that walk shed, the state law requirement will be point five spaces per dwelling unit and then two space maximum per 1,000 square feet of commercial development. So that's kind of the we know that. And then the question for you all is going to be outside of that walk shed where we do have minimum parking, what should we do? Should we go further? And we'd love to kinda get into that, not only in parking reform, but then like to hear kind of the perspective as we work through BellRed.

That's that's so helpful. Technically, wasn't my question.

I will go I will finish around and then come back to you if you need it. Maybe next person and other people ask it. Okay? Commissioner Nilchia.

Thank you. I don't have an actual question, but I wanna just highlight a couple things that I I thought sounded great to me. I first, commissioner Geppel, I fully agree with the finding some way to add incentives for paths and walkability around streams. You know, I think we have a a great resource in this area, so we might as well use it. And then I I'm also curious to

hear a

little bit more about the the the four plates analysis they were talking about. You don't have to answer this now. This for later on at at a different meeting, but I am curious about the the distinction between the 20,000 and the 25,000 number there.

And and that's a fairly new con I mean, we were open to any suggestion during Wilburton. And I think if 25 would have come forward then, it'd probably be 25, but it didn't come forward is what my memory was. So I'm happy to entertain that with the commission as we work through this. We'll have to just think about if that's a a one off for BellRed or if that's what's good for BellRed is good for Wilburton because that's the impact when we're trying to, as Christina noted, consolidate standards when those districts are adjacent to each other, such as this.

Thank you.

Commissioner, will I assist?

Thank you. Talking about the Arts District, I think it would be really helpful to see what our districts in the world we would like to emulate. Then, I think we've touched based on this before. There's Wynwood in Miami is a very, very good example. There's, Williamsburg in Bushwick in New York.

There's there's different places in the world that have different conditions, and it would be great to see what we want to Emily. What can we learn from those places? I would love to see some, like, specific examples of what you're considering when you're planning this. The other thing is going back to Wilburton, and and Nick would appreciate this. Think it would be great to understand and know now what the development capacity is of BellRed so that that can help inform the requirements for fee and legal and affordability because that that can help us understand what is the maximum that we can obtain. And it's it's just a good sense of scale to understand what's what's the development capacity about it. That's that's it for now.

Yeah. Thank you. Think for me, I know everybody likes Will Burton. Kudos to planning commission. But I want to if you guys think it's good, it's gonna go be a year after Will Burton arrives.

Like, I want to see what is what is the progress in Wilburton that everybody love it. Because I'm curious if we ended up selling more parcels or we really helped more development happen because that's, like, gonna go be interesting. And I understand the market is not good for building all of those, but I'm curious about what was that result coming out of the Wilburton. And I think for a new planning commissioner, I don't know. I'm just suggesting if you think you need a briefing about Wilburton because half of people who are sitting here memorize Wilburton.

That can be Line by line. But I think if if you guys are gonna go presentacom like, comparison between those two, good. But if you feel that'd be good for a new commissioner to just know about what's happening in Wilburton and what we agreed and what council adopted, that'd be, like, in my opinion, helpful. And I know you guys coming back for here for March 22 or something, Maybe, like, in, I don't know, February, you have debriefing meetings or something. Should we go the third round? Or Cher, can I

just add something? You do have coming before you the Wilburton Sustainable District Mhmm. Which might be a good venue to sort of update what has happened in in Wilburton. And

Yeah. That'd be good. Yeah.

How we can look forward.

Like, I feel if I was not part of Wilburton, probably half of this stuff be a little bit interesting. Yeah. Okay. That's good. If you guys want to do that, that'd be perfect. And then if you felt that you want more, I might even use a refresher. But should we go the third round, Johnny Lou?

I just had one quick is that is the the Stryker going directly down, is that connecting to the BellRed Station? Or

I can't see where you're pointing. Yeah.

Like, the very, very the very, very bottom street that goes, like, directly down,

is this is this connecting to Bell

Red Station, or is that

No. Belgrade Stations.

Belgrade

Station is higher on hundred thirty and hundred thirty two under, like, that thick area. Right?

That connects to

the station. So

I think that's helpful you guys put the number of the street, honestly, there. Yeah. Yeah.

Same. That's, like, what

I know it.

Yeah. Maybe I

have the stations there, then Really,

we have other maps with the station. But, generally, you know, that the the the light rail alignment kind of goes along spring there. So yeah.

Yeah. I I'm just thinking, like, you know, we we should be maximizing connectivity to the to the light

rail station with the street grid.

Mhmm. Agree with the stream's comment for sure. I think the other thing to prioritize is public transit. Also, why I

asked the sound translate question of, like, I wanna know how many people are actually commuting in.

But, yeah, I think that overlay would help, and then we can probably have another discussion on street grid later on. That's it. Thanks.

Commissioner Ferris, pass okay. Commissioner Geppau?

Pass. Pass. Commissioner Kennedy? Just a quick add on to the conversation around our future briefing associated with incentives for linear parks and enhancements around the stream. Be really helpful from my perspective.

I know we talked about this in the conversation around the CAO, but to better understand the overlay of the CAO in relation to that would be very helpful. Things are coming to mind that I'm not sure are accurate around how that would actually play out. So if I were a developer who had a stream going through my parcel and we were considering an incentive for linear parks under the CAO. I know that there were incentives or opportunities to meet the criteria for the CAO by working with other adjacent landowners, understanding how that would work with an incentive specific to BellRed would be very helpful, perhaps an example. And then plus one on the briefing for Wilburton.

Thank you for the idea. Very much appreciated if that's possible. And, yeah, if you could just include that that that example of how we can consider the incentives up across Bell Red. You had quite the list, but the parks

was one of them. Thanks. Commissioner Nid Chan?

I'd love a presentation on Wilburton, but that's it.

K. You're welcome. Commissioner of Levices.

Thank you. One more. For this being an arts district, something we don't have in Wellberton is city developed projects, public amenities. And this being an art district makes me think, like, why don't we have a museum or something like that? Right?

Where do we gonna see another plaza with live music? It would be awesome to see the city obtaining some three or four strategic parcels where public amenities can be built that generate what, council member Margava used to refer to as urban magnets that would create that tension between the different areas in the district where you're gonna start driving people, and pedestrians to keep this this district alive. And there's one in particular on the upper, I guess, westernmost north Northwest corner where the stream joins the Uh-huh. The East Rail. That's a pretty important note, and we shouldn't, forget about that.

Like, I I think we should show the Israel as well. Because if you if you live in Belgrade and you work in Google in Kirkland, you could dry ride your bike down to on the stream, go to Israel, and then go all the way to Kirkland downtown to to work or go all the way to Wilburton and then take I mean, you could you you're very well connected. So we should identify which nodes those are, and maybe does it make sense that there's some special public amenities in these places and that generate that tension between, between the district to to pull pedestrians into.

And I do wanna expand. So when it comes to the the public investments for the arts, we we definitely, at this moment, are not the ones to answer that question, but we do have a team that is working on just those topics so we can coordinate with our our arts folks to give some more on what they are working on in terms of those kind of public investments and programming and assets. So but, yeah, great points.

Great. Okay.

Thank you

for That's it. And we

also have a couple

city sites that we have RFPs that we're locked in now with developers. So we can highlight those as well just for additional context of what that partnership is looking like. So I

think for me, the last comment is, again, about the art and the artist. And as you mentioned, when you walk or ride your bike to the Israel Trail, you can go to the different neighborhoods, Spring Districts, or Beirut, all of those. It's just so important for me to have a walkable, accessible area for the art. And, again, the open space. I think I know developer community are pushing back on the open space, but I think this is what we were visioning for.

Like, we wanted to see the concert. We wanna see gathering and of all those. For example, in Spring District, that there's a really nice plaza in the middle that is a lot happening there. They even rent that space for the private events. Creates a lot of growth for that area. I think I want we have the incentive program super focused on that, be beneficial for the Art District if this is what we wanted to do. And I think it's a vision of council members. Any other rounds? Should we finish before nine? Okay.

Is there any motion to approve the minutes from the December 10? And thank you so much. Any discussion? All in favor?

Aye. Motion to

I know. Adjourn the meeting?

I'm giving it to her.

Oh, okay.

Adjourn our

meeting. Any discussion? All in favor? Aye. Thank you, everybody. Thanks.

Thanks.

859.

859. Like, literally a minute. They could not extend it. I was panicking. I was like, number of question was getting, like, higher and higher. I'm like, oh,